It sounds to me like PIRG is criticizing the lack of transparency and consistency in how food recalls are communicated. This is opposed to the actual policies themselves, which PIRG has not be able to fully understand because retailers won’t speak about them. I guess this does raise questions over how easy it is for consumers to discover information. However, I have to say that it is not exactly a robust methodology from PIRG if they cannot base their findings on actual facts. Whole Foods, who they criticize, for example, does regularly post food recalls on the notice board in my store, so there is a policy there even if the company didn’t explain it to PIRG.

There are huge recall execution inconsistencies at store level across companies and regions. Communication and execution is critical.

The report raises awareness on a very important issue. Anecdotally speaking, I don’t remember seeing posters in grocery stores on the current recalls.

As the report points out, it is not mandated by law. Few good corporate citizens may be showing the info as a best practice, but clearly a majority of grocers didn’t care.

For grocers, this may be an opportunity to build trust by voluntarily and proactively sharing the information, prominently. And of course there is merit in the FDA formalizing the policies.

This is so true. Having done hundreds of these across different companies, there is no consistency in communication to the retailer from the manufacturer, communication back to the vendor, etc.

Retailers do the best they can but there is no best practice that can be communicated across all food businesses. How much more compliance would we have if the FDA formalized a process for all recalls?

We have all seen recall information on the news, in the newspapers, and on the internet. I can honestly say that I have never, ever seen a notice from or at a grocery store advising me of a recall on a product that they sold. Sounds like “F” is the correct grade.

Trust and transparency have always been front and center in the relationship between consumers and grocery stores/food providers. Food recalls are always unfortunate, however, grocery stores should take a stronger stance on quality control measures to contain and prevent their customers from being impacted.

If a food recall occurs once the food is in the marketplace, the PIRG report does raise awareness around the communication strategies that have to be put in place by the grocery stores. Consumers remain loyal to brands and companies when there is open communication and transparency when trouble surfaces. It’s ultimately all about trust.

Many food retailers are more concerned about being held accountable by customers for recalls than they are about informing those shoppers. This leads to unclear policies, poor execution of recall processes, and a lack of leadership in an area where leadership is needed. Grocers should be experts in food, and do everything they can to educate customers and keep them informed, whether positive or negative.

While PIRG’s report seems harsh, it proves the global grocery sector must prioritize collaboration to protect consumers. The grocery supply chain is globally entwined, and its integrity affects public health and safety.

Retailers face the daunting responsibility of ensuring that their entire supply chain reflects food safety best practices. To improve their agility, retailers need full collaboration with all their suppliers when food recalls arise, whether recalls are due to bacteria, product mislabeling or undeclared allergens. That means integration of retail processes and ongoing information-sharing among retailers and suppliers.

Working as a team is the only way retail companies can solve supply chain issues – especially potentially fatal recalls.

Clearly this is a problem, and just as clearly the solution isn’t as obvious as it seems at first blush. Yes, supermarkets should do a better job around recalls, but in our area many (though obviously not all) recalls are communicated on all the local television news broadcasts. Could grocers use their loyalty card information to directly email shoppers? They could, but that still wouldn’t touch everyone. Still, that would be one step in the right direction.

This is another example of numerous systems operating in silos instead of creating cross-channel communications. For me it’s the same challenge, (and frustration), when you have to give your details to a robo-operator and then have to repeat all the information again – IF you’re fortunate enough to actually talk to a human being. With all the data gathering that is going on everywhere — loyalty programs, delivery services, credit card and PoS data — it seems as though it shouldn’t be a stretch to contact someone for a food recall. I’ll bet those retailers are really good, or at least focused, at promoting and communicating which wine or coupon would go best with that chicken that just got recalled.

I have only ever received food recall information from my local Kroger store, whether it was Ralph’s or Frys. This is another example of grocers not using their customer database information well.

I always thought it was common practice for grocers to inform customers who were members of the store’s loyalty card program about recalls. I guess not. This is an issue that FMI should address.

As we discussed a year ago on RetailWire, transparency across all industries (this previous discussion focused on pharmaceuticals), the supply chain must be focused on the consumer. And each stakeholder across the ecosystem must be willing to do whatever it takes to ensure consistent delivery of safe food, medicines, and products in general. There is opportunity for improvement at every turn … but, again, the consumer MUST be at the center.