POISONING PEOPLE - Foodopoly: The Battle Over the Future of Food and Farming in America - page 78

ults were incorporated into a report written in 2000 by GAP and Public Citizen called “The Jungle: Is
America's Meat Fit to Eat,” of which I was one of the authors.
The survey offered proof that HACCP had indeed become a system that took the inspectors away from
the front lines of inspection. The inspectors documented that they could no longer take direct action against
contamination, including preventing feces, vomit, and metal shards from entering the food system. Inspect-
ors reported that they have been instructed not to document violations they have observed of company
employees performing slaughter duties.
Among the quotes from the inspectors:
“Instead of taking action immediately, we are instructed to 'let the system work.'”
“It's a big paper chase . . . dot the 'i,' cross the 't.' That is all that counts.”
“Plant managers say the rule is—there are no rules! We [plant managers] write our own regulations.”
“Two sets of records are being kept by [the meat plant]; one set to show USDA inspectors (looks real
good); and one set for their own use.”
“Many things go on—especially things on the floor; they just pick it [contaminated meat] up and put it
in for human consumption.”
While HACCP had been mandated only for processing, Painter says that USDA had always planned
to introduce it into slaughter. By 1998, they had established a pilot program for slaughter called HACCP-
based Inspection Models Project (HIMP). Its goal was to take inspectors off the line in slaughter facilities
and have them review company records of inspection done by company employees. AFGE national pres-
ident Bobby Harnage said, “This is a back-door attempt to change administratively what Congress would
never consider changing legislatively—significantly weakening the entire meat and poultry inspection pro-
cess. We're not going to sit back and let the USDA abdicate its responsibility to American consumers.” 9
The AFGE filed suit against the USDA for breaking the law that stated that an inspector must examine
each animal carcass.
Despite the lawsuit, in 1999, thirty plants began participating in the program to reduce the number of
inspectors in slaughter plants. In 2000, the District of Columbia Circuit Court of Appeals ruled against
the USDA, saying that HIMP violated federal law. The judges wrote in their decision: “The government
believes that federal employees fulfill their statutory duty to inspect by watching others perform the task.
One might as well say that umpires are pitchers because they carefully watch other throw baseballs.” 10 In
response, the agency redesigned the HIMP project to position an FSIS carcass inspector at the end of each
slaughter line. The union appealed this action, but in 2001 the court found that the redesigned program met
the statutory requirements.
Felicia Nestor has worked directly with USDA meat inspector whistleblowers for the past fifteen years.
It was never a career she set out to have. Nestor put herself through City University in New York as an art
and music major by waitressing, and eventually worked as a photographer. She says that while taking pro-
fessional photographs at the United Nations, she heard incredible people speaking about civil rights—an
experience that inspired her to go to law school. While in Washington, D.C., finishing her degree at Ge-
orgetown Law School, she met someone from GAP, where she began as a volunteer photographer before
joining the staff.
Nestor says she had no background in food safety, but when she first started working for GAP in the
mid-1990s she had a completely open mind about the situation. She could see that the inspectors were rais-
ing red flags about many issues but that they had no support from consumer groups who went right along
with the USDA administration.