9 replies to this topic

[Hungary]

One McDonald's outlet caught out for hygiene twice in a year.

Does anyone have thoughts on whether such eateries should be "named and shamed" on government databases, and if so, for how long?

Also, has anybody had any experience in jurisdictions where exposed eateries have to advertise their convictions on the premises?


http://www.oneperth....-fourth-breach/

[Tony-C]

One McDonald's outlet caught out for hygiene twice in a year.
Does anyone have thoughts on whether such eateries should be "named and shamed" on government databases, and if so, for how long?
Also, has anybody had any experience in jurisdictions where exposed eateries have to advertise their convictions on the premises?
http://www.oneperth....-fourth-breach/

Hi Hungary



I guess McDonalds sell millions of meals every day. Due to their success people like to publicise events when they have messed up (especially Burger King & KFC who never mess up).

People usually complain about service but there are plenty of complaints to be found: http://www.complaint...mcdonalds-a2322

With regards to naming and shaming on government databases, I guess half of the take away establishments in the UK would be on that list if the were inspected as they should be.

Regards,

Tony

[Simon]

Name and shame.

[GMO]

Some councils report inspections on their website. Sadly my experience of this though is the local rag, sorry, newspaper on quiet days trawls through the inspection reports and prints anything with a major name attached even if the non conformance was pretty minor, the hack, sorry, journalist, never having studied any science subject in their life, let alone food science, inflates said non conformance to the highest level.

So yes, naming and shaming is all well and good but we know how rubbish inaccurate most science sections in newspapers are. Such reporting should be balanced. Now before you all hold up your arms in the air and say "but if there's nothing to hide...?" remember the ridiculous situation with Sudan I where there was no known health issue in the quantities found but full public recalls were demanded by the FSA. If we had a more knowledgable and science aware media, less prone to overreacting, that surely would not have happened. Now you could argue that Salmonellae and BSE paved the way for that but then we just get onto the argument of the true cost of low priced foods...

Ooooh I could argue with myself for days!

[Chief Inspector]

One McDonald's outlet caught out for hygiene twice in a year.

Does anyone have thoughts on whether such eateries should be "named and shamed" on government databases, and if so, for how long?

Also, has anybody had any experience in jurisdictions where exposed eateries have to advertise their convictions on the premises?


http://www.oneperth....-fourth-breach/

Here in the US, each state and/or municipality has control over what's available online. Regardless, any individual can request the health inspection reports from any establishment, usually via written request (most accept email requests now). As with the jurisdictional control over reports, those heath departments also may dictate how their inspections are posted in an establishment. Some, like California, NYC, Florida and a few others make it mandatory for establishments to place their latest inspection report in a conspicuous location (usually the front door or window). Other states (Arkansas, New Hampshire, Maine, Tennessee, and others) don't inspect more than once a year, even in follow-up to a critical violation.
As far as food safety's come, its an extremely large pool of water these strides are dripping into. I put in a lot of hours compiling Find Fetid Eats , which is a listing of all known links online in the US where people can search for inspection reports directly. There's also links on the page to cruise ships inspected by the Centers for Disease Control and Canada. I really wish I could create a global listing, but for now, maintaining just the US is quite the handful.

[Mike Green]

One McDonald's outlet caught out for hygiene twice in a year.

Does anyone have thoughts on whether such eateries should be "named and shamed" on government databases, and if so, for how long?

Also, has anybody had any experience in jurisdictions where exposed eateries have to advertise their convictions on the premises?


http://www.oneperth....-fourth-breach/

As has been stated elsewhere- I think McDonalds do very very well considering how many meals they serve each day- personally I don't think much of the quality-but I don't think anyone can knock them on safety!

In the Uk we have Scores on the Doors which is a website giving each business a 0-5 star rating based around hygiene and structural compliance and confidence in management- most of the Local Authorites have bought into it- unfortunately it is not mandatory at present for a food business to display the outcomes-(but that decision is under review). Of course the 3-5 star establishments usually display their cert- I usually recommend that if there is no cert on display potential customers should treat it as a zero!- Can't comment nationally-but locally it seems to be having a reasonable impact both on consumers and businesses

The datebase is searchable by area/business name and postcode area- so once all of the authorities buy in,all ratings are there and if it is more widely promoted it will be a very useful resource for the public

Aside from this all of the local authorities have a 'freedom of information email address-where you can request a full inspection report- I can honestly say I am nort aware of any request that has been turned down- our local paper does a double page 'name and shame' a couple of times a year- but to be honest- since they can only profile 5-6 of the hundereds of failing businesses each yr- it does not have any impact other than raising the profile of food safety a little(which I suppose can't be a bad thing)

As an aside the best businesses(5 star) are usually primary schools and residential care homes- very rarely commercial food businesses!

Regards

Mike

[Charles.C]

Dear Mike Green,

Yes, i remember reviewing the Scores on Doors system here some time back.
One obvious difficulty was the lack of any uniformity in rating systems. In particular, there were some highly ingenious examples of starring methods which seemed almost impossible to fail. Also, in some areas there appeared to be an amusing, almost intuitive relationship between name and score, eg Jim's Inn vs La Traviata !

Based on yr closing paragraph, the level of Primary Schools has ascended considerably from my memories of spoiled milk bottles.

Rgds / Charles.C

[Mike Green]

Dear Mike Green,

Yes, i remember reviewing the Scores on Doors system here some time back.
One obvious difficulty was the lack of any uniformity in rating systems. In particular, there were some highly ingenious examples of starring methods which seemed almost impossible to fail. Also, in some areas there appeared to be an amusing, almost intuitive relationship between name and score, eg Jim's Inn vs La Traviata !

Based on yr closing paragraph, the level of Primary Schools has ascended considerably from my memories of spoiled milk bottles.

Rgds / Charles.C

Hi Charles
Yes it was a bit of a mishmash to start with- but the dust has settled on the 3 vs 4 vs 5 star systems its getting there now-with almost all LA's singing from the same hymn sheet- loads of water under the bridge on getting the standards equitable across the country as well

Proof if proof were needed is the uniformity of the outcomes of assessment of companies like McDonalds and KFC over all of the LA areas and I guess(from your comment) also the amount of 0 or 1 star establishments proving that it is definately possible to 'fail'!

As for school dinners IMEX I think they were always 'overcooked but safe'- now in my experience a lot of them have improved the quality and kept the safety-which is great- where as a lot of the residential care homes are still just safe!
Regards
Mike

[GMO]

My primary school used to ferry in cooked meals from another school (it was a small school without many takers for the food) they weren't reheated on arrival and were only kept warm with padded covers. They arrived kind of tepid. Also I still believe there is no refrigeration for packed lunches (unless parents use ice blocks etc) so I think there is still some way to go on food safety in some schools although I doubt the travelling meals have continued...

[Mike Green]

My primary school used to ferry in cooked meals from another school (it was a small school without many takers for the food) they weren't reheated on arrival and were only kept warm with padded covers. They arrived kind of tepid. Also I still believe there is no refrigeration for packed lunches (unless parents use ice blocks etc) so I think there is still some way to go on food safety in some schools although I doubt the travelling meals have continued...

I think you are correct some schools still have a way to go-but generally speaking they are doing a lot better than their commercial counterparts-

travelling meals still exist on a limited basis(unfortunately)- pretty poor practice- and awful quality-wise but being made on that morning travelling a short distance and having had the hell blasted out of it at 82-86 degrees celsius at the cook stage- I guess not a lot of surviving pathogens to multiply on the journey!!

The 'fridge for packed lunches' thing is unfortunately still a 'grey area' in the eyes of schools-they do not readily accept their responsibility for stored food that isn't 'theirs'-we have been recommending it for years-and had i think 1 success locally!- the EHO's are not insisting on it during inspections/DCSF don't have it in their guidelines- so most won't do it-what we really need is for OfSted to tell them!!!-until that happens sandwiches will still be stored on radiators and window sills across the land!-happy days!

Mike