A few decade ago I worked with QA in the food industry.
A bit familiar with the NSF*, SQF2000**, WI-DHS, ABA, and USDA*** standards. And passing the relevant audits.
What is so weird about this first complaint is that it was sent to OSHA. This is bizarre, and something a person on the line who did not understand the bureaucracy of food safety would do. Because of the source, it would 100% of the time be ignored. The guy who reported this was also likely fired shortly there after, anonymous or not this was likely either the machine operator or maintenance tech.
The "proper" way to deal with this is to quietly slip a note to a USDA inspector, which we all had personal non-work contacts for. Nobody ever did this. This sort of thing is career ending.
The actual way we dealt with problems was a verbal hint to the Heinz auditor, and use Heinz as a baseball bat to beat management into doing the right thing. The only way to influence a multinational is with another multinational. Heinz promotes its QA up from line workers and develops its QA all internally. They had a reputation for being sharp, but more importantly willing to deal with problems without making unnecessary waves.
*in my opinion the National Sanitary Foundation was the best with its random no warning audits and focus on practical food safety
**Safe Quality Food 2000 was Walmart's favorite audit and the auditor date/time is scheduled before hand. By far the most paperwork. Big focus on avoiding supply interruptions.
***The United States Department of Agriculture were very good and very hands on. I liked the inspectors. Always understaffed.
Speculation:
This problem was likely around a long time. Both management and QA were aware some of the containers were not sealing. They both likely were unconcerned because when the workers package the containers they have to squeeze them to lift them into the boxes. This likely would immediately betray any leakers.
Odds are there was a SOP on the wall next to the boxing to discard all containers that did not hold internal pressure.
This all worked fine for years. But then as the machines aged, the throughput rate on the line fell as discards increased. Management came down on the supervisor for substandard performance. Probably more then once, in the form of a write up.
The supervisor(s) likely then realized they needed to get creative. So they quietly changed the rules, to allow containers that were mostly good through.
This was fine for a while, but as the machines wore out the "mostly good" standard was relaxed.
And then we end up where we are today.
Facebook
Twitter