• dc matthews

    Less than A re-inspections should happen at a cost to the business for overtime; as long as inspectors don’t abuse it – problem solved.

  • kburgoyne

    Oh gosh, relying upon business to self inspect doesn’t work? Shock!!!

    I have to say that 2 times for independents and 3 times for chains struck me as counter-intuitive. I would have thought the chains, with their brand names on the line, and chain staff to draw upon, would do a better job of self policing.

    Presumably businesses are provided with an objective list of things required to meet certain letter grades. It is not the job of inspectors to “teach” people who want to be in the food service business what they need to do. There are schools for that.

    One of the reasons I myself dismiss the idea (for now) of starting up a food service business is I know I’d need to go through a big learning curve in order to properly understand the safety procedures. Just like a civil engineer needs to go through a big learning curve to make sure s/he doesn’t build a bridge that ends up killing people.

    Food service grading in NOT like handing in your essay to your English 101 teacher asking for feedback and then a new grade. If the business violated a health requirement and got a lower grade, that is the businesses own “personal responsibility” for getting that grade.

    There is no need to provide enough staff to coddle businesses that failed to take personal responsibility for the health of their customers right from the start. Indeed that simply results of a laxer attitude toward getting it right from the start because they business owner starts to rely upon the attitude of “I can just fix something if/when they find it and then get re-inspected.” If they had been responsible food service business owners, they would have passed food service classes at schools if necessary, and would have known what to do to get a high grade BEFORE the inspector showed up.

    I do recognize there could be rare cases of disputing whether something was actually wrong or not. Those cases could be handled as the main inspection job of a supervisor. The supervisor should be using such inspections to evaluate the inspectors working for him/her.

    However with the advent of cheap photography, a lot of potential for “disputes” can be quickly eliminated. If the business has a violation, in many cases a picture of the violation can (and should) be placed on electronic file. A supervisor would not need to start investigating a dispute by visiting the business. The supervisor could inspect the photos to see whether the inspector was getting over-zealous or if the violation was legit, then visit the business if the photos were insufficient.

    Simple “re-grading” which doesn’t involve a dispute of the original findings should be entirely “we’ll fit you in when we have a chance”. It’s the business owners personal responsibility for having the violation in the first place, so there is no need to coddle them. Indeed business owners who want to be re-graded should pay for the privilege which can help fund the additional workload. The fee would need to not really benefit the inspectors so-as to not create an incentive for issuing low grades in order to generate fees.