Comments on: Appeal Inspections

By: A Produce Person

A Produce Person — Sun, 26 Jul 2009 18:50:51 +0000

Anonymous from July 25th, why should we ask
Spinale about HP appeals? You give the impression
that you can tell us all we need to know. So have
at it. We have plenty of time.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Sat, 25 Jul 2009 12:23:41 +0000

Ask T. Spinale about HP appeals! LOL

By: C

Wed, 29 Apr 2009 13:59:26 +0000

I am in support of appeal inspections and feel they add value to the service. I have been on them when an inspector was reversed, but most of the time that is not the case.

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Sat, 25 Apr 2009 10:40:33 +0000

If the appeal inspectors are not following procedures then they should be removed from their duties.

By: The Truth Hurts

The Truth Hurts — Sun, 19 Apr 2009 22:23:29 +0000

Trust me hendrik, those that participate in appeal
inspections can be incorrect with their results too.
If runforit is being straight forward about the story
of being reversed off a 1/2 pallet of onions that wasn’t
even part of the original lot of onions, that was a very
sloppy job on the appealing inspector(s) part for not
determining if the onions, second time around, were
part of the original lot. Determining whether or
not if the product involved in an appeal inspection
is part of or all of the original lot is of paramount
importance. If the appeal inspector(s) are not
100% certain that the product that they are looking
at is not part of or all of the original lot, then the
appeal inspection is worthless. If they (appeal inspectors)
fail to follow through on a basic appeal inspection
proceedure prior to starting the actual inspection, how
can anyone have any confidence in their findings?

By: hendrik

hendrik — Sun, 19 Apr 2009 18:52:40 +0000

I am not even an inspector. Just an observer. I doubt very much if when an appeal is called that the appealing supervisor is not taking his time and
doing a very fair and knowlegable appeal on the inspection in question.
If the original inspection was done right then the appealers will find similar results. However, in Runforits scenario, the original inspection was most likely incompetent. Don’t blame it on the appealers.

By: The Truth Hurts

The Truth Hurts — Mon, 13 Apr 2009 22:39:13 +0000

hendrik – Perhaps you should reserve “incompetent”
for those responsible for supervising and managing
Runforit. Maybe, just maybe that is the root problem
systemic throughout the entire FPB. Then again,
you may be part of the problem yourself.

By: hendrik

hendrik — Mon, 30 Mar 2009 22:25:59 +0000

Runforit, why do you place the blame on your incompetent work on an inspection?

By: runforit

runforit — Sun, 29 Mar 2009 04:24:57 +0000

Dog you must work in the Bronx. I was reversed there once on a half a pallet of onions. I was told later that it wasn’t even the same product I looked at. I would suggest on every appeal done the origanal inspector go out and at least ID the lot first.

By: Dog Bonz

Dog Bonz — Wed, 25 Mar 2009 13:11:14 +0000

The inspection rules for appeals are changing, for the worse. Most of the times the appeal inspections in our office are handled by equal pay grade inspectors, sometimes with less experience than the original inspector. The Officer in Charge and Assistant stay in the office, and very rarely handle any inspections at all, much less the appeals.