Introduction
A “health hazard alert” was issued by the Canadian Food Inspection Agency and Maple Leaf Foods – a major Canadian food processing company – in the summer of 2008, alerting the public to avoid serving or consuming “Sure Slice brand roast beef and corned beef” “because these products may be contaminated with Listeria monocytogenes” (Government of Canada, 2008). Despite early warnings, the outbreak quickly escalated into a major listeriosis epidemic. Approximately 200 Maple Leaf Foods products coming from the Bartor Road meat processing facility in Toronto, Ontario, were recalled, though not before 22 deaths, thousands of illnesses, and a class action lawsuit – involving more than 5,000 individuals – exceeding $50 million (Greenberg & Elliott, 2009, p. 189). As a result of the health and economic impacts of the Maple Leaf Foods listeriosis outbreak and the company’s communication in its management efforts, the outbreak is significant. As opposed to organizations who have also experienced similar outbreaks that avoided or shifted the burden in times of crisis or remained unresponsive and kept a low visibility strategy, Maple Leaf Foods adopted a high visibility strategy. This means that the company would put itself in the media spotlight so that more consumers would receive the information about the outbreak and throw away the recalled packaged meats more quickly. Typically, foodborne illness outbreaks like 2008 do not often happen in Canada (Canada.ca, 2009). Canada.ca says, “there has been a steady increase in listeriosis cases in recent years; since 2005, the percentage of listeriosis outbreaks recorded each year in Canada has doubled”. With that, older individuals are among those at greatest risk of contracting the illness – one of the fastest-growing segments of Canada’s population. This critical analysis aims to explore the significance of the Maple Leaf Foods listeriosis outbreak in examining the relationship between power, social relations, and the process of criminalization as a corporate crime.
Crisis of Power Dynamics and Legitimacy
Consumers are generally considered among the most vulnerable groups of white-collar and corporate crime victims. “All consumers are subject to fraud, health and safety threats, and deception from producing and selling consumer goods and services” (Croall, 2009, p. 127). Croall (2009) defines food crimes as “the manufacture and distribution of food that involve many violations causing a range of damages and consisting of fraudulent marketing tactics, even though the line dividing the legitimate and unlawful is very blurred” (p. 131). As Croall (2009) explains, food poisoning is an example of this; a significant source of death and illness for consumers is associated with violations of sanitation standards. This happened with the listeriosis outbreak at the Maple Leaf Foods plant in 2008. This is significant because not only will some people get very ill or die, but it puts family members of victims at risk of seeing their loved ones suffer.
In Maple Leaf Foods’ case, the use of their power is evident in many ways since they were aware of Listeria occurrences in the plant in 2007 and 2008 and attempted to rectify the problem through sanitation procedures set by industry standards. Listeria was believed to be under control by the plant’s management. Under Maple Leaf Foods’ Listeria control policy, a trend analysis did not take place (Greenberg & Elliott, 2009). However, later in 2008, Maple Leaf Foods claimed they did not know that the recent recurring positive results at the Bartor Road plant had reached an alarming level (Greenberg & Elliott, 2009). According to this claim, the first positive test was not brought to the attention of Maple Leaf Foods management, and it did not surface until later when several more tests returned positive (Greenberg & Elliott, 2009). The company continued to serve their products until multiple tests confirmed the same result. This is dangerous because many people began experiencing symptoms of listeria and did not know what they had been exposed to; the company did not make this information public until later when more positive tests came back.
The Maple Leaf Foods staff informed their superiors of the repeated presence of Listeria beyond the Bartor Road facility into the Head Office (Greenberg & Elliott, 2009). However, this information did not reach the office of the Chief Executive Officer as it was believed that the plant’s interventions had resolved the problem. In the Maple Leaf Foods Bartor Road plant, employees were not required to inform the Canada Food Inspection Agency (CFIA) inspectors about repeated occurrences of Listeria, nor did they volunteer such information (Greenberg & Elliott, 2009). This is scary for consumers because it is difficult to dictate how many other companies follow this policy also. The Canadian Food Inspection Agency plays a vital role as it is “a regulatory agency dedicated to the safeguarding of food, plants, and animals in Canada, thus enhancing the health and well-being of Canada’s people, environment and economy” (Government of Canada, 2008). However, they should have informed consumers right away about the outbreak that took place. A combination of different types of management, such as Maple Leaf Foods and the CFIA, caused this outbreak to spread to the extent it did.
The company also produced larger packages of deli meat products for sale to hospitals and long-term care facilities (Greenberg & Elliott, 2009). Because of the recalls, they lost money and saw this as an opportunity to recover some of those losses. This can be noted as a possibility as to why the company ignored the first positive tests of listeria. As many of the institutions’ clients benefit from low-sodium diets, their recipe used less sodium, which made it attractive to the institutional market. As a result of these circumstances, vulnerable populations were exposed to risk (Greenberg & Elliott, 2009). Ultimately, Maple Leaf Foods was aware of the consequences of producing larger meat packages and distributing them to vulnerable populations. Someone living in a long-term care facility should be able to trust that the food they are consuming is healthy and safely prepared. Due to the above factors, the company’s negligence is evident because they chose to turn a blind eye to the situation, leaving their consumers at risk of contracting listeriosis (Greenberg & Elliott, 2009).
Contextualizing Social Relations at the Local and Global Levels
According to McMullan (2006), as an institution of social control, the news media reproduce order in representing it. He writes that “the rules for the production of statements emphasize importance (what the public must know), immediacy (the present), interest (audience support), personalities (individuals), credibility (authoritative sources), sensationalism (binary categories), and recollection and retelling” (p. 909). These factors are essential because consumers would not receive the complete picture of the company without them. For this reason, companies should have open and honest policies that include all of the listed considerations. Also, local news reporters sent reporters to the Maple Leaf Company headquarters immediately after the first death was reported (p. 190). President and CEO Michael H. McCain made an announcement that was broadcast across all major broadcast channels and was widely streamed across social media outlets, such as YouTube (Greenberg & Elliott, 2009, p. 190). Upon learning that Listeria had been detected in some of the company’s products, McCain described what Listeria was, conveyed the company’s worries about the incident, and offered an apology to those affected (Greenberg & Elliott, 2009, p. 190). He also confirmed that Maple Leaf was taking full responsibility for the crisis, rejecting claims that the problem arose from government policy or regulation. Greenberg and Elliott (2009) argue that “trust is always personal, while confidence is institutional (i.e., we can trust individuals but can only have confidence in institutions)” (p. 193). The company quickly got ahead of the messaging, which helped save its reputation. McMullan (2006) states that “statements of blame and accountability rarely surface in news reports” (p. 913). It is essential to note that Maple Leaf Foods publicly took responsibility, which shows that they wanted to be upfront with their consumers regarding the outbreak. The public’s response to the apology McCain gave was mainly based on their response to McCain, meaning that many people liked him personally. These personal connections allowed for the restoration of trust in Maple Leaf Food products.
In the past decade, food safety has become a significant social and public policy issue as awareness of health hazards associated with food production and processing (e.g., pesticides, food additives, and trans fats) has increased (Greenberg & Elliott, 2009, p. 191). Greenberg and Elliott use data collected from Durham (2005), Miller (2007) and Miller and Reilly (1995) to argue that “food safety concerns have been amplified by how private interests have contested and denied claims about potential threats posed by new food production and processing techniques and how these debates have played out in media accounts” (Greenberg & Elliott, 2009, p. 192). Companies producing food should be able to expand their operations safely, with the right equipment, to ensure contamination does not occur. “Deaths and mass illnesses resulting from outbreaks of contaminated food can threaten legitimacy not only in the immediate sense of culpability and sanctioning (i.e., legal liability) but also by providing an opportunity for broader concerns to be raised regarding business practices or policy” (Greenberg & Elliott, 2009, p. 192). A company does not want its reputation altered based on a mistake; therefore, it is crucial to avoid contamination so that people will not become ill or die from that company’s products.
Process of Criminalizing Corporate Accountability
Gray (2009) explains, under section 2.17.1 of the Canadian Criminal Code, “any individual who undertakes, or has the authority, to direct another individual in the execution of work or a task is legally obligated to take reasonable steps to prevent bodily harm to that individual or anyone else as a result of the work or the task” (p. 327). Gray goes on to say that “the neoliberal discourse of individual and shared/joint responsibility fell under criminal law and changed Canada’s notion of who is responsible for workplace safety” (p. 327). There is, however, the possibility of bringing charges against individual executives and board members under Canadian health and safety legislation (Greenberg & Elliott, 2009). McCain launched the product recall and accepted full responsibility; he was doing what was suitable for consumers and right for the brand. There was no doubt that it was textbook reputation management, whether it resulted from a carefully crafted action plan or wise judgment.
Additionally, the federal government of Canada also investigated the listeriosis outbreak at the Barton Road production plant (Greenberg & Elliott, 2009). They sought to determine how to prevent such events from occurring in the future (Greenberg & Elliott, 2009). There needed to be more understanding about which government department was responsible for conducting the investigation (Greenberg & Elliott, 2009). According to the inquiry, the listeriosis outbreak had not been taken seriously enough at the outset. Despite having meat-slicing machines contaminated with Listeria, Maple Leaf Foods did not notice the problem (Greenberg & Elliott, 2009). It was their responsibility to ensure that their products were safe for their consumers; however, they failed to do this. In addition, not only did Maple Leaf Foods not detect the issue, but government inspectors also failed to detect the outbreak. This is significant because these are people that society relies on to detect possible outbreaks of infections to prevent this kind of illness from spreading to the masses. When reports of illnesses began to accumulate, the outbreak was not immediately treated as an emergency (Greenberg & Elliott, 2009). This was a poor judgement call from Maple Leaf Foods, as many people lost their lives from contracting listeria from their products, as well as the thousands who brought forth complaints.
Conclusion
It has been determined that Maple Leaf Foods is responsible for the listeriosis outbreak at their Bartor Road meat processing facility in Toronto, Ontario. As a result of ignorance within the processing plant, there was contamination that caused several individuals to become very ill and some to die. Due to the power relations within Maple Leaf Foods, consumers were more susceptible to Listeria infections. Furthermore, the media also played a role as the President and CEO, Michael H. McCain, publicly admitted guilt and took responsibility for rejecting the assertion that the problem was due to government policy or regulation. In addition, several contaminated meat packages were distributed to high-risk individuals, including nursing homes. However, Mr. McCain was not criminally prosecuted for the outbreak that cost some consumers their lives, despite the company taking responsibility and apologizing for the outbreak. For these reasons, the Maple Leaf Foods listeriosis outbreak affects the relationship between power, social relations, and the process of criminalization as a corporate crime.
References
Croall, H. (2009). White collar crime, consumers and victimization. Crime, Law and Social Change, 51(1), 127–146.
Gray, G. (2009). The responsibilization strategy of health and safety: neo-liberalism and the reconfiguration of individual responsibility for risk. The British Journal of Criminology, 49(3), 326–342.
Government of Canada. (2008). Health hazard alert: certain ready-to-eat deli meat products produced at establishment 97B may contain listeria monocytogenes. Canada.ca. Retrieved from https://www.canada.ca/en/news/archive/2008/08/health-hazard-alert-certain-ready-eat-deli-meat-products-produced-establishment-97b-may-contain-listeria-monocytogenes.html.
Government of Canada. (2009). Report of the independent investigator into the 2008 listeriosis outbreak. Canada.ca. Retrieved from https://www.canada.ca/en/news/archive/2009/07/report-independent-investigator-into-2008-listeriosis-outbreak.html.
Greenberg, J., & Elliott, C. (2009). A cold cut crisis: listeriosis, maple leaf foods, and the politics of apology. Canadian Journal of Communication, 34(2), 189-204.
McMullan, J. (2006). News, truth, and the recognition of corporate crime. Canadian Journal of Criminology & Criminal Justice, 48(6), 905-939.
Crimes of the Powerful 