Diners beware: some restaurant workers may not have a full grasp of what it takes to keep food safe from contamination.
That’s according to a recent study from the University of Illinois at Chicago, which posed a series of food safety questions to area food handlers and found that the average respondent was able to answer only 72 percent of them correctly – a rate that would earn them a C- on most school grading scales.
Researchers surveyed 372 food service workers in order to test their familiarity with meat and poultry handling protocol. Of those surveyed, only half received a score of 70 percent or above.
Employees who were certified in safe food handling – usually a manager or supervisor – scored slightly higher than other participants, averaging 77 percent; however, 35 percent of this group still scored under 70 percent.
And while these scores might mean a passing grade in school, in the restaurant industry they raise red flags, says Mark Dworkin, associate professor of epidemiology at UIC and lead researcher of the study.
“I really don’t know of any of these kinds of questions that it’s OK that they don’t know,” said Dworkin in a phone interview. “They’re handling this food for the whole public, including Grandma and young children and pregnant women.”
The question most commonly answered incorrectly by meat and poultry handlers was a true or false statement: “Beef may be placed in the microwave to defrost.” The statement is true; however 65.3 percent of respondents answered “false.”
And 56 percent of respondents answered “true” to the statement “Raw meat can be stored anywhere in a refrigerator as long as it is wrapped in plastic,” a false statement because meat must be stored on the bottom shelf so that it doesn’t drip onto other foods.
Dworkin says that requiring food workers to have a full understanding of food safety protocol is not too much to ask. “I don’t think that it’s unfair to be expecting them to know this information, which is not difficult information to learn,” he says. “You don’t need to know complicated mathematics to know this stuff.”
Food Safety Knowledge: A National Issue
For those wiping their brow thinking the study does not apply to restauran21ts outside Chicagoland, Dworkin has some not-so-comforting news: these types of findings are most likely not region-specific.
“It’s probably similar in much of the rest of the country,” he says, “based on the little amount of published data there is out there on restaurant food handler knowledge.”
Moving Forward: Filling in the Information Gaps
In addition to pinpointing the problem, Dworkin and his team have also come up with a solution — a set of educational materials designed to address the food safety problem areas revealed by their study.
Phase 2 of the study will include introducing those materials to restaurant inspectors, whom Dworkin says are the best people to deliver safe food-handling information to workers.
“Many sanitarians have told me that the most important thing they do during an inspection is the education of food handlers,” says Dworkin, “but they don’t have a lot of time for it. That’s what they think is most useful.”
And education doesn’t just mean knowing the ABCs of food handling, says Dworkin. Workers must understand why it is so important to keep food free of harmful pathogens.
In the study, when asked whether “eating ground meat that is not completely cooked can cause bloody diarrhea,” a full 36.8 percent of participants said no.
Simply knowing proper handling protocol, “is enough for robots,” says Dworkin. “But for human beings, knowledge influences behavior, and so do emotions, and when you recognize that a particular practice can cause bloody diarrhea, it’s an alarming fact. It makes you more likely to take something seriously…when you realize that the consequences are not minor.”
While they wait to distribute their educational materials to health inspectors, researchers have already provided these resources – including a comic strip – to Chicago-area food handlers, who have shown a slight improvement in familiarity with food safety protocol.
Consumers can also take measures to protect themselves by being aware of what to look for while dining out. Dworkin says consumers can ask themselves the following questions:
- Do you see staff washing their hands?
- Do you see thermometers placed where cold food is stored, i.e. in the fish case at a sushi restaurant?
- Do you see people wiping their face with their hands and then not immediately going to wash their hands?
- Are workers handling money and then food directly afterward?
- Are workers scooping ice with their hands on the glass instead of using ice tongs?
September 2nd, 2011 at 12:30 pm
What is even more interesting is if you look not at what answers workers give to questions but rather what they actually do in practice and try to understand why. Giving the right (or wrong) answer to a question does not mean that the worker will do the right thing in practice. Those that are most dangerous are the workers who misunderstand but do so with confidence and therefore put hazardous practices into the kitchen.
September 2nd, 2011 at 12:30 pm
In my vast experience as a head of food department, where I managed 40 people for 13 years, I can tell you, that you can repeat this things till the end of time, but without proper interest and knowledge of the workers and strict every day surveillance, people will do the minimum expected of them. You can explain the dangers to workers every day for years and years, but they just do what they think it’s right. I always believed that if you explain to the person why a thing he/she does is not right and what can come out of it, if he/she will continue to do so, but my end conclusion is that most of the work force will do the minimum asked not to get punished. Now it’s all on team leaders to guide and warn the work force about dangers, but there has to be a punishment if the person gets more than a few warnings. We have had meetings and lectures and written material and each got his own booklet of HACCP for workers, but without surveillance nothing worked.
I think that the numbers in the article are alarming but I doubt that they are much better anywhere else in large kitchens. What I find really scary and alarming is the statement “Employees who were certified in safe food handling – usually a manager or supervisor – scored slightly higher than other participants, averaging 77 percent; however, 35 percent of this group still scored under 70 percent.” Those are the people that should be really aware of all the dangers of not following PRP’s and protocols. I think that something must be done in educating this people so that they can share their knowledge to the workers and supervise them.
September 2nd, 2011 at 12:31 pm
I agree with many of your points Urska, but I think the fundamental importance is getting to what workers do or do not understand or misunderstand. Survey data I have suggests that across training as a whole (not just food safety) suggests only 17% of workers understand what they have been taught and will implement it with confidence and that 30% misunderstand at least one area but will still implement with confidence – these are the dangerous ones. Of the remaining 53% most require simple clarification and coaching to improve confidence; companies should identify the 17% and use them as safety champions to set the standards. You are also right that there needs to be consequence management for incorrect behaviours. I would be happy to discuss the method for identifying which workers fall into which categories.
September 2nd, 2011 at 12:31 pm
I believe we are at surveillance again, by manager or by team leaders. You have to watch the workers, talk to them and discover what they did and didn’t understand.Check their knowledge and their behavior, because some can talk their way out and do exactly the opposite thing you tell them. I agree that those that misunderstand things are the dangerous ones, because you don’t expect them to fail, but they do in all confidence that they are doing the right thing. But I still think that if worker fails at simple thing like washing hands, that’s not misunderstanding, that’s just ignorance. And against that kind of worker disciplinary actions should be taken. Sadly, as I don’t appreciate guidance with a stick. And I totally agree with you Dan on rewarding workers that did understand the lecture and are doing the right thing (that 17%) or the workers that didn’t understand it but come to the lecturer and ask him/her of the matter they didn’t understand. But that kind of worker is rare, there is just not enough self-initiative in most of them. You can ignite that with in some of them but mostly you will fail.
.
Would be happy to hear your suggestions and comments
September 2nd, 2011 at 12:31 pm
The workers do understand the concept of Food Hygiene and Safety. The problem is they take it for granted and ignore the very small important things like washing hands and avoiding cross contamination during food processing.
The survillance job can be irritating if you keep reminding the same workers to be aware of Food Safety and Hygiene everyday. It sometimes feels like baby sitting grown ups. What kind of displinary action can be taken? Please Help me here somebody.
September 2nd, 2011 at 12:32 pm
Well,a interesting topic.I too agree with this.This is because of the experienced workers taking things for granted and standing a worse examples for the new comers.Inspite of several trainings and surveillance,the experienced workers try to deviate the food safety rules and food hygiene.sometimes,it looks that even top management are supporting them.Only a continuous training,education,good leadership,top management commitment,taking the things to top management.A good food safety executive with good patience will certainly change the things by giving continuous training on food safety,hygiene and combined peronality development programme will change the attitude of workers.
September 2nd, 2011 at 12:47 pm
Totally agree. Some of food operators, even in 5 star hotels, are lack of food safety and hygiene awerence.
September 2nd, 2011 at 12:48 pm
As a trainer I feel root cause is lack of proper training and understanding and management apathy towards spending on trainings as it is done for other things like decor and ambiance.
September 2nd, 2011 at 2:57 pm
The survillance job can be irritating if you keep reminding the same workers to be aware of Food Safety and Hygiene everyday. It sometimes feels like baby sitting grown ups.” that’s exactly how I felt day after day after day. But if you don’t do it, things will go down fast. Sadly. Well what I did was make a list of all the workers, put it on board in the middle of the kitchen and put little red dots for every time I had to remind the same worker about the same thing like taking internal temperature of meat when roasting. Three dots meant he/she has to make a defense why he/she doesn’t do what he/she is told. If I wasn’t satisfied with the defense I put him/her into disciplinary procedure with top management. Publicly having dots on the boar proved to be quite efficient.
September 2nd, 2011 at 4:21 pm
If you work to ISO 22000 as I have, then everyone gets the relevant training. I gave some training whilst working in the UK for a major USA company – and we made dog- and catfood!
September 2nd, 2011 at 6:09 pm
I quite agree with this that the workers should be trained but level of their exposure also matter. Some of them need to be exposed to new technology in food processing couple with
training.
September 2nd, 2011 at 6:09 pm
The fundamental here is not that the workers must be trained – I think it’s obvious that they should whether it be ra egulatory requirement, a certification/standard requirtement or just good practice – it’s whether they understand or misunderstand what they have been trained in that counts. A worker that misunderstands an instruction, a temperature control, a cleaning process, etc. BUT is confident in what they are doing, these are the danger workers. What you need to do is to find out who these people are (I work with a firm of psychologists to develop assessment tools to do this) and then put in place specific interventions to help or force them to change their behavior. Equally, through assessment when you discover who the workers are who understand all their training and put it into practice with confidence you don’t need to waste money training them each year…break the pattern, do something different, try a new approach.
September 4th, 2011 at 8:14 pm
Preventative costs for food safety, i.e. training, is essential, although most companies don’t like to spend the money for training because it eats part of their bottom line–whether a restaurant or a manufacturer. To protect their business and their customers, more companies are going to have to take a proactive approach. General employees, along with management, need to be trained, and not just for knowledge’s sake, but for understanding (cleaning crews w/chemical usages, to line employees).
September 4th, 2011 at 8:14 pm
Any food company director who thinks food safety training is expensive should be made to eat the alternative!
September 4th, 2011 at 10:40 pm
I have been in the Food Safety business like many of you for too many years. My observation is that if we could get people in the industry at every level to wash their hands, we could reduce food safety microbial incidents by over 90%. For what it is worth, we are not alone. A US CDC study shows that the compliance rates for health professionals including doctors and nurses is only 40%. These professionals complain about poor placement of facilities, over-washing, overburdened hands etc. A forthcoming study by Psychological Science to be published says that signs that are patient-focused elicited a 33% increase in use of soap and disinfectants. What is the lesson for us in the food industry? Our signs say to wash hands after using the washroom, eating, smoking etc. Why? Perhaps we need to focus our attention on telling our workers that washing hands is for the benefit of our customers not for the products we make. Without customers, we have no business.
September 5th, 2011 at 3:58 pm
Whilst agreeing in principle with Desmond Ali, we need to recognise when microbial infection is at its worst and when it may *almost* be incidental.
When making canned food, if the processing time & temperature are correct, then there will be virtually no chance of microbiological infection. Obviously many inorganic substances can easily survive the processing, but these should be excluded from the factory.
In cases when minor microbial contamination can be damning, it is worth insisting on an EtOH (or similar) hand sanitiser being used. Gloves, if the correct type and regularly changed, can also help avoid contamination.
Operators should be given some initial training, repeated at least annually, on hygiene. This training must be well given, and different each time. Whilst the message may remain the same, an identical, second-rate PowerPoint presentation repeated many times will simply turn off the operators (and most managers).
September 5th, 2011 at 10:42 pm
I fully agree with all of the shared discussions about worker training, threats and incentives as a means for ensuring the safe handling of food. Some challenges remain as has also been expressed. Employees may be trained, threatened or bribed but remain uncommitted. The safe handling of food is indeed crucial. However, unsafe food handling and employee commitment are only two of the challenges facing the assurance of food safety. Whether we are talking about restaurant kitchens, the food manufacturing sector or food distribution services, et cetera, the challenge is broad-scoped.
September 6th, 2011 at 11:32 am
In fact , the GHP (Good hygienic Practice) depend mainly on the hotel management.
there is a shared matter of this issue between the organizations is ‘LACK of AWARENESS’.
September 6th, 2011 at 11:32 am
Since my company also conducts independent food safety audits for restaurants, meat markets, hospitals, day care facilities, etc.,I think that if companies really checked their foodservice facilities and rated their employees, they would find that the average respondent could not even answer 72% of the food safety questions correctly. The percentage rating would be below 50%. Having been in the business for over 35 years, first with the Health Department and upon retiring, I have my own consultant company, I find problems with managers, assistant managers and it goes on down from there. I train every day. Sometimes the problem is because of language barriers but other times it happens because some employees do not care. If they do not understand what I am trying to convey, then I will show them what to do and how to do it. Companies, as well as private owners, pay me to see that the food is handled, prepared and stored correctly. They pay me to ensure that their food and drinking utensils are cleaned, sanitized and stored correctly. I observe each employee for sores, colds, cuts, burns, bandages and how they wash their hands and if the employee is clean. These are just some of the many things I perform during each audit. Our food chain is not safe but I am trying to make a small difference in this world.
December 24th, 2011 at 12:25 pm
This is very interesting, You’re a very skilled blogger. I’ve joined your rss feed and look forward to seeking more of your wonderful post.
December 31st, 2011 at 12:08 pm
I was just thinking the same thing
April 23rd, 2012 at 7:47 pm
An interesting article, however the real source of the issue is being caused through poor teaching techniques of staff from course providers, it’s also partially caused by Food Surveillance Authorized Officers from the Authorities charged with inspecting Food Manufacturer’s and Food Premises.
The appropriate audit tools are failing us, in the expectation that a poor result will jolt business owners/operators to perform better. However this is not the case. I have worked in both the Food Manufacturing industry and as a Food Regulator in Australia, and now conducting some internal audits and assessments of an American brand and I can tell you that appropriate education is the one single thing that is missing and can be pinpointed through these assessments.
When talking to the operators of each of these businesses, they will advise you that the Public Health Officer responsible for Inspecting their place of business will spend no longer that 10-15 minutes in the store, of the one hour that my client is entitled to as part of their registration.
But why are the Public health Officer’s not stopping by to provide some education to my client’s? Is it that they do not understand the food type that my client is selling, or is it because the client’s stores are only small?
When I was a Public Health Officer, responsible for inspecting food businesses in Australia, I made sure that I knew about the type of store I was entering, I made sure I knew some facts about the product that was being sold. I ensured that I provided education on hygiene, or record keeping, or even cleaning of premises. I made it know that I was there to help them at any time they needed help or information on Public Health aspects within their business, and they knew that I would call in again in the near future to see how things were going.
In the arena of Food Handling and Hygiene Education, it seems that anybody can teach this, but it never seems that any of the teachers have had much to do with hospitality, or regulation, or inspection / audits. A lot of providers read straight from their scripted books that the student follow and expect an assignment to be handed in at the end of the course. I have in the past had many people come to me and ask for verification that they were in fact doing what had been asked, because the information relating to the assignment, although it was in the book, was never actually covered by the course. Types of things missed generally include developing a Food Safety Plan/Program, although in Australia on course id actually titled “Implement a Food Safety Program” ( a requirement to attain the position of Food Safety Supervisor).
In Australia, they have in the last 2 years introduced online education packages for Food Safety certification. Most Public Health Officers I have spoken to say it’s great when they can not find a training provider to service their local area. But they also agree, that it’s not the best way to train, you can’t ask questions of the trainer, you can’t share ideas with the rest of the class and all you have to do is answer questions on a test to be assessed. I’ve heard a Public Health Auditor, recently say that it’s the equivalent of pulling a qualification out of the cereal packet that morning and saying look what I’ve earned, without doing any hard work.
So to in my opinion, if Public Health Officer’s started providing more education to business proprietors and ensured that they were able to present a section on what they look for in Food Safety courses, I believe that people may actually take more care of their Hygiene and that of the food premises cleaning schedules.
As far as the online courses go, Public health Officer’s need to ensure that a participant is appropriately qualified and sign off on the qualification, which I bet that no Public Health Officer in his/her right mind would sign-off on.
In Australia, Municipal Authorities are governed by their State Legislation and provide avenues for proprietors to complain about anything including Customer Service, or the lack of service they receive as a result of paying their Annual registration. In most jurisdictions now a Municipality, must be able to prove that their fees are based on the actual cost of providing that document.
In the case of a registration Certificate for 12 months, it is only supposed to cost the actual amount that it costs to produce. But most municipalities will add at least one inspection, and if it only take 15 minutes to complete, then either refund the owing amount or provide some education to the business and assess their Food handling skills.
In the case of the client I have been working for and any future clients I have, who set-up there own food safety program should set adequate food safety training from a local provider in motion should to ensure that their operators are provided with the same training across Australia and reflects the needs of their food Safety Program.
May 30th, 2012 at 4:45 pm
OMG!!!
I hope the hygiene skills of some correspondents are better than their punctuation (and both require precision).
As a member of the AAAA (Association for the Abolition of the Aberrant Apostrophe), I hate to see the (possessive?) apostrophe added simply because the word is a plural and happens to end in “s”.
October 12th, 2012 at 10:03 pm
Took an excellent HACCP course where the instructor emphasized that a commitment to Food Safety starts at the top. Best practices say that thorough hand washing takes 20 seconds, yet in reality an employer may implicitly discourage that because of the “wasted” time it takes. I’ve seen the idea “customer service” take precedence over cleanliness, especially handling cash.