 |
|
|
|
|
|
||||||||||
|
|
|
 |
 |
 |
||||||||||
|
 |
 |
|
|
|
||||||||||
|
 |
|
|
|
|||||||||||
|
May 2003 |
||||||||||||||
|
|||||||||||||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Time to switch from certification to competency? |  Back to contents | |
|
|
|||
|
|
Why is it that the Food Standards Agency (FSA) estimates that, in the UK, over 4.5 million people suffer from food poisoning every year,1 and yet, since the early 1980s, millions of food handlers have received food hygiene certificates by attending approved training centre courses? In addition to which, food hygiene training has been a statutory requirement for at least six years. Perhaps it is because enforcers and owners of food businesses do not fully appreciate what training involves and the skills required by managers to instruct and supervise employees who have been on courses? WHY CERTIFICATON?Key definitions in the Food Hygiene (General Food Hygiene) Regulations 1995, and the Industry Guides to Good Hygiene Practice are missing. Too much reliance is being placed upon attaining a certificate, rather than attention being paid to achieving competency in food hygiene practice. Perhaps more emphasis and resources need to be diverted towards assisting managers to become highly motivated food hygiene managers who develop and maintain a food safety culture within their business. The Food Safety (General Food Hygiene) Regulations 1995 for England and Wales require that “the proprietor of a food business shall ensure that food handlers engaged in a food business are supervised and instructed and/or trained in food hygiene matters commensurate with their work activities”.2 It is not sufficient for enforcement officers to expect proprietors to comply with the law if there is no legal definition of key words. The Industry Guides to Good Hygiene offer no real helpful workable advice or definitions, while sections on the training regulation are not clear and need updating. The following definitions may wish to be considered:
It is probably fair to say that the majority of small food businesses do not have satisfactory training policies for all their staff.3 A small business owner may be tempted to place the burden of training responsibility on an external employer, and not to shoulder any responsibility themselves. Is this because the employer lacks key management skills in leadership, motivation, training and evaluation? Or is it because everyone else goes for a certificate course as it is the “done thing”? Contrary to common misconception there is no legal requirement to hold a foundation certificate in food hygiene. Language barriers and the high turnover of hourly paid staff within small hospitality businesses do little to help resources, morale or behavioural change. Foundation certificates in food hygiene courses are readily accessible from colleges, consultants, local authorities or in-house trainers, all of which are registered with examination bodies such as the Chartered Institute of Environmental Health, the Royal Institute of Public Health or the Royal Society for Public Health. None of the nationally recognised certificates give any indication of “competence”, however, so in this context, the foundation and intermediate certificates on offer do not represent “training” in the full meaning of the word. They are, instead, “education”. This involves passing on information for the candidate to absorb, and possibly regurgitate in a multiple-choice examination. Candidates may not necessarily have the ability to apply the information practically upon return to their workplace. According to Professor Eunice Taylor, who is critical of training of food handlers in the UK, this is because such training is stand-alone, theoretical and one-off with little attempt made to evaluate its effectiveness.4 All training must be appropriate to each individual business and motivated employers and employees must properly apply it. A retail food business employee will need to know specific food hygiene practices, compared with someone working in a vegetarian restaurant, who in turn needs different skills to a take-away kebab or burger bar employee. However, qualifications are pointless unless the named certificate holders constantly keep up to date and put in to practice their knowledge.5 WHAT IS A CERTIFICATE?Closer reading of the regulation will help to demonstrate that there is no legal requirement to hold a certificate, which could be defined as a piece of paper confirming attendance of an event or achievement. If this is the case, how will a manager or enforcer know whether the holder is competent to do their job? Too much reliance has been placed upon certificates and not enough on competence. This is defined as the ability of an individual to demonstrate the activities within their workplace, or to function to the standards expected in a food business. According to Richard Sprenger, managing director of Highfield Publications, there should be an increased emphasis placed on the importance of in-house competency-based training and supervision. During inspections, authorised officers should assess the competence of food handlers by observations and questions, not by the presence of certificates on walls.6 To some extent, National Vocational Qualifications (NVQs) require candidates to demonstrate competency through assessments and verification. Unfortunately, the Qualification Curriculum Authority (QCA) is at odds with improving standards. The QCA is behind the uniformity of accredited examination bodies calling their courses similar titles and placing them within the national framework of recognised qualifications. For instance, a foundation course is level 1 and an advanced course is at level 3. The Restaurant Association is piloting a training programme called “Food safety together”. This is based on restaurants appointing a mentor (trained in food hygiene practice) to work with a new employee in order to find positive approaches to improving standards within a particular business. This “working together” approach is a significant step away from the old approach of being required to know something for the certificate course. The UK has a poor track record of food hygiene courses in languages for individuals whose mother tongues are not English.7 While examination bodies make proud claims that examination papers in other languages apart from English are available, their usefulness leaves much to be desired. What is the point in offering papers in a range of languages if the trainers are in short supply or not available at all? The examination and governmental organisations must work together to encourage potential trainers from ethnic and minority groups to come forward and undertake the necessary training to become community-based food hygiene trainers capable of winning over the confidences of their peers. Computer-based training (CBT) and e-learning will have an extensive role to play in contributing to the training of food handlers and managers. Designed by the right people, and put in the hands of motivated trainees, CBT is a valuable training aid. It also teaches another key skill, namely IT. CBT may suit individuals who have difficulty in training rooms for a range of reasons. These may include learning difficulties, special needs, language barriers, staff shortages and courses not at a time to suit individuals or businesses. According to Richard Taylor of Creative Learning Media, the use of CBT ensures that learning can be automatically managed and evaluated across an entire organisation. This includes analysis of who is learning what, when, where and how; comparison of pre and post-learning assessments; and evaluation of the system to enable continuous improvement.8 MOVE TOWARDS TRAININGA shift is required away from a qualification based on theory to one that provides an employee with the confidence to put into practice what has been taught and provides employers with increased knowledge. The FSA’s five-year strategy to improve food safety standards and reduce incidences of food poisoning is based upon the promotion of a culture of learning and training within the UK.9 However, practical, collaborative efforts are required and a little more nurturing by central government and enforcement agencies would not go amiss. Perhaps it could be argued that, in their current format, Foundation Certificates (or any other level in food hygiene) have had their day. The emphasis now needs to be placed on helping managers understand what is expected of them and giving them support in managing effective food hygiene. The FSA has started down this road by inviting tenders from specific training providers for provision to help managers of small and medium-sized (SMEs) food premises produce a workable Haccp system relevant to the individual needs of each business. This will involve training managers and guiding them through the practicalities rather than theory of Haccp. Good documentation will serve as a valuable training aid for both employers and employees.10 The FSA would do well to link up with computer-based training companies to provide on-line basic management skills relevant to SMEs. BEHAVIOURAL CHANGEThere will always be a place for certification, but if food hygiene is to improve, practical application of the theory taught on courses must be properly managed. If certificates are to remain they must specify whether competency has been assessed, and when update training may have to be considered. Clearer definitions of training, instruction and supervision are required. Practical training, evaluation and guidance in management and food hygiene skills are required for SME managers. In addition to which, community groups will need empowerment to adopt workable food hygiene solutions that benefit employees and consumers – such as delivery of training in their own specific languages. Enforcement officers will need clearer guidance about how to determine effective training and/or instruction and supervision. In the future, they will also need more advice about the range of training media available and how the best media to suit business and employee needs can be accessed. Future effective food hygiene training strategies in the UK must encompass behavioural change or behaviour modification. That is to say a change in knowledge, skills, or attitude of individuals that occur as a result of a planned set and schedule of reinforcements.11 Euan MacAuslan, FRIPH, FRSH, FITOL, MCIPD, environmental health training co-ordinator, Council Offices, 37 Pembroke Road, London W8 6PW, England Tel: 020 7341 5606. E-mail: euan.macauslan@rbkc.gov.uk. The views expressed in this article are those of the author and not necessarily those of his employer, the Royal Borough of Kensington and Chelsea. References
|
||
