Most food manufacturers describe their safety training as adequate. It meets audit requirements and completes necessary paperwork. Laura Dunn Nelson, a food safety consultant with over 40 years of experience, sees this as the core issue.
Nelson has spent nearly a decade studying how training functions on plant floors. The latest Global Food Safety Training Survey, which gathered responses from more than 1,200 professionals across 3,000 facilities, revealed that only one in five plants consider their programs above average. The remaining majority settle for “sufficient”—a term that often signifies little beyond regulatory compliance.
How “sufficient” training falls short
“Sufficient means doing just enough to meet certification demands,” Nelson explained. Companies review SQF, BRC, or GFSI requirements and implement the minimum necessary. The survey details the consequences: annual refreshers squeezed into long Saturday sessions, onboarding that mixes food safety with general workplace hazards, and materials written at an elementary reading level.
Language differences worsen the problem. Some plants operate with 20 or more languages spoken among workers, yet training frequently defaults to English. “We see nods and completed quizzes,” Nelson said, “but the information isn’t retained.” Workers may memorize rules but fail to apply them in critical moments.
The benefits of moving beyond compliance
Facilities that exceed basic training standards achieve significant improvements. The survey showed that advancing from compliance-level programs to above-average training results in a 137% increase in standard operating procedure adherence. These plants also report better retention, fewer violations, and higher Good Manufacturing Practice scores.
Related: Finding Mexican restaurants in Denver, Colorado and the best Mexican restaurants in Colorado Springs
The improvement stems from follow-up. “Without reinforcement, people forget nearly all of the material,” Nelson said. “That becomes dangerous when those tasks are essential for safety.”
Leadership involvement proves more influential than many expect. When asked why workers ignore protocols, the top response wasn’t poor training. It was ingrained habits and lack of supervisor reinforcement. “Some companies experience high turnover,” Nelson said. “They hire 25 people on Monday and retain only two by Friday. So they skip proper onboarding, assuming it’s not worth the effort. That’s how bad practices spread.”
Why food manufacturing resists training technology
Over half of food facilities still use paper-based training methods. Only 17% employ a learning management system, compared to 76% in other industries. The gap reflects priorities rather than resistance to change.
“Production changes constantly, and that’s where attention goes,” Nelson said. “Training remains in survival mode. If completion rates hit 100%, many feel their job is done.” The pandemic forced some plants to adopt e-learning for health and safety, and many noticed advantages: shorter sessions, interactive content, and better engagement. Yet old methods persist.
“Some companies accept 10% GMP violations as normal,” Nelson said. “They train everyone on glove use and hairnets, but the problems continue. The missing piece? Measuring whether people truly understood the material.”
Scheduling presents another challenge. Classroom sessions and supervisor coaching require significant time, yet they remain the most common approaches. The survey found most facilities keep training budgets unchanged, with only 15% increasing investment. “We stay stuck in outdated methods,” Nelson said. “But tools exist to eliminate those persistent issues.”
Related: Cal-Maine to donate 30 million eggs in settlement
Retention improves with better programs. Facilities with above-average training are 108% more likely to enhance it. Companies that invest in upskilling—training workers on new equipment or roles—see lower turnover. “Employees notice when a company invests in them,” Nelson said. “That answers whether they should stay or look elsewhere.”
AI’s role in modern training
Just 13% of food facilities use AI in training, and the biggest obstacle isn’t fear of job loss—it’s unfamiliarity. “It’s uncharted territory,” Nelson said. “We’re busy, and sticking with what we know is easier.”
AI is already making progress. Some platforms use it for instant translations, chatbots for answering training questions, and even generating interactive modules from SOPs in minutes. “The time savings are enormous when that’s the biggest constraint,” Nelson said. “Start with education. Online courses, conferences, and workshops offer plenty of resources.”
For executives seeking a single improvement this quarter, Nelson offers clear advice: “Stop tracking training completion. Start measuring employee competence.” Choose one high-risk task, ensure proper training, and verify behaviors through coaching. “Ask workers what they’re supposed to do and why,” she said. “That’s how you find gaps and improve performance.”
Many plants overlook opportunities to strengthen supermarket sales growth through better safety practices, though the connection isn’t always obvious.