1. Tells people what to do, as in, tells us to change logs and forms to fit what he wants.
- Inspector can't tell you what to do, however if the inspector finds a noncompliance in your programs that inspector might "suggest" or "recommend" changes prior to documenting a noncompliance (this is being nice, because they can easily just document the NR). If you believe the inspector is wrong, then let the inspector write a noncompliance and then "Appeal" it. The appeal forces the inspector to "reconsider", if the regulations cited suggest noncompliance then it goes up to FLS, then up a chain of command that reviews it.
2. Takes our HACCP Binders out of the office into there office and keeps them for extended periods of time. (Currently has had SOP for 14 hours now)
- You can provide a copy of the programs, or you can make it clear that the HACCP binder, SSOP, and SOP binders should only be accessed in a certain area, for example the QA Office or the conference room. You might also want to consider a designated desktop with no internet access that has a pdf file for al programs, this allows access to review programs and is always accessible.
3. Takes pictures on a constant basis. (takes pictures of a clerical error and waits for someone to change it and then says we are forging numbers.
- 9 CFR 417.5, 9 CFR 418.4, 9 CFR 320.4 allows inspectors to "copy" certain programs and records. I would agree that a picture would fall under "copying" but that is my opinion.
4. Has become friends with employees. (The employees think he is there friend when he is actually using them for info or to change things to fit what he wants.
- This one is common, humans make connections. Employees will share information or complaints to inspectors hoping for inspectors to bring changes. Maybe have a meeting with employees about focusing on their duties instead of gossiping.
5. Has lied to plant owner and his front line supervisor about employees being aggressive so that they are excluded from dealing with USDA.
- One of the top reasons that FLS's are involved besides the obvious food safety and sanitation is "intimidation". If the inspector felt "intimidated" then that inspector reaches out to FLS who then proceeds to ask for a full Memorandum of Interview of all events. The FLS will then reach out to District and within hours a Notice of Intent Enforcement can be issued where "inspection is withheld" until the establishment finds a solution. If none of this happened then the inspector did not report anything and that inspector cannot just avoid dealing with certain employees.
6. Has called employees liars in front of multiple people.
- Skip
7. Issues demands without showing proof or support for anything he is saying.
- Define "demands". Again, as per #1, inspectors cannot tell you what to do. If there is a noncompliance, they should issue an NR citing 9 CFR citations that support that finding. Thus that 9 CFR citation should be the proof or support. If that citation is invalid, then appealing is the best choice, that appeal will easily be granted. One more thing, inspectors are not required to provide documentation to prove their point (sounds odds I know), it is the establishment’s duty or the consultant’s duty to support compliance or to appeal the noncompliance. Now if this inspector is always using verbal warning and doesn’t write any NRs then you should be happy because none of that is getting documented.