Yesterday, FIC blogged about the KING 5 News investigative story in Washington state, where two former USDA inspectors exposed Snokist's "reprocessing" of moldy applesauce and the agency's dismissal of their complaints. The Seattle-based news outlet has now done a follow-up piece that explores the conflicts of interest between USDA and the food industry that may keep the agency from tackling serious health concerns in the food supply. One highlight:
Records obtained by the KING 5 Investigators show Snokist paid more than a half-million dollars in user fees to the USDA in just over three years. The fees pay for USDA inspections and services to monitor the food Snokist is sending to USDA programs like school lunches and food banks.
The inspectors believe their boss ignored their concerns about the applesauce because he didn’t want to lose the money Snokist’s contract brought in to the USDA.
The USDA states that inspectors were "diligent" about making sure the moldy applesauce didn't go to schools, but that the inspectors don't have the authority to block shipments (however questionable) to non-government contractors such as grocery stores.
The former inspectors, Wendy Alguard and Jerry Pierce, allege that the USDA could have done something more, but that their boss didn't want to lose the company's business via user fees. Money from the fees "made him look good in the western region as well as Washington, DC," said Pierce.
Like many government whistleblowers before them, Alguard and Pierce said they were punished for raising concerns.
Alguard says the USDA tried to transfer her to a less desirable job in California. She was fired late last year after refusing the assignment.
Jerry Pierce says his career was tarnished, as well. He retired from the USDA at the end of 2011. The USDA inspector who worked at Snokist before Pierce was also terminated by the agency.
A USDA spokesperson denies that there was any retaliation involved.
Sadly, whistleblower retaliation in the form of a job transfer, demotion, firing, etc., is nothing new. Former USDA Public Health Veterinarian, the late Dr. Dean Wyatt, was transferred to Vermont and demoted for raising humane handling concerns at a slaughterhouse in Oklahoma. Perhaps he would have been fired just like Alguard if he had refused to take the assignment in Vermont, but he soon found similar violations at that plant as well and blew the whistle again (resulting in more retaliation against Wyatt, but who was ultimately vindicated). Such punishment creates a chilling effect, silencing others who might wish to expose wrongdoing. But silence is not golden when it comes to our food system.
You would think that the federal government would use its oversight role to ensure potentially unsafe food never reaches consumers (especially when both USDA and FDA say they don't have a list of where the questionable products end up). The conflicting USDA role of promoting agricultural products while supposedly enforcing food safety, and other apparent financial incentives, make it a constant struggle for both whistleblowers and the public at large. GAP continues to fight for stronger whistleblower protections for federal workers in the form of the pending Whistleblower Protection Enhancement Act. We can't have what apparently happened to Alguard and Pierce inhibit more truth-tellers from raising concerns when food safety is at risk.
Sarah Damian is New Media Associate for the Government Accountability Project, the nation's leading whistleblower protection and advocacy organization.
