Tesco's Zero Score on the Door, Food Hygiene Rating Options

[wabbit]

Reading in the NWN about the recent spot check hygiene test failures by local catering companies led me to check out some of the zero-scorers on the excellent Scores on the Doors website.

Worryingly, the bakery at Tesco Extra (Pinchington Lane) has managed a zero score for Food Hygiene from WBC Environmental Health Officers...including 'little' confidence in management and 'bad' structure scoring which means 'General failure to satisfy statutory obligations – standards generally low'...not sure I feel quite the same about my Tiger Bread addiction...

It would seem that the reality of supermarket shopping doesn't quite live up to the sumptuous advertisements! Is is just me too, or has Tesco Extra gone seriously downhill over the past few years? Without being unkind, some of the staff look like they would fail a hygiene inspection too!

[Andy Capp]

Yes, I know what you mean. Supermarkets are notoriously cliquey to work for. I have heard a number of rumours (first-hand accounts) that I wont repeat here, that leads me to think some supermarkets defy there label.

[KMcC]

Have to agree sadly with the comment about (some of) the staff, popped over to the deli the other evening where the lady behind the counter (minus gloves) gave her ear a good old scratch before picking up the food! ... ummm needless to say I didn't buy anything

[Strafin]

The thing with the scores on the doors system is that whilst they can be used as a guide they don't necessarily relfect what is really going on. In an establishment where I worked once we were awarded one star, as we had some drinks stored outside in crates, as delivered by the brewery. It meant nothing to the general hygiene and running of the place but made a huge difference to our score. I have no idea why Tesco failed so badly, and there isn't really anything else to judge them on but I shouldn't worry about it too much. If it was that bad they would have closed it down.

[Strafin]

Just had a good look through, The Vineyard and the Crab both only got one star, as did The Art of Siam, Donnington Valley and the Hoggit & Hoof. Some expensive places. Whereas Burger King and Subway got 5.

[dannyboy]

Just had a good look through, The Vineyard and the Crab both only got one star, as did The Art of Siam, Donnington Valley and the Hoggit & Hoof. Some expensive places. Whereas Burger King and Subway got 5.

Reading the blurb about the scoring, it seems that poor documentation gets you low scores,
not the actuallity of having a dirty kitchen.

This is the description of a 'bad' Food safetry & hygine score -

Verbal instruction to food handlers before starting employment.
Minimal supervision of food handlers.
No formal training of food handlers.
Some procedures effective in controlling the principle food safety hazards.
No documentation/records kept but the owner/manager can demonstrate sufficient
appreciation of hazards and controls.
Safer Food, Better Business' standard is not met

and the Excellent -

Comprehensive documented food safety system, subject to audit and review.
All of the other standards but may include hazard and control details for specific
foods or processes. The audit and review process will be either internal or
external and will have written records of the findings and any action taken as
a result. At least 1 member of staff holds an intermediate level food hygiene qualification or
equivalent. Evidence must be on site available for inspection

[Strafin]

Obviously having a dirty kitchen is also included in the scoring. However if something looks clean it doesn't mean it is, which is why you need documentation to back up when stuff was cleaned and by who etc. Also cleanliness isn't as much of an issue if you are cooking the food properly as the cooking process will kill off an awful lot. But again the documentation is the only proof.

[dannyboy]

Obviously having a dirty kitchen is also included in the scoring. However if something looks clean it doesn't mean it is, which is why you need documentation to back up when stuff was cleaned and by who etc. Also cleanliness isn't as much of an issue if you are cooking the food properly as the cooking process will kill off an awful lot. But again the documentation is the only proof.

I was intrigued as to why a fast food joint would score 5 stars & a gaggle of the 'better' restaurants in the area would only score 1 star.

Maybe the staff in the fast food joints need to have everything written down & drummed into them....

[Strafin]

That's probably the case - also the chains have a lot more procedures in place and have the admin network to make sure everyone has the right forms.

[Dodgys smarter b...]

Maybe the staff in the fast food joints need to have everything written down & drummed into them....

Well, it's obviously working.

[Sidney]

Yep ! Guess it's McDonalds for Tea.

[wabbit]

I agree, large organisations should (and usually do) have the necessary checks and procedures in place to tick all the boxes - which makes it doubly worrying that Tesco, with all their squillions of dosh, cannot put in place absolutely basic hygiene practices. Shame on them. It is actually pretty scandalous.

Whilst I appreciate that these are 'spot checks' and the 'small guys' are busy just trying to earn a crust, I have to admit that I am particularly concerned about food hygiene, having a partner who is very susceptable to any type of 'dodgy' food and so did check all our favourite 'haunts' (both past and present). I am shocked by some of the results to be honest - I'm personally not a fan of Mr Robinson's 'TV Star/Muntjac Muncher' food so have never returned to the Pot Kiln after my first disappointing visit but...a one star rating?? And, the Crab at Chieveley (yes, I know it's changed hands) but again, a one star...??

I have also just discovered that the Duke & Duchess of Cambridge's 'local' is also a proud owner of a one star rating so let's hope Kate & Will usually dine chez Middletons! Makes me ponder whether the royals have a 'food taster' - just in case the heir to the throne (after Daddy) is poisoned! Anyone know?

I'm not too concerned about smaller establishments not being awarded five stars - but I would expect at least a two or three star as a basic minimum.

Is M&S doing their Dine in Offer this Bank Holiday?

[dannyboy]

There are just too many one star establishments.

It reminds me of the old BS5750 registration process. All that mattered was documentation. What you did was of no concern of the BS5750 inspector - not his brief. That you were following what the documentation said you should be doing was of prime importance.

Effectively you could be simply opening tins of Stagg Chilli & popping the contents in the microwave. So long as it was all documented & you were following procedure everything was fine. 5 stars, no problem....

[NWNREADER]

Obviously having a dirty kitchen is also included in the scoring. However if something looks clean it doesn't mean it is, which is why you need documentation to back up when stuff was cleaned and by who etc. Also cleanliness isn't as much of an issue if you are cooking the food properly as the cooking process will kill off an awful lot. But again the documentation is the only proof.

The bureaucrats response - the input proves the outcome, so document the input to the max. Regardless of stars, documentation, certificates etc, the only proof of a safe kitchen is the lack of illness caused by the operation. If documentation proves anything, it is that someone has filled out the document.

[On the edge]

I was intrigued as to why a fast food joint would score 5 stars & a gaggle of the 'better' restaurants in the area would only score 1 star.

Maybe the staff in the fast food joints need to have everything written down & drummed into them....

McDonalds (an international wiorld class business) does have an enviable reputation for training and operational processes. Which are both correct and economic. Indeed, as we can see, doing far better than the apparently better restaurants - which the above post suggests are serviced by more intelligent staff.

There are lessons here all round - properly defining processes and close attention to operational / production training pays dividends and not only in retail catering.

[Andy Capp]

There are just too many one star establishments.

It reminds me of the old BS5750 registration process. All that mattered was documentation. What you did was of no concern of the BS5750 inspector - not his brief. That you were following what the documentation said you should be doing was of prime importance.

This is a common attitude towards BS/ISO standards. Companies view them as a hindrance and subsequently didn't/don't harvest the rewards good processes can offer.

[dannyboy]

This is a common attitude towards BS/ISO standards. Companies view them as a hindrance and subsequently didn't/don't harvest the rewards good processes can offer.

I can understand the rewards that good processes can offer - problem was the zero tolerance to working outside the bounds of the 'manual'. But this is another thread.....

[On the edge]

I can understand the rewards that good processes can offer - problem was the zero tolerance to working outside the bounds of the 'manual'. But this is another thread.....

Err no - that's exactly what this thread is about - WBC's enforcement officers are expecting compliance to standard. Some of our 'better' restaurants apparently can't manage that. In the case of food standards - its pretty black and white is it not? As we heard in an earlier response; a member of staff feeling its OK to dig around in her ears...!

[dannyboy]

McDonalds (an international wiorld class business) does have an enviable reputation for training and operational processes. Which are both correct and economic. Indeed, as we can see, doing far better than the apparently better restaurants - which the above post suggests are serviced by more intelligent staff.

There are lessons here all round - properly defining processes and close attention to operational / production training pays dividends and not only in retail catering.

Well, McDonalds need to include a paragraph in the extensive documentation to ensure the Big Mac looks like the one in the picture on the menu.......
of course, without it the burger can look like it has been sat on....maybe that is what the documentation calls for....

[dannyboy]

Err no - that's exactly what this thread is about - WBC's enforcement officers are expecting compliance to standard. Some of our 'better' restaurants apparently can't manage that. In the case of food standards - its pretty black and white is it not? As we heard in an earlier response; a member of staff feeling its OK to dig around in her ears...!

Nope, that isn't what the star system is about. It is about having documentation that shows it is being followed.