Tensions in the Social Licence to Operate at Hormel Meats

Tensions in the Social Licence to operate at Hormel Meats

1) What are the contending forces in the emerging SLO at Hormel and other meat processors and packers?  

This case is about an experiment piloted by the US Department of Agriculture in 1997, whose primary objective is to reduce the number of Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS) inspectors from seven to four in order to accelerate the speed in the lines of five pork processing plants. This experiment presented different contending forces which have distinct interests.

The organizations that are in favor of the increase in the speed of production lines are:

a). Hormel: One of the meat processor plants selected for the experiment. This plant supports the experiment for several reasons: they increased their productivity in 33% as a result of the experiment and their profits because of the increased line speed; they expanded their company to satisfy the demand and invested in equipment.

b). QPP (Quality Pork Processors): One of the plants selected for the experiment, this plant is the custom packer for Hormel. QPP has a strong relationship with Hormel because QPP had been part of Hormel plant before. This company benefited form the experiment; it increased its line speed in 50%, with a minimum increase in workers; these improvements resulted in more profits for the company.

e). Federal Inspectors: The case presents different entities such as FSIS, USDA, OSHA and OIG whose mission is to regulate and to make sure that inspection addresses the standards in order to ensure not only the safety of food but also that of workers. However, we could infer from the reading that they are by the side of the industry.

The organizations that are against of the increase in the speed of production lines are:

c). Customers: The increase in the speed of the production lines brought about less quality control. Workers can not check carcasses manually as they did before and there are some signs of diseases and contamination that can be detected only by manual inspection. In this scenario Hormel could not guarantee the quality of its products.

d). Workers: The runaway production carried also safety problems for workers. Their job has become extremely dangerous because they are exposed to cuts of their extremities. Also, workers are exposed to dangerous situations such as contamination and chemical substances that could result in health problems.

2) Make the case for SLO by joining those in the community motivated by reducing meat regulations, inspections and in general speeding up the process.

From the perspective of the shareholders of Hormel and the other companies involved in this experiment, they should get the SLO from the community because they are benefiting the community in different ways: