58 replies to this topic

[johnct]

I think you are correct on your assessment of the current availability of able bodies. I am in the U.S, been in the industry +6 years almost and I think it is a combination of all these factors, Covid didn't help by no means. The herd is definitely thinning.

[AltonBrownFanClub]

Here's my personal viewpoint from 10 years in the food industry.

 

People are (rightfully) focusing on themselves and their own wellbeing.

Employees are less likely to stay at a company for low pay, high stress, no benefits, etc.

Companies that didn't realize this fact are now stuck.

They either finally pay up for good safety/quality personnel (rare) or continue hiring cheap, ineffective labor (often).

 

No job should cost you your health and happiness.

 

For example, I made more in 2012 with no formal education at multiple entry-level construction/warehouse jobs.

Most food companies now are hiring to replace someone they paid $50,000/year for the past 25 years. The climate has changed.

Where I live, someone could do just about any job with less stress for a similar amount. WITHOUT DEGREES, TRAINING, OR EXPERIENCE

 

Any competent food industry worker can make the switch to an industry with better pay, benefits, etc.

I think that's what a lot of them have done. Get a FS/QC job > See that it's a disaster with no upward mobility > Find a better job anywhere else

[kfromNE]

Scampi is right - you need to read statistics better. And you need to consider other factors. Like is the birth rate up or down is one of many. 

Side note: the USA - the number of abortions has gone down though the news would make you think differently. 

 

https://www.pewresea...m-1950-to-2050/

 

 

 

In 2021 alone, there were 214,256 abortions for women resident in England and Wales, the highest number since the Abortion Act was introduced.

I consider that a huge toll.  How can that not be mentioned when we talk about "Where is everyone?"

https://www.gov.uk/g...-and-wales-2021

 

[matthewcc]

OK, please tell me what I got wrong and how I can do better.

 

Scampi is right - you need to read statistics better. And you need to consider other factors. Like is the birth rate up or down is one of many. 

Side note: the USA - the number of abortions has gone down though the news would make you think differently. 

 

https://www.pewresea...m-1950-to-2050/

[Scampi]

Step 1 in life-------------make sure you FACTS are correct before spewing them 

 

Step 2  leave political/religious ideas off discussion pages ---or use the old adage, don't discuss religion and politics in mixed company

 

Step 3 do not assume your personnel beliefs are the majority

 

Step 4  Do you own research

[AltonBrownFanClub]

Step 1 in life-------------make sure you FACTS are correct before spewing them 

 

Step 2  leave political/religious ideas off discussion pages ---or use the old adage, don't discuss religion and politics in mixed company

 

Step 3 do not assume your personnel beliefs are the majority

 

Step 4  Do you own research

 

This should be a pinned message on the top of the boards. 

 

Most of us use this forum at/for work. Members who include their pseudoscience and political views are unpleasant and inappropriate.

[GMO]

Here's my personal viewpoint from 10 years in the food industry.

 

People are (rightfully) focusing on themselves and their own wellbeing.

Employees are less likely to stay at a company for low pay, high stress, no benefits, etc.

Companies that didn't realize this fact are now stuck.

They either finally pay up for good safety/quality personnel (rare) or continue hiring cheap, ineffective labor (often).

 

No job should cost you your health and happiness.

 

For example, I made more in 2012 with no formal education at multiple entry-level construction/warehouse jobs.

Most food companies now are hiring to replace someone they paid $50,000/year for the past 25 years. The climate has changed.

Where I live, someone could do just about any job with less stress for a similar amount. WITHOUT DEGREES, TRAINING, OR EXPERIENCE

 

Any competent food industry worker can make the switch to an industry with better pay, benefits, etc.

I think that's what a lot of them have done. Get a FS/QC job > See that it's a disaster with no upward mobility > Find a better job anywhere else

 

My company now are paying Quality people pretty well.  So I think that message is (finally) landing and there is upward mobility to a greater degree than there was.  That said, I don't get the same pay and conditions as finance or commercial people at my level (even though they're easier to hire).  Plus ça change eh?  But I also think no money can compensate for stress.  

I really welcome Millennials and Gen Z joining the industry and being focused on wellbeing.  I always have been through sad and bitter experience (I burned out in my early 30s and now won't work the hours I used to.)

[Dorothy87]

Please tell me your kidding

 

unfortunately     

[Scampi]

unfortunately     

 

I'd be walking----the level of responsibility ALONE should warrant your salary being doubled          

[MDaleDDF]

This should be a pinned message on the top of the boards. 

 

Most of us use this forum at/for work. Members who include their pseudoscience and political views are unpleasant and inappropriate.

 

Other forums I belong to, this is law, and indeed pinned up top for all to see.   Any political, religious, or stuff way off topic for the site, will get you a warning, then a suspension, then banned if you don't follow the rules.  I follow those rules wherever I go, and if I ain't, it's no accident.....lol.

 

[Scotty_SQF]

I just think there are too many people getting tired of the constant changes and updates.  While some are warranted, others make no sense and in the end, the big schemes are obviously driven by big companies for profit, not for food safety.  It can be a constant fight and add into the fact that you can now be charged (understandable, don't get me wrong) and if you aren't in a supportive place or a place that takes things seriously, just seems to a lot of people not to be worth it anymore.  Some places get by on audits with a smoke and mirrors show and the length doesn't make sense for some.  We are a small company at about 45,000 square feet, so our audit time is 2 days, I literally worked for another place that was 4 times the size and the audit duration was 3 days.  Auditors never had enough time to clearly find the true issues there, but where I am at now with how small it is, the littlest things get caught.  Don't get me wrong it makes us as a small company better, but i know those same issues were happening in the bigger one, but never seen.  There is just still a disparity (if that's the right word) in my opinion.  Plus the push lately seems to be for more unannounced audits and that doesn't help when you want a to have a good work/life balance.

[GMO]

unfortunately     

 

I missed you're in the UK.  What level are you at for £35k?  That's not great.  DM me if you want me to suggest some places.  

[GMO]

i know those same issues were happening in the bigger one, but never seen.  There is just still a disparity (if that's the right word) in my opinion.  Plus the push lately seems to be for more unannounced audits and that doesn't help when you want a to have a good work/life balance.

 

I don't mind an unannounced.  It focuses minds when some of the ops team have to step up.  

I agree though on the scope length and I'm going to shout out for AIB here, some of the auditors for GFSI standards do not spend anywhere near the time they should in production.  AIB do and will cover vast areas in days.  Too many audit bodies have arbitrary measures of complexity (square foot, number of HACCP plans which is meaningless if you choose a modular approach) and there is too little leeway for auditors.  There is no way I would approach an internal audit by deciding how long it will take before I even start.  You don't know what you'll find.

[Scampi]

I don't mind an unannounced.  It focuses minds when some of the ops team have to step up.  

 

 

I object highly                 My work feeds my life, not the other way around     

BRC with a 4 month window is absurd 

 

I have zero interest in putting my life on hold for 1/3 of the year every year for the rest of my life-----we are a Costco supplier, so the decision was made for us---each and every year until the end of time is an unannounced audit OR minimum of 2 onsite audits/year PLUS regulatory inspections           

 

Unannounced should be according to past audit findings, not an arbitrary decision based that isn't based on science.  If my regulator sees fit to tell me when they are inspecting, the same courtesy should be standard practice for 3rd party.

 

There is not another industry where this is the normal course of doing business, if there was ANY evidence that 3rd party audits IMPROVED food safety, I could wrap my head around, but since there is not a "standard" for auditors (and we don't hear near enough that anyone is checking their work) this is a hill I will die on

[GMO]

We have so many unannounced now (it's not just BRC, we have multiple retailers with unannounced audits) that it became pretty day to day for me a good 8 or so years ago.

 

But a while back I went to a business where they were only doing announced audits.  It had no less of a "putting your life on hold" feel to it.  If anything I found it worse.  Unannounced for me means that everyone has to be capable and that, to my mind is a good thing.  Our record was three auditors in one day.

 

What I object to far more is the multiple retail audits when BRCGS / GFSI was meant to get rid of that.  I don't even mind if they just audited their "extra" requirements but they don't.  It's a waste of my time and a cost which gets added into the cost of doing business which isn't value add to my mind.

[mgourley]

What I object to far more is the multiple retail audits when BRCGS / GFSI was meant to get rid of that.  I don't even mind if they just audited their "extra" requirements but they don't.  It's a waste of my time and a cost which gets added into the cost of doing business which isn't value add to my mind.

 

Absolutely. 

 

Marshall

[Dorothy87]

We have so many unannounced now (it's not just BRC, we have multiple retailers with unannounced audits) that it became pretty day to day for me a good 8 or so years ago.

 

But a while back I went to a business where they were only doing announced audits.  It had no less of a "putting your life on hold" feel to it.  If anything I found it worse.  Unannounced for me means that everyone has to be capable and that, to my mind is a good thing.  Our record was three auditors in one day.

 

What I object to far more is the multiple retail audits when BRCGS / GFSI was meant to get rid of that.  I don't even mind if they just audited their "extra" requirements but they don't.  It's a waste of my time and a cost which gets added into the cost of doing business which isn't value add to my mind.

 

Exactly.. the BRC was meant to get rid of that. Plus.. additionally some retailers have code of practice a SEPARATED documents which you as TM must be aware of..

 

I was told once - we want to be different - UNIQUE...   guess which retailer said this..........

[Scampi]

According to the reviews of recalls etc since inception, there is ZERO value in GFSI at all

 

Case in point from PepsiCo 

Frito Lay Canada recalls 2 of its most popular snacks for possible salmonella contamination Recall applies to Sunchips Harvest Cheddar Flavoured Multigrain Snacks, Munchies Original Snack Mix

https://www.cbc.ca/n...anada-1.7203468

 

Add to this the 2 other recalls pepsico has had this year, and tell me where ANY value in GFSI to the END CONSUMER exists..I'll wait

Edited by Scampi, 14 May 2024 - 01:56 PM.

[GMO]

According to the reviews of recalls etc since inception, there is ZERO value in GFSI at all

 

Case in point from PepsiCo 

Frito Lay Canada recalls 2 of its most popular snacks for possible salmonella contamination Recall applies to Sunchips Harvest Cheddar Flavoured Multigrain Snacks, Munchies Original Snack Mix

https://www.cbc.ca/n...anada-1.7203468

 

Add to this the 2 other recalls pepsico has had this year, and tell me where ANY value in GFSI to the END CONSUMER exists..I'll wait

 

I don't know the case but I'd say that GFSI if applied well obviously can be supportive of food safety, mostly because it goes further than food safety legislation and, while we may think the standards change slowly, they're again faster than legislation moves.  

 

There are practices which were accepted which aren't anymore.  

Difficult to know on the above.  Really difficult.  But I am completely sympathetic that the act of a standard aimed mostly at Technical people (even if we pretend it's not) with limited consequences for leaders within a business if there is a food safety issue?  That's a problem.  Couple that with legislative issues particularly in some nations like the US where there is a fear of testing because then "you'll have to act" and that's a bigger problem.  It would be great if GFSI could tackle both of those but it's tough to say that's its job.  I'd strongly argue it's under "culture" but how much has that really been embedded?

BUT what I would say is go to a factory making UK retailer branded foods and then go to a UK branded factory not making retailer branded and like it or loathe it, the retailer branded site will be of a better fabrication standard.  What I mean by that in some ways there are three levels of what drives food safety (in the UK at least), there's legislation which is tighter than the US for example, but still quite lax. Then there's GFSI, mostly BRCGS in the UK.  Then the retailer standards have tighter requirements still.  Great for stuff you can touch and feel like whether your white wall is actually cleanable.  Less good at actually holding leaders of industry to account.  For that, legislation needs to catch up.

 

One of the biggest drivers though in H&S adherence and driving H&S legislation in the UK was the unions.  Perhaps us Techies should unionise to demand change...?

[GMO]

I was told once - we want to be different - UNIQUE...   guess which retailer said this..........

 

I cannot possibly think who you mean?    

By the way have you started on the ridiculously enormous waste of time of a HACCP style quality plan? 

[ChristinaK]

Unannounced should be according to past audit findings, not an arbitrary decision based that isn't based on science.  If my regulator sees fit to tell me when they are inspecting, the same courtesy should be standard practice for 3rd party.

 

Agreed! The frequency of unannounced audits should be based on prior audit findings--not scores, but the non-conformances themselves--and the inherent risk associated with the product and process (like idk, dear ol' HACCP?).

 

The UA audit every 3 years idea is...silly when you're an extremely low-risk product category. They shouldn't be held to the same requirements of high-risk products--in regards to unannounced audit frequency, that is. For example, if I'm a distributor for ambient-temperature finished goods like...breakfast cereals, why am I on the same UA schedule as a poultry processing plant? That has never made much sense to me.

[MDaleDDF]

According to the reviews of recalls etc since inception, there is ZERO value in GFSI at all

 

Case in point from PepsiCo 

Frito Lay Canada recalls 2 of its most popular snacks for possible salmonella contamination Recall applies to Sunchips Harvest Cheddar Flavoured Multigrain Snacks, Munchies Original Snack Mix

https://www.cbc.ca/n...anada-1.7203468

 

Add to this the 2 other recalls pepsico has had this year, and tell me where ANY value in GFSI to the END CONSUMER exists..I'll wait

I've been saying since they got big, GFSI is nothing but a money grab.  They created their own marketplace, where there was no need.   Pretty fancy of them actually...lol.

AIB honestly did a better job of actual site inspection, as I've stated elsewhere.    GFSI is a paperwork audit, and a joke...

[GMO]

Ah but then there was the howler AIB had with Peanut Butter Corporation of America.

 

PCA e-mails tell the tale in peanut poisoning trial | barfblog

 

I guess the rationale is that without notice, it's harder for someone to deliberately mislead the auditor (and peanut butter while subject to Salmonella risk, isn't a chilled high risk food).

 

But I always say, if someone is DETERMINED to act fraudulently, they will.  And personally I still go into sites now where I'm having to say to site directors and ops managers "stop telling your team to have audit standards on an audit day, announced or unannounced, they can see us as we are".  

 

Audits are only verification.  You cannot test something safe and that's what audits are.  But I've just had an idea and as this is now very  I'll start a new thread...

[Scotty_SQF]

The thing I don't like is big companies saying to do business with them you must be GFSI certified, which I agree seems to have no added value.  It hurts smaller companies and then most times these bigger companies then still want to audit you anyway.  Then what is the point of having to be GFSI?

 

And 100% agree with Scampi, no value at all to unannounced audits.  They have yet to prove that there is value in them.  No reason at all why we have to put life on hold for a period of time in case the audit happens.  Luckily, we are SQF so the window is only 8 weeks, but still I had to not commit to a lot of things I would have like to do, waiting for an auditor.

[Setanta]

It would be so lovely to have the GFSI schemes tagged into this thread, to get an idea of how the auditing part of the population lives and sees the GFSI rules.

 

<wishful thinking>