Peanut Corporation of America, Research Paper Example

Introduction

Food manufacturing and production requires a high level of quality control in order to protect the end user, the consumer, from any possible unnecessary risk or harm. When food products are manufactured under unsafe conditions and they pose a threat to consumers, government control and oversight regarding food products must be implemented. It is important for consumers to be able to trust in the products that they purchase and to be confident that they have been properly manufactured and produced under safe conditions. However, there are many legal consequences and other high levels of risk when products are unsafe for consumption and are sold nonetheless in the market. This is a critical issue that requires further evaluation because it demonstrates a lack of oversight and support for the protection and safety of consumers through regulation of their food products.

The legalities of food safety and production must be considered, as evidenced in the case of the Peanut Corporation of America, whose salmonella poisoning events led to the death of nine people between 2008 and 2009 served as a landmark decision in that the company’s chief executive was found guilty of conspiracy and obstruction of justice in the case (Newman, 2014). The following discussion will address this case in greater detail and will emphasize the importance of understanding the legal responsibility of companies who manufacture, produce, and sell food products to the public, as the safety of consumers must always be the key priority during these activities. The discussion will also address the role of legal precedent, government oversight and control, and the overall direction of the food service industry with respect to this incident.  These factors are critical in the development of new ideas and strategies to ensure that food production in the United States is safe and effective at all times and that foods are safe for consumption by the consumer population.

Analysis

In the case against the Peanut Corporation of America and its chief executive, Stewart Parnell, the following conditions were observed: “Prosecutors said Peanut Corp. defrauded customers, including several national food companies, by neglecting to notify them when laboratory tests revealed the presence of food-borne pathogens, including salmonella, in its shipped products. In some cases, prosecutors alleged, company officials fabricated lab results entirely, stating peanut products were safe for consumption even when tests showed otherwise, or when tests had never been conducted at all” (Newman, 2014). Based upon these conditions, it is clearly evident that illegal activities took place and that they had a significant impact on the organization’s reputation for safety and its responsibility to the consumer (Newman, 2014). Under these conditions, the chief executive was clearly negligent in his decisions and the actions that were taken, thereby creating an environment in which he willingly placed consumers’ health at risk with the products that were manufactured and sold to market (Newman, 2014).

Food safety practices must serve as the primary focus for corporations who manufacture these products because consumers depend on safe products that are able to be consumed without consequences or risks. Food safety experts and organizations have looked to this case as a sign that the industry must modify its practices and buckle down on its efforts to produce products that are safe for consumption (Nestle, 2013). In this context, it is important for consumers to recognize that government oversight is working and that it provides a positive approach to managing food manufacturing and production as safely as possible (Nestle, 2013). These practices require the development of new levels of regulatory oversight that support government intervention in this industry, particularly when safety practices are called into question and require further investigation (Nestle, 2013).

Protecting consumers from food products that are unsafe for consumption requires a high level of regulatory oversight that must consider not only the actions of the corporation, but the actions of the individuals working on behalf of the corporation and whether or not these actions are in the best interests of the business and its objectives: “We expect, and rightfully so, for food suppliers to follow the rules and regulations, and to never sacrifice public safety for profits. In this case, these defendants were willing to put tainted food on the shelves of stores across the country. After this trial, it should be clear that individual accountability, not just corporate responsibility, for criminal conduct that puts public safety in jeopardy is now the norm in the eyes of the Department of Justice (United States Department of Justice, 2014).

With this case, it is important to identify the specific methods by which lessons might be learned so that these events will not be repeated in the future. This is an important reminder of the challenges associated with food manufacturing and production and how food safety must be a critical component of these practices at all times. Most importantly, many consumers lost confidence in a product that they believed to be safe from risk upon consumption and a product that is used widely by children (Flynn, 2014). This incident represents a serious challenge because it significantly impacts how consumers view food products and whether or not they are able to trust that the products that are available in stores and restaurants are safe to eat (Flynn, 2014). Therefore, organizations must take all required steps to ensure that their products are indeed safe to consume and that there is no risk involved (Flynn, 2014).

It is also necessary to evaluate products at their originating source and to be mindful of the practices upheld by farmers, as well as in manufacturing plants, as noted in the following: “In partnership with state and federal agencies, we will help provide technical assistance and education, and we will provide guidance to help farmers and industry build a framework that protects their products from contamination and, if potential hazards are identified, enables them to act immediately to control them” (Sklamberg & Taylor, 2014). Under these conditions, it is necessary to develop strategies that encompass the creation of an environment in which there are sufficient opportunities to examine the different needs that are related to food safety and to make effective decisions regarding the role of food safety in the production process (Sklamberg & Taylor, 2014). There are significant needs to be addressed at the regulatory level in order to prevent future incidents of this magnitude and to avoid any potential health risks associated with food production and manufacturing in order to improve the reputation of the food service industry in this manner (Sklamberg & Taylor, 2014). It is important for all members of the food production industry, from farmers to manufacturers, to take a close look at their current practices and to identify areas where they might be able to improve the practice environment through their actions, while also considering other factors that will play an important role in advancing the success of an organization and its production practices through its focus on food safety and consumer protection (Sklamberg & Taylor, 2014). This practice requires the development of new ideas and approaches to improving the practice environment and in supporting the needs of the consumer population at all times, as they place their trust in the products that they purchase and the conditions under which they are manufactured (Sklamberg & Taylor, 2014).

Conclusion and Recommendations

The risks associated with food manufacturing and production must be closely evaluated in order to prevent future cases similar to this case and to protect consumers from exposure to food products that are unsafe for consumption. This practice requires an ongoing effort from corporations and government organizations in order to alleviate these risks through strict regulations and to require businesses to disclose any possible risks of contamination to the general public as quickly as possible. It is believed that when these practices are undertaken, corporations will gain a higher level of support in how they conduct their manufacturing practices. Preventing this type of incident from occurring in the future requires a strong and steadfast approach that supports the ability to promote change and progress at the regulatory level through stricter guidelines and oversight regarding food manufacturing and production practices. This will encourage organizations to exercise positive approaches to food service that will eliminate risks to consumers as best as possible.

Protecting consumers must serve as the primary focus of the food industry, particularly as regulations evolve and require a stricter approach to food safety in many respects. These efforts require the development of new principles that will be effective in advancing a positive and safe agenda for food production for the foreseeable future. These practices must be encouraging to consumers and provide them with a greater sense of security and safety that the products they purchase are safe to eat and that they will not get sick as a result of consuming them. Although this may sound practical on the surface, it is not always the case, thereby creating an environment in which there are significant opportunities for organizations to exercise ethically responsible judgment and decision-making in their efforts to produce products that are safe and that will support their reputation as a company with high quality products. This strategy must encompass a steadfast reputation for safety through product manufacturing and promote a greater sense of security and support in advancing a positive agenda towards producing products under safe conditions. These practices must demonstrate the ability of organizations to be proactive in promoting safety and in determining how to best approach their responsibility to the general public in this manner.

References

Flynn, D. (2014). DOJ alerts those sickened by Peter Pan and Great Value peanut butter to potential prosecution. Retrieved from http://www.foodsafetynews.com/2014/08/doj-tells-peter-pan-and-great-value-victims-to-expect-conagra-prosecution/#.VFzKrfnF-So

Nestle, M. (2013). Grand jury indicts Peanut Corporation of America officials. Retrieved from http://www.foodpolitics.com/?s=Peanut+Corporation+of+America+

Newman, J. (2014). Peanut executive found guilty in salmonella trial. Retrieved from http://online.wsj.com/articles/head-of-company-that-distributed-salmonella-tainted-peanuts-found-guilty-1411149368

Sklamberg, H., & Taylor, M.R. (2014). Reflecting on the new food protections in the wake of PCA convictions. Retrieved from http://blogs.fda.gov/fdavoice/index.php/tag/peanut-corporation-of-america-pca/

United States Department of Justice (2014). Peanut Corporation of America former officials and broker convicted on criminal charges related to salmonella-tainted peanut products. Retrieved from http://www.justice.gov/opa/pr/peanut-corporation-america-former-officials-and-broker-convicted-criminal-charges-related