Like I’ve always said, in the food industry, we need to “rock the mock.” Whether it’s a mock traceability exercise, a mock audit, a mock recall, or a mock trial, training in the industry like you intend to fight is always a good strategy. Leaning forward in the food safety foxhole enables food companies to find their food safety grove, and identify and, ideally, eliminate any food safety risk and exposure long before it occurs.

And, Congress has given us good reason to “lean forward.” When Congress passed the Food Safety Modernization Act (FSMA) in 2011, it was, in essence, directing FDA to, in legal parlance, “make foodborne illness outbreaks stop.” After President Obama signed the legislation into law in early 2011, the agency responded by accepting the charge, and working tirelessly to draft the enabling regulations, forever changing, completely, the landscape of food safety in the U.S.

The agency, however, also understood that FSMA was really nothing more than a speed limit sign, and that the overall safety of the food supply would not likely improve significantly unless the new rules had substantial teeth. Thus, in Machiavellian fashion, the agency partnered visibly in 2014 with DOJ, when the agencies stated publicly that they would examine any situation where a food company’s products made people sick for grounds to bring potential criminal charges.

So, at about the same time, in addition to helping clients with mock audits and recalls, our firm began conducting mock trials. During these exercises, we focus on either a mock civil trial following a fictional outbreak which sickens multiple consumers, or a mock Park Doctrine criminal trial where the company of its executives are accused by DOJ of not doing enough to prevent an outbreak from occurring. In either scenario, our attorneys play the role of the plaintiff (or prosecution) lawyer and the defense lawyer, arguing why the company should, and should not, be held responsible. The company leadership listens to the arguments and serves as the jurors.

After hearing the evidence and arguments, the jurors are typically broken out into smaller groups and asked to deliberate. Following the issuance and collection of the verdicts, we use the opportunity to impart lessons on the leadership group which will invariably give them additional tools to draw from in the future when making important food safety decisions. The exercise has been incredible successful, and has had a net positive effect on making our food supply more safe.

At the end of the day, having more resources in your pocket can help prepare you when that inevitable day comes when FDA or USDA calls alleging that your products have made consumers sick or worse. Being able to “experience” an intense experience without the actual pressure can ease the anxiety when panic would normally kick in, allowing you to take the most appropriate action when it truly matters.

So, as you move forward, and consider how to continue to reduce your exposure, think about how your organization can also get on the food safety risk-reduction bandwagon, and rock the mock.

The Benefits of a Mock Trial

Join for free* to continue reading.