FSIS exemplifies growing inadequacy of U.S. food inspection regime
product safety. In reality, inspection activity manifests itself differently. Recent media accounts have reported that slaughterhouse and processing plant employees use radios to signal the comings and goings of FSIS inspectors. According to the Los Angeles Times, “They even assign the pretty talkative woman to work next to the inspector to distract him from his mission to safeguard the nation’s food supply.”
The ability of processors and manufacturers to circumvent the FSIS inspection process is aided by widespread inspector shortages. According to the Baltimore Sun, “inspectors interviewed said that because of vacancies in the ranks, inspectors are often forced to do the work of two or three staff members, making it all the more difficult for them to catch signs of disease either in animals before slaughter, or in meat that has been butchered.” In many media accounts, FSIS officials claim the agency employs more than 7,000 inspectors nationwide. FSIS’s inspection force, however, has an average national vacancy rate of at least 10 percent. In June 2007 the rate spiked to 12.2 percent. Three of the agency’s 15 districts — Denver, Dallas, and Chicago — consistently carried vacancy rates of about 15 percent. One district, Albany, consistently carried a vacancy rate of more than 20 percent. These high vacancy rates continue to erode the ability of FSIS to properly carry out a robust inspection regime of the nation’s beef, poultry, and egg stocks.
Less thorough inspections raise the chance that processors may have to conduct recalls. Although recalls present an opportunity for FSIS and processors to keep tainted meat, poultry, or egg products away from consumers, recalls are far less effective in protecting public health than proper inspections, which keep those products from entering the market in the first place. First, all recalls are conducted by manufacturers or distributors and are completely voluntary. FSIS may request a recall, but it cannot force a recall (FSIS does have the authority to seize products in commerce) Second, manufacturers and distributors frequently recover only a small fraction of the product for which the recall was announced. Lastly, and most importantly, FSIS does not release the names or locations of retail outlets where tainted products may end up, stripping consumers of their ability to make informed decisions and their right to protect themselves and their families. Meat, poultry, and egg product recalls have spiked in the 2000s. In 2001 FSIS announced 95 recalls of
