USDA ‘playing chicken with safety,’ protesters charge

Amanda Palleschi/

Poultry inspectors, union representatives and a few men in chicken costumes on Monday protested the U.S. Agriculture Department’s proposed changes to the poultry inspection process.

USDA wants to expand a pilot program that replaces some federal poultry inspectors with inspectors employed by the processing plants themselves.

The program has been in place at 20 chicken and five turkey slaughterhouses in the Southwest and Southeastern United States since the late 1990s. USDA now wants to expand the program to include about 200 facilities.

The program hastens the chicken inspection process. Currently, inspectors from the department’s Food Safety Inspection Service examine about 35 birds per minute. Under the pilot program, inspectors examine 175 birds per minute, USDA said.

But the 35 birds per minute statistic does not accurately reflect the reality of the inspection process, USDA officials said. Birds move down an inspection line at a speed of 140 birds per minute, with two inspectors on each side of the line on hand to examine them. An increase to 175 birds per minute is not the four-fold increase in examination speed protesters claimed, said Ali Almanza, a Food Safety Inspection Service administrator.

The program’s expansion also could result in the loss of up to 1,000 federal inspector jobs.

But protesters outside USDA headquarters on Monday, including labor union members and watchdog groups, chose to protest the change for consumer safety reasons, holding signs that read “Speed Kills,” “Chicken Inspection Isn’t a Speed Sport” and “Don’t Play Chicken With Safety” to express concerns about the pilot program.

Under the change, a federal inspector remains part of the process, but only at the end of the line. Opponents of the pilot claim that those inspectors are permitted to take only 80 carcasses from hundreds of thousands off the line per shift. But USDA says an inspector can stop the line at any time and claim that routine sampling by FSIS inspectors at the end of the line, and that the pilot actually increases the number of carcasses required in “routine sampling” procedures.

Typically, federal inspectors have received about three years of training to examine the insides of chickens for fecal matter, disease or other forms of contamination that can lead to food-borne illnesses. Some fear private inspectors would not receive adequate training.

Tony Corbo, legislative representative for the consumer rights group Food and Water Watch, said the new process rushes critical controls.

“Whether you’re trained or not, you’re not going to be able to catch stuff,” Carbo told Government Executive.

USDA has argued the change would be good for both consumers and taxpayers. According to congressional testimony given in March by Undersecretary for Food Safety Elisabeth Hagen, the project would save taxpayers more than $90 million during its first three years of expansion and could lower production costs by $256 million annually.

Streamlining the inspection process could help prevent food-borne illness by addressing contamination before carcasses are placed into chillers, Agriculture has argued. The change could prevent more than 5,000 food-borne illnesses a year, the department estimated.

USDA said earlier this year in the Federal Register that the current poultry inspection system is outdated, arguing it was developed when “visually detectable animal disease were more prevalent and considered to be more of a concern than they are today.”

Allowing private poultry inspectors to check and discard carcasses earlier in the slaughter and production process could allow plants greater flexibility to develop their own procedures for condemning contaminated carcasses, the proposal claimed.

The nonprofit Government Accountability Project said it is slated to release a report this week concluding that although private inspectors would be examining carcasses earlier in the processes, the speed of the new process makes it difficult to look inside the bird, where leftover fecal matter and other contaminants often are found, said Felicia Nestor, an attorney who worked with the watchdog group to investigate the pilot program.

Phillys Mckelvey, a retired USDA poultry inspector who worked on the first pilot project in Guntersville, Ala., said she believes companies involved in the pilot did their best. The plant in Guntersville required specific training for its inspectors, but she is concerned training may not be kept up if the pilot becomes policy.

“If this goes nationwide, it’s going to be a total nightmare,” she told Government Executive at Monday’s protest.

When Mckelvey began her career 44 years ago as an inspector’s helper, inspectors “looked inside every bird, inside and outside, from every side,” she said. “All they do on the pilot is they sit and watch the birds go flying by.”

This story has been updated.

Stay up-to-date with federal news alerts and analysis — Sign up for GovExec's email newsletters.
Close [ x ] More from GovExec

Thank you for subscribing to newsletters from
We think these reports might interest you:

  • Sponsored by Brocade

    Best of 2016 Federal Forum eBook

    Earlier this summer, Federal and tech industry leaders convened to talk security, machine learning, network modernization, DevOps, and much more at the 2016 Federal Forum. This eBook includes a useful summary highlighting the best content shared at the 2016 Federal Forum to help agencies modernize their network infrastructure.

  • Sponsored by CDW-G

    GBC Flash Poll Series: Merger & Acquisitions

    Download this GBC Flash Poll to learn more about federal perspectives on the impact of industry consolidation.

  • Sponsored by One Identity

    One Nation Under Guard: Securing User Identities Across State and Local Government

    In 2016, the government can expect even more sophisticated threats on the horizon, making it all the more imperative that agencies enforce proper identity and access management (IAM) practices. In order to better measure the current state of IAM at the state and local level, Government Business Council (GBC) conducted an in-depth research study of state and local employees.

  • Sponsored by Aquilent

    The Next Federal Evolution of Cloud

    This GBC report explains the evolution of cloud computing in federal government, and provides an outlook for the future of the cloud in government IT.

  • Sponsored by Aquilent

    A DevOps Roadmap for the Federal Government

    This GBC Report discusses how DevOps is steadily gaining traction among some of government's leading IT developers and agencies.

  • Sponsored by LTC Partners, administrators of the Federal Long Term Care Insurance Program

    Approaching the Brink of Federal Retirement

    Approximately 10,000 baby boomers are reaching retirement age per day, and a growing number of federal employees are preparing themselves for the next chapter of their lives. Learn how to tackle the challenges that today's workforce faces in laying the groundwork for a smooth and secure retirement.

  • Sponsored by Hewlett Packard Enterprise

    Cyber Defense 101: Arming the Next Generation of Government Employees

    Read this issue brief to learn about the sector's most potent challenges in the new cyber landscape and how government organizations are building a robust, threat-aware infrastructure

  • Sponsored by Aquilent

    GBC Issue Brief: Cultivating Digital Services in the Federal Landscape

    Read this GBC issue brief to learn more about the current state of digital services in the government, and how key players are pushing enhancements towards a user-centric approach.

  • Sponsored by CDW-G

    Joint Enterprise Licensing Agreements

    Read this eBook to learn how defense agencies can achieve savings and efficiencies with an Enterprise Software Agreement.

  • Sponsored by Cloudera

    Government Forum Content Library

    Get all the essential resources needed for effective technology strategies in the federal landscape.


When you download a report, your information may be shared with the underwriters of that document.