Provisioner logo
Provisioner logo
search
cart
facebook twitter linkedin youtube
  • Sign In
  • Create Account
  • Sign Out
  • My Account
Provisioner logo
Provisioner logo
  • NEWS
    • Industry News
    • Supplier News
    • Case Studies
    • Recalls
    • Regulations
    • New Consumer Products
  • EXCLUSIVES
    • Newsletters
    • Source Book
    • Sponsored Insights
    • Events
    • Webinars
    • Classifieds
    • White Papers
    • Provisioner Store
    • Market Research
  • MEAT PROCESSING
    • SUSTAINABILITY
    • Processing
    • Packaging
    • Ingredients
    • Formulation
    • Food Safety
    • Special Reports
    • Commentary
  • PROFILES
    • Processor Profiles
    • Processor of the Year
    • Top 100 Processors
  • MEDIA
    • Videos
    • Podcasts
  • DIRECTORY
  • MIHOF
  • INDEPENDENT PROCESSOR
  • EMAG
    • eMagazine
    • ARCHIVE ISSUES
    • Contact
    • Advertise
  • JOIN!
Meat and Poultry Industry NewsFood SafetyExpert Commentary

Consultants Corner

FSIS training data reveals troublesome trend

Records show inspectors took online training courses on a wide range of topics — many of which have little application to inspectors’ actual jobs.

By Andrew Lorenz
November 9, 2015

I have been asked quite a bit about food-safety training, for production employees and for quality assurance and other food-safety monitors. What should they be trained on, how often, etc.?

While there have been attempts to establish industry baselines for minimal training by different organizations, USDA-FSIS has been quiet on the subject, at least so far.

To establish some sort of baseline, I thought I would simply submit a FOIA request and use FSIS training data as support for my recommendations.  The idea was, since those inspectors are in the food-safety/inspection business, they would be a good example to use.  Unfortunately, we won’t be using the data from FSIS to establish any sort of baseline for training.  Having worked as a DDM with FSIS just more than three years ago, I am very aware of its systems and how to get data from them. My initial FOIA request was denied because the agency claimed it would take too long to get the information put together. I pushed the issue by filing appeals, etc. Finally, I was sent the data I requested.

After reviewing it, I think you will understand why FSIS didn’t want to share it — and why we can’t use it to establish any sort of baseline for food-safety training.

We have two data sets from the FOIA request: training completed by Grade 8 HIMP employees at swine plants and training completed by non-HIMP GS 5 and 7 inspectors at all other swine plants. The vast majority of training is Web-based — HIMP inspectors take 97 percent of their courses online.

For HIMP inspectors, approximately 1 percent of courses are related to humane handling, 5 percent are related to exports, 9 percent are related to food safety and 73 percent is “other training” (see below). In comparison, for the non-HIMP inspectors, 2 percent of courses are related to humane handling, 2 percent are related to food safety and 86 percent are related to other training. I wouldn’t expect to see much, if any, export training at the traditional plants, as those inspection personnel don’t have much to do with the export process. 

“Other training” taken by USDA-FSIS inspectors was typically based on getting along in the workplace or personal employee improvement. Some of the classes taken included:

  • Reasonable accommodation
  • Diversity and inclusion
  • Alternate dispute resolution
  • Weight loss tips
  • Mom-tested super tips
  • Accounting for sales returns
  • Equal Employment Opportunity
  • Ethics
  • Workplace safety and health

By moving the training from predominately classroom to a Web-based training format, FSIS is saving huge sums of money; however, why is the majority of the training focused on topics other than food safety?

None of this helps us with our baseline. So what is my recommendation? I go back to my time in the U.S. Army as a food inspector. The Army has a very robust training regimen that is focused on creating food inspectors who are knowledgeable in all aspects of food safety and quality assurance, and it helps make sure they stay that way.

Training can and should be presented in a variety of ways, be it lectures, on-the-floor correlations, outside sourced, etc.  All employees should be tested for knowledge and have areas that need improvement identified.

For production employees, I recommend an initial basic food-safety training that covers your GMPs, SSOPs, etc., sufficient for them to do their jobs in a sanitary manner. I recommend quarterly training focused on potentially risky areas — cross-contamination prevention, for example — followed by an annual refresher that again covers your basic sanitation programs.

For QA personnel, it is a bit more complicated as it depends on their actual job functions; however, a basic food-safety course with special emphasis on record-keeping requirements on initial training and, as with production employees, quarterly training focused on problem areas. Annual refresher training that covers your programs and how they fit into your system would be appropriate. 

For HACCP managers or QA managers that have food-safety program development responsibilities, I recommend the International HACCP Alliance basic training regimen of SSOP, basic HACCP, then advanced HACCP. I also recommend they attend some sort of annual training to keep up with advances in technology, processes, regulations and science. There are many opportunities hosted by the different industry trade associations. For example, the AAMP Validation Seminars or NAMI’s outlook conference are both good choices.

Based on your testing feedback, I also recommend focused individual training if an employee is weak in an area. The supervisor or trainers can retrain to ensure the employee understands what he or she needs to know. 

As an industry, we need to establish a basic industry standard that outlines initial training and refresher training. It would be a useful tool for the industry and help us avoid government-mandated training.

The industry simply needs to do it before FSIS mandates, “Do as I say, not as I do,” with regard to food-safety training. NP

KEYWORDS: consultants corner food safety training HIMP

Share This Story

Looking for a reprint of this article?
From high-res PDFs to custom plaques, order your copy today!

Andrew Lorenz is president of We R Food Safety! For more information, email him at andrew@werfoodsafety.com.

Recommended Content

JOIN TODAY
to unlock your recommendations.

Already have an account? Sign In

  • Double Charburger

    Premiumization drives burger category

    Shoppers seek out premium meat offerings to fulfill...
    Special Reports
    By: Sammy Bredar
  • JJS Adult Pekin duck

    Poultry Report 2025: Convenience propels poultry at retail

    Despite continued economic pressures, the poultry...
    Chicken
    By: Sammy Bredar
You must login or register in order to post a comment.

Report Abusive Comment

Manage My Account
  • eMagazine Subscriptions
  • Manage My Preferences
  • Newsletters
  • Online Registration
  • Subscription Customer Service
  • Connect with The National Provisioner

More Videos

Sponsored Content

Sponsored Content is a special paid section where industry companies provide high quality, objective, non-commercial content around topics of interest to the The National Provisioner audience. All Sponsored Content is supplied by the advertising company and any opinions expressed in this article are those of the author and not necessarily reflect the views of The National Provisioner or its parent company, BNP Media. Interested in participating in our Sponsored Content section? Contact your local rep!

close
  • A smiling man carrying a grocery basket is reaching down to pick up a package of meat in a grocery store.
    Sponsored byPIC

    The Green Light: New Data Shows 12-to-1 Support for Pork from PRRS-Resistant Pigs

  • Close up of a grocery cart full of groceries, a cropped image of a couple pushing the cart and a blurred background of the vegetable aisle.
    Sponsored byPIC

    New Market Research Finds Consumers in Eight Key Pork Markets Are Likely to Purchase Pork from Gene-Edited Pigs

  • Close up of a young pig with a blurred background.
    Sponsored byPIC

    New Research Forecasts Significant Economic and Market Impacts with PRRS-Resistant Pig Adoption

Popular Stories

Spam Dog

Hormel rolls out Spam hot dog for foodservice applications

Various new Primal snack sticks on a table amongst pencils, apples, a pair of glasses, lunch bags and a water bottle.

Protein demand drives snacking occasions

Several cuts of beef, pork and chicken on a wooden board, cast iron pan and salt.

Validated thermal lethality data and a new tool for ensuring safety of RTE meats

2026 Top 100 Meat & Poultry Processors Report

Events

June 11, 2026

From Fresh to Frozen in 3 Minutes Flat: Unlocking the Secrets to Temperature Control

Join Tony Vacaro, Foods Industry Manager, and Emile Klein, Foods Market Strategy Manager at Air Products and Chemicals, Inc. , as they tackle key questions surrounding heat removal in food processing. 

January 1, 2030

Webinar Sponsorship Information

For webinar sponsorship information, visit www.bnpevents.com/webinars or email webinars@bnpmedia.com.

View All Submit An Event

Products

Food Crime: An Introduction to Deviance in the Food Industry

Food Crime: An Introduction to Deviance in the Food Industry

See More Products
From Fresh to Frozen in 3 Minutes Flat: Unlocking the Secrets to Temperature Control Webinar Sponsored by Air Products

Related Articles

  • New data reveals preference for sustainable packaging remains strong

    New data reveals preference for sustainable packaging remains strong

    See More
  • Validation: Is it a big deal or not?

    Validation: Is it a big deal or not?

    See More
  • 2022 Alltech Agri-Food Outlook reveals global feed production survey data and trends shaping the future

    2022 Alltech Agri-Food Outlook reveals global feed production survey data and trends shaping the future

    See More

Related Directories

  • Missouri Assn. of Meat Processors

    The Missouri Association of Meat Processors was founded in 1939, by a small group of meat business operators who were looking for a way to promote their products and businesses. MAMP helps members expand into new markets and learn new skills. Its dual mission of protection and education for members are enhanced by unique marketing opportunities available through the Association. MAMP provides 10 newsletters a year and provides training to keep the small processor ahead of the trends.
×

Stay ahead of the curve. Unlock a dose of cutting-edge insights.

Receive our premium content directly to your inbox.

SIGN-UP TODAY
  • RESOURCES
    • Advertise
    • Contact Us
    • Directories
    • Store
    • Want More
  • SIGN UP TODAY
    • Create Account
    • eMagazine
    • Newsletter
    • Customer Service
    • Manage Preferences
  • SERVICES
    • Marketing Services
    • Reprints
    • Market Research
    • List Rental
    • Survey/Respondent Access
  • STAY CONNECTED
    • LinkedIn
    • Facebook
    • YouTube
    • X (Twitter)
  • PRIVACY
    • PRIVACY POLICY
    • TERMS & CONDITIONS
    • DO NOT SELL MY PERSONAL INFORMATION
    • PRIVACY REQUEST
    • ACCESSIBILITY

Copyright ©2026. All Rights Reserved BNP Media, Inc. and BNP Media II, LLC.

Design, CMS, Hosting & Web Development :: ePublishing