JIF Peanut Butter Recall 5/20/22 for Salmonella

[kwright396]

I received a JIF coupon in the mail today. It's a coupon for "any 1 JIF product" up to $11.50, exp 6/30/23. I'm a little confused because I filed a rebate form for 2 40oz jars that I purchased in a two pack. Is this rebate for 1 jar and I will receive another one or is it for both jars in the two pack?
While its not a big deal, if the rebate is for the whole two pack it would've been nice if the limit was high enough to actually buy a replacement two pack.

I received my JIF coupon today in the mail. It is good on any 1 JIF product up to $5.50. Good thru 06/30/2023.

 

[gromit]

I received my JIF coupon today in the mail. It is good on any 1 JIF product up to $5.50. Good thru 06/30/2023.

Thanks for that info. It means my coupon is for both jars. Like I said before its not a big deal to me that it doesn't quite cover the replacement cost in my area. Now I just need to find the Natural Creamy that I prefer. Our Walmart is getting Jif back in stock, but all the varieties aren't available yet.

 

[Qs Laptop]

I got my coupon today as well. Value up to $7.00. I believe I had one 40 oz. jar that needed replacing.

 

[street]

Got It Today!!!
What an expense for the Company.

 

[Koolau]

Got It Today!!!
What an expense for the Company.

Oh, yes! Recalls are incredibly expensive. I have read that the cost to Smucker for the recall is expected to be around 175 million dollars. Sadly, folks may still not trust the company so it's sort of a lose - lose situation. I feel kind of sorry for companies that have to do recalls. Nobody really wins and companies lose big. Quality Control is not just a slogan, it has to be a way of life.

 

[REWahoo]

Oh, yes! Recalls are incredibly expensive. I have read that the cost to Smucker for the recall is expected to be around 175 million dollars. Sadly, folks may still not trust the company so it's sort of a lose - lose situation. I feel kind of sorry for companies that have to do recalls. Nobody really wins and companies lose big.

You can make that a lose - lose - lose situation when you add in the hit the insurance company takes.

Large food manufacturer's have liability insurance specifically designed to help cover costs in the event of a recall. DD#1 (CPA) works for a company that had a recall a few years ago and was the point person in dealing with the insurance claim. Big cost, big claim, big payout - and no doubt a big premium increase!

 

[W2R]

I have a really dumb question.

When we see JIF on the grocery store shelves, from now on, do we still need to check the numbers on each jar that we buy? Or do you trust the major grocery stores to be selling only non-contaminated JIF. How about Amazon?

 

[Koolau]

I have a really dumb question.

When we see JIF on the grocery store shelves, from now on, do we still need to check the numbers on each jar that we buy? Or do you trust the major grocery stores to be selling only non-contaminated JIF. How about Amazon?

Heh, heh, who was it who said "Trust but verify?" Wait, I remember. He used to be an actor. But seriously, I will be checking the lot numbers - whenever they get the extra crunchy back on the shelves.

 

[Turbo29]

Oh, yes! Recalls are incredibly expensive. I have read that the cost to Smucker for the recall is expected to be around 175 million dollars. Sadly, folks may still not trust the company so it's sort of a lose - lose situation. I feel kind of sorry for companies that have to do recalls. Nobody really wins and companies lose big. Quality Control is not just a slogan, it has to be a way of life.

I don't feel sorry for them. The facility inspection reports going back over a decade show that the plant that produced the recalled peanut butter had issues.

As far as trusting them now, they are probably the cleanest kid on the block after this.

 

[Koolau]

I don't feel sorry for them. The facility inspection reports going back over a decade show that the plant that produced the recalled peanut butter had issues.

As far as trusting them now, they are probably the cleanest kid on the block after this.

I suspect that a look at similar food plants would show similar results (though I have no knowledge of this particular company.) I have w*rked in an industry that had lots of gummint inspections. I can assure you that it's virtually impossible to meet every requirement - especially without knocking your plants and other infrastructure to the ground and starting over. Most of our inspections found "issues" that had to be addressed. Most were almost petty, but citations were still issued.

I w*rked for friends occasionally who ran a food-service business at fairs, carnivals, etc. I had to quickly set up one time in the owner's absence. I generated a citation by the local health dept. because I made the bleach solution (required for cleaning surfaces) TOO concentrated. So, no organisms would have survived it and no human would be exposed to it in their food, but it wasn't "correct" so it generated a violation. I'm not suggesting that a violation should not be generated. I'm suggesting that violations, per se, do not delineate safe and unsafe. They delineate correct and incorrect - which CAN suggest safe/unsafe. It's difficult to be "perfect" though that is the standard AND the goal. YMMV

 

[Turbo29]

I suspect that a look at similar food plants would show similar results (though I have no knowledge of this particular company.) I have w*rked in an industry that had lots of gummint inspections. I can assure you that it's virtually impossible to meet every requirement - especially without knocking your plants and other infrastructure to the ground and starting over. Most of our inspections found "issues" that had to be addressed. Most were almost petty, but citations were still issued.

I w*rked for friends occasionally who ran a food-service business at fairs, carnivals, etc. I had to quickly set up one time in the owner's absence. I generated a citation by the local health dept. because I made the bleach solution (required for cleaning surfaces) TOO concentrated. So, no organisms would have survived it and no human would be exposed to it in their food, but it wasn't "correct" so it generated a violation. I'm not suggesting that a violation should not be generated. I'm suggesting that violations, per se, do not delineate safe and unsafe. They delineate correct and incorrect - which CAN suggest safe/unsafe. It's difficult to be "perfect" though that is the standard AND the goal. YMMV

Bleach solution too strong is not a big issue as it completely dissipates when the solution is dry. I would have let that go. Quaternary ammonium sanitizers on the other hand can leave a toxic residue if they are too strong.

I have been inside numerous restaurants and processing plants but as an employee for a local jurisdiction, we didn't have time the FDA does to gather every possible thing and write up a voluminous report. If a place is a total sh*t show however, I do put the minor stuff on the report too, knowing that if a bunch of people fall ill this will assist their attorneys in getting a proper settlement. Their high sounding rhetoric about how much they care aside, most food producers fear a team of attorneys after an outbreak of illness traced to them more than they fear the "gummint."

There are proper and improper practices. Usually the improper (or "incorrect" as you like say) practices cause no harm. But, when things go wrong, they can go very wrong.

 

[Turbo29]

J.M. Smucker knew about Jif’s Salmonella trouble but did not report it as required by law

During this past weekend, however, it was disclosed that Lexington plant management knew some of its Jif products were contaminated with Salmonella as early as December 2021 and as late as February 2022, but opted to keep it a secret. They did not make the required reports to the Food and Drug Administration or initiate recalls.

 

[Sunset]

J.M. Smucker knew about Jif’s Salmonella trouble but did not report it as required by law

During this past weekend, however, it was disclosed that Lexington plant management knew some of its Jif products were contaminated with Salmonella as early as December 2021 and as late as February 2022, but opted to keep it a secret. They did not make the required reports to the Food and Drug Administration or initiate recalls.

And the people who hid this issue will probably NOT be fined personally, nor fired. Company may be fined a small amount, and increase the price by a few cents so that consumers pay the fine.

 

[Koolau]

And the people who hid this issue will probably NOT be fined personally, nor fired. Company may be fined a small amount, and increase the price by a few cents so that consumers pay the fine.

I agree that some personal responsibility needs to be enforced. As far as "cost" to the company, the recall must be running into the millions. AND the cost in reputation is incalculable. I wonder if the company can not only fire the employee (I assume yes) but also sue him for damages to the company - probably not! YMMV