Fewer people associate Chipotle with “healthy” now.
December 23, 2015 2:23 PM   Subscribe

Inside Chipotle’s Contamination Crisis
Smugness and happy talk about sustainability aren’t working anymore.
posted by andoatnp (98 comments total) 12 users marked this as a favorite
 
I was a bit surprised to see that a company who places such attention on ethical sourcing is so bad at tracking their sourcing back from the restaurants when there is contamination.

Also surprised that they see the need for commissaries to get safe food preparation.
posted by smackfu at 2:33 PM on December 23, 2015 [1 favorite]


You can't spell Chipotle without E. Coli
posted by STFUDonnie at 2:37 PM on December 23, 2015 [90 favorites]


You know, fuck the kind of reporting that needs to slide a picture of a guy in a radiation suit onto the page in order to tell this story.
posted by Wolfdog at 2:38 PM on December 23, 2015 [46 favorites]


I don't like the implication that ethical sourcing is the problem here. There's no evidence of that yet.
posted by Bee'sWing at 2:39 PM on December 23, 2015 [13 favorites]


Cheap, locally-sourced, rigorously inspected. Pick any two (at most).

I'm not convinced that Chipotle made the wrong tradeoff here.

Also worth noting that there were lobbyists in the wings waiting for this crisis to happen.

The titans of the food/agriculture industry (and their weird anti-Chipotle PAC) really hate Chipotle, and it's worth considering that they've likely been feeding the press with this story.

I'm generally not one for a conspiracy, but the way that "ethical sourcing" seems to be taking the blame for a lot of the problems really suggests to me that this story arrived at the press pre-spun -- it's not really the first (or second, or third) conclusion that I'd jump to. Even before the current "crisis" broke, I've noticed a really strong undercurrent of anti-Chipotle sentiment in the press that seemingly emerged from nowhere.
posted by schmod at 2:46 PM on December 23, 2015 [119 favorites]


"To hear Ells tell it, the company is witnessing an outbreak of excitement. He says the chain’s suppliers are excited to participate in the new safety programs; employees at headquarters in Denver are excited to contribute however they can; it’s “a very, very exciting time for us to be pushing the boundaries” on food safety. “We’re embracing this as an opportunity.”"

Are business people so thoroughly entrenched in their own bullshit that they actually think that this sort of arrant nonsense is believable, or are there people in the world who actually buy into it? I know that "every problem is an opportunity in disguise" is a neat idea, but when your customers start crapping blood and your stock price plummets I'm not really buying that you're actually pleased to be presented with this wonderful chance to learn new things.
posted by Dext at 2:46 PM on December 23, 2015 [24 favorites]


I'm not convinced that Chipotle made the wrong tradeoff here.

That sounds to me merely like an inversion of "The Market will sort it out." In other words, hundreds of illnesses and several deaths seems to be an acceptable cost of doing what some consider to be morally superior (on one axis, I guess) business.
posted by chimaera at 2:48 PM on December 23, 2015 [7 favorites]


fuck the kind of reporting that needs to slide a picture of a guy in a radiation suit onto the page in order to tell this story.

To be fair to the reporter, that was almost certainly the work of her superiors.
posted by STFUDonnie at 2:50 PM on December 23, 2015 [6 favorites]



To be fair to the reporter, that was almost certainly the work of her superiors bosses.

posted by j_curiouser at 2:53 PM on December 23, 2015 [25 favorites]


Millennials may discriminate when they eat, but bacteria are agnostic.

Just couldn't resist slipping in a little non-sequitur dig at snake people, eh Bloomberg?
posted by Dysk at 2:53 PM on December 23, 2015 [33 favorites]


Are business people so thoroughly entrenched in their own bullshit that they actually think that this sort of arrant nonsense is believable, or are there people in the world who actually buy into it?

In my experience, about half fully buy into the bullshit and the other half are entirely aware how much it stinks but don't care as long as the checks clear.
posted by incessant at 2:54 PM on December 23, 2015 [6 favorites]


To be fair to the reporter, that was almost certainly the work of her superiors.

Was this?
For a long time, smug worked pretty well for Chipotle Mexican Grill. It’s grown into a chain of more than 1,900 locations, thanks in part to marketing—including short animated films about the evils of industrial agriculture—that reminds customers that its fresh ingredients and naturally raised meat are better than rivals’ and better for the world. The implication: If you eat Chipotle, you’re doing the right thing, and maybe you’re better, too. It helped the company, charging about $7 for a burrito, reach a market valuation of nearly $24 billion. Its executives seemed to have done the impossible and made a national fast-food chain feel healthy.
You can almost see the sneer peeking through the text.
posted by indubitable at 2:54 PM on December 23, 2015 [20 favorites]


I'm leery of anyone strongly emotionally invested in burritos one way or the other. YMMV.
posted by Dark Messiah at 2:56 PM on December 23, 2015 [14 favorites]


Please- I don't need to go to some fancy upscale "organic" chain just to get explosive diarrhea from a burrito.


Honestly, I can achieve the same effect just by putting sour cream on it.
posted by TheWhiteSkull at 3:01 PM on December 23, 2015 [9 favorites]


Cheap, locally-sourced, rigorously inspected. Pick any two (at most).

Hillary might have another Manhattan Project for us.
posted by XMLicious at 3:02 PM on December 23, 2015 [3 favorites]


chimaera: "That sounds to me merely like an inversion of "The Market will sort it out." In other words, hundreds of illnesses and several deaths seems to be an acceptable cost of doing what some consider to be morally superior (on one axis, I guess) business."

No. I'm saying that this might be a fairly normal incidence of food-borne illnesses that isn't particularly specific to Chipotle.

That doesn't mean that we don't have an obligation to do better, but the reporting on this story isn't passing the sniff test for me.
posted by schmod at 3:04 PM on December 23, 2015 [7 favorites]


IIRC, the last "feature" article I saw on Bloomberg Business also read like some kind of paid-for hit piece. Wish I could remember what it was.
posted by indubitable at 3:07 PM on December 23, 2015 [2 favorites]


"Don't panic, order will be restored to the universe."

I would burn that place to the motherfucking ground.
posted by Cool Papa Bell at 3:10 PM on December 23, 2015 [3 favorites]


I should also add that I've long been advocating for the "processed food" bogeyman to die, and for a restoration of evidence-based science and economies of scale to our food supply.

There's a happy middle-ground between your local family farm/restaurant and McDonalds that nobody seems to want to acknowledge. Up until this point, Chipotle were Exhibit A that this middle-ground was easily attainable.

Right now, though, the media narrative is overwhelmingly reading "This is what happens when you don't source with Monsanto and Sysco."
posted by schmod at 3:10 PM on December 23, 2015 [79 favorites]


Antivaxxers have also been pretty vocal about this, I think in defense of Chipotle as a victim of Big Pharma (who just want to pump meat with antibiotics)

Really? *boggles*
posted by frumiousb at 3:14 PM on December 23, 2015 [1 favorite]


Chipotle marketed the safety and wholesomeness of their products based on environmental-level effects, not on the basic microbiological safety, because they believed it to be a solved problem. This debacle emphasizes the need to be vigilant about microbiological safety, because there are still risks, especially if uncooked ingredients are involved.
posted by Small Dollar at 3:14 PM on December 23, 2015 [30 favorites]


I was a bit surprised to see that a company who places such attention on ethical sourcing is so bad at tracking their sourcing back from the restaurants when there is contamination.

In terms of handling liability, if I was a shareholder, I'd be very upset at management for not having tracking processes in place, let alone any plan for one. Better processes means being able to coordinate E. coli outbreaks that affect everyone, including Chipotle, i.e., any other restaurant chain or supplier that sources the same bad product. Not only is it much easier to sue the responsible parties that way, but when outbreaks do occur, it should be easier and faster to remove bad product from the supply chain, thus avoiding or at least reducing legal liabilities and long-term damage to the brand. Chipotle's CEO should have been fired after the second outbreak.
posted by a lungful of dragon at 3:18 PM on December 23, 2015 [3 favorites]


I think the e coli problem is most likely to come from raw vegetables, the nora virus from employees. The least likely source is the meat, the thing they've probably spent the most time "ethically sourcing".
posted by Bee'sWing at 3:19 PM on December 23, 2015 [12 favorites]


I would burn that place to the motherfucking ground.

Well as long as you don't overreact.
posted by howfar at 3:24 PM on December 23, 2015 [22 favorites]


Chipotle's CEO should have been fired after the second outbreak.

Uh. Fired by who? Boards are typically not terribly keen on displacing founders.
posted by iamabot at 3:27 PM on December 23, 2015


"Collins sued Chipotle"

Yep. Getting E.coli is bad.

But, given he's recovered, I'm gonna assume that the guy didn't suffer anything that wasn't (shouldn't be?) otherwise covered by his (national) health insurance. What good does suing do? Will he feel less shaky with a cuppla K in his back pocket? Won't the shame of the coverage be more effective in changing practices at the restaurants?
posted by stanf at 3:28 PM on December 23, 2015


Uh. Fired by who? Boards are typically not terribly keen on displacing founders.


Especially if those funders ipo'd at 42 bucks a share in 2006 and the stock is currently trading at nearly 500 bucks a share.
posted by iamabot at 3:33 PM on December 23, 2015 [4 favorites]


Suing a company for causing you harm prevents future harms by giving a tangible financial incentive not to cause harm instead of just the hypothetical loss of sales because of a bad reputation.
posted by Small Dollar at 3:38 PM on December 23, 2015 [11 favorites]


Right now, though, the media narrative is overwhelmingly reading "This is what happens when you don't source with Monsanto and Sysco."

Honestly, a slim risk of e coli seems a small price to pay for not having to east Monsanto and Sysco garbage. I'll continue to patronize Chipotle.
posted by ryanshepard at 3:45 PM on December 23, 2015 [26 favorites]


I'm leery of anyone strongly emotionally invested in burritos one way or the other. YMMV.--Dark Messiah

On the Dark Messiah robot planet, emotions and enjoyment of food will be strictly forbidden!
posted by eye of newt at 3:46 PM on December 23, 2015 [4 favorites]


Suing a company for causing you harm prevents future harms by giving a tangible financial incentive not to cause harm instead of just the hypothetical loss of sales because of a bad reputation.

Which at least, it's the theory in sue-happy America. How's that working out?
posted by happyroach at 3:48 PM on December 23, 2015 [2 favorites]


Frontline did a great show on salmonella in meat not that long ago. One of the main points of the episode was how hard it is for the FDA or CDC to shutdown a company responsible if the company disputes that it's the source.

It's not enough to show a high correlation between sick people and the product. What they needed was an unopened, frozen package purchased at the same time the suspect item was consumed that showed the same contamination. In this case that would mean you bought two identical burritos, froze one and got sick from the other. Not something people often do.

To Chipotle's credit at least they don't seem to be fighting the correlation between the outbreaks and their restaurants.
posted by sbutler at 3:48 PM on December 23, 2015 [2 favorites]


Hmm... now I'm wondering if Chipotle's lax controls around ingredient sourcing were to make it less likely they'd happen across knowledge of anything that could contradict their "fresh! local! humane!" claims.
posted by Vulgar Euphemism at 3:52 PM on December 23, 2015 [1 favorite]


But, given he's recovered, I'm gonna assume that the guy didn't suffer anything that wasn't (shouldn't be?) otherwise covered by his (national) health insurance.

He's in the US, which doesn't have functioning national health insurance. Even people who do have health insurance can be driven into bankruptcy by health care costs. Sixty percent of bankruptcies are related to medical costs, and three quarters of those people had health insurance. Ideally continuing health care reform will try and address this, but I'm not convinced we're at that stage yet.

And since he was recovering for six weeks, there's also a high possibility of lost wages, as it's very unlikely he had enough paid time off to cover that much time. US Federal law only guarantees unpaid time off for sick leave, and only if your employer has more than 50 employees.

On the other hand, while medical care is expensive lawsuits are affordable because many lawyers for this sort of a lawsuit will work on contingency where they only get paid if they win.

These are some reasons why people in the US who get sick in a way that lets them point a finger at a responsible party often turn litigious.
posted by foxfirefey at 3:53 PM on December 23, 2015 [50 favorites]


I think the e coli problem is most likely to come from raw vegetables, the nora virus from employees. The least likely source is the meat, the thing they've probably spent the most time "ethically sourcing".

Probably; the contemporary Costco E. Coli outbreak was traced to contaminated celery.
posted by MikeKD at 3:53 PM on December 23, 2015 [3 favorites]


I'm leery of anyone strongly emotionally invested in burritos one way or the other. YMMV.

Speak for yourself, a burrito is like, part of my daily life. I cannot eat bread anymore - tortillas are it. And you can make almost anything into a burrito like meal. I've had 3 already today.

I've lived in the Denver/Boulder area most of that life. I used to frequent Chipotle often, but it has to be said: the ingredients in burritos are cheap, and making one is easy, and a Chipotle burrito, if you think about it for about 5 seconds, is massively overpriced. And the amount of salt is overboard.

I'd still go and get one in the future, but it's more of a guilty pleasure now. Kinda like eating out in general. Cooking is actually pretty fun, if you've got the time.
posted by alex_skazat at 3:54 PM on December 23, 2015 [2 favorites]


I was a bit surprised to see that a company who places such attention on ethical sourcing is so bad at tracking their sourcing back from the restaurants when there is contamination.

The AP just broke that story about shrimp being shelled by slaves and being sold by places like Whole Foods.

So, I'm not a bit surprised.
posted by alex_skazat at 3:56 PM on December 23, 2015 [4 favorites]


Well, at least it isn't Monsanto shrimp.
posted by Drinky Die at 3:58 PM on December 23, 2015 [2 favorites]


I'm leery of anyone strongly emotionally invested in burritos

Your permit to transit to or across California is hereby revoked.
posted by zippy at 3:59 PM on December 23, 2015 [37 favorites]


What's weird to me is that Chipotle isn't acting like Tylenol during its contamination scare, shutting down for a few days and tossing every food item they have on deck. If Starbucks can close for three hours for a national training/publicity exercise, surely Chipotle can take some time out to restore credibility and really clean the hell out of everything.
posted by blnkfrnk at 4:00 PM on December 23, 2015 [5 favorites]


foxfirefey... Wow! I (thought I) knew some of that but I've just had a bunch of assumptions re-adjusted.
posted by stanf at 4:02 PM on December 23, 2015


Antivaxxers have also been pretty vocal about this, I think in defense of Chipotle as a victim of Big Pharma (who just want to pump meat with antibiotics) and Monsanto (wake up, sheeple! don't you know Monsanto is evil???!).

Well, to be fair the overuse of antibiotics in livestock is a key source of antibiotic resistant bacteria, although I'd blame that more on Big Ag than Big Pharma. Stopped clocks, twice a day, and so on.
posted by Existential Dread at 4:05 PM on December 23, 2015 [4 favorites]


In other words, hundreds of illnesses and several deaths seems to be an acceptable cost of doing what some consider to be morally superior (on one axis, I guess) business.

To my knowledge, and according to this article and every other article about the case, it does not seem anyone has died. Do you have a source for this?

This article was mostly a bunch of "see! you hippies and your earnestness and beliefs! we told you it would get you in the end! nah nah nah nah!"
posted by Lutoslawski at 4:14 PM on December 23, 2015 [4 favorites]


Honestly, a slim risk of e coli seems a small price to pay for not having to east Monsanto and Sysco garbage.

I'm not sure I know what you mean. While Chipotle avoids GMO products, where do you think their wheat, corn, dairy, soy, tomatoes, onions, and all the animal feed that their meats depend on come from? It comes from farms that use Monsanto's non-GMO seeds and Monsanto pesticides. Or some other agribusiness giant, not the idyllic mom and pop farms of your imagination.

And Chipotle is essentially in-housing Sysco's production process with their new commissary plan, so food will be prepared and tested in huge batches, vacuum sealed and shipped out ready to serve at the retail level. The difference is Chipotle only makes burritos. And marketing.
posted by peeedro at 4:24 PM on December 23, 2015 [7 favorites]


What's weird to me is that Chipotle isn't acting like Tylenol during its contamination scare, shutting down for a few days and tossing every food item they have on deck.

This happened in Oregon, at least. It was a condition of reopening set by the state health department.
posted by That's Numberwang! at 4:25 PM on December 23, 2015 [3 favorites]


The titans of the food/agriculture industry (and their weird anti-Chipotle PAC) really hate Chipotle, and it's worth considering that they've likely been feeding the press with this story.

Man this really exposes the CCF doesn't it? I mean I already knew it was an industry front group but an organization "fighting for your right" to smoke or drink cheap soda or whatever could plausibly pass as something consumers might believe in. But now they're going after Chipotle... for failing to live up to their stated health/environmental principles, while out of the other side of their mouths saying oh and those principles are also bullshit anyway. Better not step out of line, fast food companies!
posted by atoxyl at 4:36 PM on December 23, 2015 [2 favorites]


I used to eat at Chipotle regularly, but at some point I noticed a shift in my experience eating there. I thought at first it was just a couple locations, but more and more I noticed that the employees weren't really paying attention. Things like not noticing when I'm standing there, immediately forgetting the answer to what they just asked, sometimes screwing up orders entirely and starting over. I don't know if people were overworked, inexperienced, or poorly trained, but I found myself eating there less and less. It makes sense that the area of food safety would also suffer.

Not sure what is happening in that company, but it ain't good.
posted by davejh at 4:40 PM on December 23, 2015 [7 favorites]


I know this is not the point of the story, but:

By the next night, Collins’s body was aching and his stomach was upset. Then he began experiencing cramping and diarrhea. His stomach bloated. “Moving gave me excruciating pain,” he says, “and anytime I ate or drank it got worse.” His diarrhea turned bloody. “All I was doing was pooping blood. It was incredibly scary.” After five days, he went to an urgent-care clinic near his home

He waited FIVE DAYS?

Are there really people out there who see eating at Chipotle as healthy and ethical? There is one near my office and it is pretty much considered a last resort by all my colleagues, and they're hardly wealthy or food snobby. The staff seem to hate their jobs, they always seem to be out of ingredients, the food is bland, and they make burritos so wide they're basically balls and impossible to eat. I eat there a few times a month because they're open late and it's close, but it's never a good experience.
posted by retrograde at 4:57 PM on December 23, 2015 [3 favorites]


What's weird to me is that Chipotle isn't acting like Tylenol during its contamination scare, shutting down for a few days and tossing every food item they have on deck.

Regionally, this is exactly what they did.
posted by Dip Flash at 5:22 PM on December 23, 2015 [2 favorites]


The titans of the food/agriculture industry (and their weird anti-Chipotle PAC) really hate Chipotle

Wow, this thing may be the most "bitter competitor / then they fight you" thing I've ever seen.

(clicking around, I ended up on a page saying "Many of the companies and individuals who support the Center financially have indicated that they want anonymity as contributors." No shit...)
posted by effbot at 5:23 PM on December 23, 2015 [3 favorites]


Yeah, I don't get the adulation for Chipotle. It's still fast food. And e.coli has to do with hygiene, not ethics.
posted by monospace at 5:25 PM on December 23, 2015


I have the same experience of Chipotle as retrograde. I remember really enjoying them in the early 2000s, but I feel like a lot of things have changed in their corporate culture in the last 10 years, and it's translated to the individual store level. When we had just one location in my area, I felt like everyone from the counter staff on up to the CEO were all on the same page, and the food was tasty and fast; Now that there's a Chipotle basically everywhere, there doesn't seem to be the same emphasis on the overall customer experience. My last few Chipotle burritos (ca. 2011-12 or so) were awful room-temperature messes of badly wrapped, goo-ified ingredients, and not at all what I'd come to expect from the chain. Fortunately, there are other burrito joints near my work that have picked up the slack.
posted by Strange Interlude at 5:33 PM on December 23, 2015 [2 favorites]


Organic != safe. Ethical != safe. Proper food prep and sanitation MUST be practiced.

That it hit in Oregon and Washington first stirred a lot of bad memories out here -- the two states were ground zero for the Jack In The Box E.coli outbreak in 1993, and then the Odwalla E.coli outbreak of 1996.

Jack In The Box's problem was factory farming, terrible sanitation practices, and a lack of oversight. They eventually recovered the brand by implementing rigorous food chain watchdog rules over its suppliers. Still factory farmed, but safer.

Odwalla, OTOH, refused to pasteurize their juices. The outbreak was traced to one set of apples collected from an orchard where cattle also grazed. After that, they abandoned their "never pasteurized" stance. But they're still organic.

In both cases, it came down to one simple problem: When you're trying to run at scale, oversight is the first thing to go in the name of growth and profit. Chipotle's been on a tear of late, opening restaurants like crazy while insisting it isn't straying from "ethical" and "organic." It's easy to see how they just let food safety slip.

But, honestly? They are a bit smug about it. The weekend they ran their "WE HAVE NO ADDITIVES!" Boorito free burrito special? Same weekend all the Chipotles in WA and OR were closed with their bizarre "make up something that's not food safety" closure. Tone-deaf on both ends.

The idea that McD or BK are gloating over this overlooks how much of a knife's edge they know they're on with food safety.
posted by dw at 5:36 PM on December 23, 2015 [3 favorites]


You know, fuck the kind of reporting that needs to slide a picture of a guy in a radiation suit

It's an NBC suit. The kind they wore for the ebola outbreak.
posted by dw at 5:40 PM on December 23, 2015 [1 favorite]


He waited FIVE DAYS?

This guy came off a bit loopy in the original AP story (I think that's the first outlet he spoke with.) From the story:
Now, he's not willing to eat out at all and he and his wife are seriously considering becoming vegetarians.

They never identified the source but as stated above it was more than likely one of the vegetables. Vegetables from the same local-ish sources one would probably be purchasing from to use at home. Between recent E. coli and listeria recalls I don't think not eating out is a complete solution.
posted by asterisk at 5:41 PM on December 23, 2015 [1 favorite]


He waited FIVE DAYS?

See above comment about no national insurance and bankruptcy. I agree that shitting blood is a medical emergency and one should go to the hospital no matter what the cost, but it's easy to fall into denial. I can't judge this guy without knowing more about his circumstances.

As for Chipotle... I have had norovirus and cryptosporidium and those were bad enough. I would rather never eat another burrito again than take the risk of getting E. Coli. (Yes, I know this is not completely rational because I could get it from other sources.)
posted by desjardins at 5:43 PM on December 23, 2015


Huh. If you're big enough, the credit card processors require you to have emergency plans in place in case of a breach. They also require regular training for all people who might come into contact with cardholder information, and various physical controls on things like servers that contain cardholder data. This is all in addition to the normal controls on cardholder data that you would expect like encryption, security, antivirus etc. They require this as a condition of doing business with them.

I don't know anything about the regulation of food processing or restaurant chains. Maybe the sorts of things are already required by the appropriate governmental agencies. But I get the impression that this is not the case. And if that's so, isn't that just the result of regulatory capture? I'm against that sort of thing. We all depend on these things, not just shareholders.

We care more about the security and safety of our money than we do the food that we eat. I can't decide if that's an unfair assessment.
posted by bigbigdog at 5:43 PM on December 23, 2015 [1 favorite]


it does not seem anyone has died. Do you have a source for this?

I stand corrected. I saw a claim of deaths due to e. coli, but no news source I've since seen has mentioned any.

I still get a creepy feeling from some comments in this thread, such as "a slim risk of e coli seems a small price to pay," and it still sounds like a weird funhouse mirror of market-fetish Libertarians who say that eventually people will punish bad actors in the marketplace. Which all sounds fine and good unless it's you or your kid who is among the first to fall ill (or worse) because a "slim risk" is OK by someone else. It's not to me.

There's enough risk when everyone follows all the rules, thank you very much. I'm not interested in hearing that it's OK because it's Not A Company We Hate.
posted by chimaera at 5:46 PM on December 23, 2015 [2 favorites]


One of the major selling points of chains like McD, BK, Applebee's, etc. is precisely food safety. I once had lunch with a sales rep who swore by Applebee's, because he claimed it was the only way he could consistently eat on the road without catching some local stomach bug.

Also, the "Center for Consumer Freedom" is creepy as fuck.
posted by phooky at 5:47 PM on December 23, 2015 [2 favorites]


The Chipotle that made all those Boston College students sick just re-opened today (with several news trucks parked right in front), after the Boston Public Health Commission retested both the restaurant and all the workers (including the one who came to work sick in the first place) to ensure both were noro-free. The manager who let the worker keep working despite being sick was let go. Here's the initial food-inspector report.
posted by adamg at 6:00 PM on December 23, 2015


Honestly, I don't get the attention on Chipotle. OK yes I do because E Coli is scary, but if anything this is just symptomatic of a larger problem.

In any big enough supply chain with enough locations this type of thing is bound to happen - I seriously doubt it would be because of some process that's specific to Chipotle. There is a risk of getting E Coli from basically any grocery store product or restaurant chain. If you never want to get E Coli - well, it's not enough to not eat at Chipotle. You need to basically not eat anything that you haven't personally sourced and cooked.

Jack in the Box in 1993, Taco Bell in 2006, Maple Leaf Foods in 2008. It happens. They fix it and eventually people forget and go back to eating it.
posted by pravit at 6:27 PM on December 23, 2015 [5 favorites]


Give food employees paid sick leave and require employers to send sick food handlers home.
posted by xarnop at 6:30 PM on December 23, 2015 [35 favorites]


Even unpaid leave would be an improvement. My experience was if you don't show up for a day, for any reason, you don't have a job anymore.
posted by Drinky Die at 6:57 PM on December 23, 2015 [8 favorites]


Same experience. Worker conditions are shit and actively chewing people up and spitting them out in food service and too many other sectors.
posted by xarnop at 6:58 PM on December 23, 2015 [4 favorites]


Related Posts
6 Tricks to Get 86% More Chipotle Burrito (for free!)

Um, nahhh.
posted by Cookiebastard at 7:05 PM on December 23, 2015


Are there really people out there who see eating at Chipotle as healthy and ethical?

I travel all the time for work and Chipotle is pretty much the only fast food I'm not allergic to. I can get a vegetarian, gluten-free meal that involves beans and rice and some veggies. Getting my layovers in airports with a Chipotle means an actual meal rather than trying to find the least over-sugared items at Hudson News or Cibo Express. So it's maybe not awesome, but it's better than many of the other available options. I'd rather be eating stuff I made, but I don't always get that option.
posted by bile and syntax at 7:09 PM on December 23, 2015 [9 favorites]


So it's maybe not awesome, but it's better than many of the other available options.

Oh, I get that, and it's the same reason I end up eating there a few times a month instead of some other late-night fast food joint. But the article implied customers are flocking to Chipotle because they're really buzzed to be eating what they see as ethically-sourced, healthy food and this food poisoning thing has shattered their perception of the place. But when I'm there, it seems like everyone has a similar "Eh, it'll do" kinda attitude while piling on the sour cream and getting annoyed at the staff.

Except the people ordering the Chipotle Margaritas. I don't know what is going on in their heads.
posted by retrograde at 7:56 PM on December 23, 2015 [2 favorites]


I still get a creepy feeling from some comments in this thread, such as "a slim risk of e coli seems a small price to pay," and it still sounds like a weird funhouse mirror of market-fetish Libertarians who say that eventually people will punish bad actors in the marketplace. Which all sounds fine and good unless it's you or your kid who is among the first to fall ill (or worse) because a "slim risk" is OK by someone else. It's not to me.

You are currently experiencing a "slim risk" (at the very least) of literally every single bad thing that can befall a human being, including infection with all the different foodborne pathogens. Insisting that a slim risk is not OK to you is just noise -- it's posturing without actually saying anything because there is no such thing as living without risk.

I can assure you, vehemently, that quantifying risk is an activity that is not limited to market-fetish Libertarians. The CDC does it, doctors do it, businesses do it, and you're doing it right now because there is no way to opt out of living with slim risks.
posted by telegraph at 8:08 PM on December 23, 2015 [5 favorites]


> My experience was if you don't show up for a day, for any reason, you don't have a job anymore.

Yup, the reality of a low-wage job is that you have your shift covered, either by yourself, working healthy or sick, or by somebody else (but not somebody who is over 40 hours this week because we're not paying overtime for you to have a day off). Otherwise, you don't have a job any more.

I used to work in management for another chain known for their commitment to ethical sourcing, environmental responsibility, and community involvement (hint, they sell coffee). With a wink and a nod to let us know they're offering practical advice which departed from written company regulations, the corporate trainer encouraged us to schedule "full time" employees at 29-35 hours per week -- that way they are always hungry for another shift if someone needs to call in sick and they live with the persistent threat that they will drop below 30 hours/week and lose their "full time" benefits if they need to call in sick.

> The manager who let the worker keep working despite being sick was let go.

The sick employee was also fired. So, you'll be fired if you work sick and you'll be fired if you call in sick. It really sucks at the bottom end of the labor market. These companies give minimum wage employees the power to make what turns out to be life and death decisions when it comes to public health issues. It's bullshit that their wages and training don't reflect that.
posted by peeedro at 8:13 PM on December 23, 2015 [18 favorites]


The difference is Chipotle only makes burritos. And marketing.

Guess I'm going to be hunting squirrels at the edge of the parking lot then, goddammit.

I still get a creepy feeling from some comments in this thread, such as "a slim risk of e coli seems a small price to pay," and it still sounds like a weird funhouse mirror of market-fetish Libertarians who say that eventually people will punish bad actors in the marketplace.

No - I'm actually fairly far to the left. It's just that Chipotle is the one chain in the all-chain landscape near my work that doesn't seem like utterly unredeemable, inedible garbage.
posted by ryanshepard at 8:26 PM on December 23, 2015


Insisting that a slim risk is not OK to you is just noise -- it's posturing without actually saying anything because there is no such thing as living without risk.

Also, that was exactly my point - I've worked in restaurants, and you are basically rolling the dice on getting e coli, salmonella, etc., *every time you eat out* (just check the health code violations section of your local newspaper if you need concrete proof of this). And for that reason, I'm not going to stop patronizing a place whose food is passably edible - and that makes some at least partially credible motions in the direction of ethical sourcing - in the pretty revolting chain landscape that's available to me because this time their number happened to come up.
posted by ryanshepard at 8:37 PM on December 23, 2015


Also, the "Center for Consumer Freedom" is creepy as fuck.

Rick Berman, the guy who runs it, is a fascinatingly horrible person. I haven't eaten at Chipotle in a decade, but if one of Rick Berman's front groups is opposing them, they must be doing something right.
posted by cmonkey at 8:41 PM on December 23, 2015 [3 favorites]


"Chipotle's CEO should have been fired after the second outbreak."

"Uh. Fired by who? Boards are typically not terribly keen on displacing founders."


That's because the chairman of the board and the CEO and the founder are all the same person.

This is an classic example of the failure of corporate governance in the U.S. Being founder doesn't give you the right to reign as king after you have cashed in and sold out through a public offering. Steve Ells made millions when he sold his ownership of the company. Today he holds less than 0.1% of shares yet runs the company as if he still owns it.

Even worse he simultaneously holds both the position of CEO and the position of chairman of the board, the nominal boss of the CEO. Who is there to hold the CEO responsible when you are your own boss? And then he, as chairman, authorizes himself as CEO $25 million a year in salary, looting a company he doesn't own anymore. Such a corporate arrangement should be illegal.
posted by JackFlash at 9:11 PM on December 23, 2015 [5 favorites]


No - I'm actually fairly far to the left. It's just that Chipotle is the one chain in the all-chain landscape near my work that doesn't seem like utterly unredeemable, inedible garbage.

Do us all a solid and break that down for us, please...

Do they have progressive labor practices and pay fair rates that shame the rest of the fast food industry?

Do the have food safety practices that and above and beyond the rest of the industry and keep their consumers safe?

Is their food prepared more freshly or closely to their consumers? Is there any honesty to a claim to authenticity?

Are their suppliers legit? Are there accounting procedures to judge complicated issues like land use, water use, sustainability, and organics? Is that documented?

Does any of that matter beyond scoring some marketing points? How do we make a not-dumb system of ranking these things?

Or maybe you just want to feel better about paying $8 for a fucking burrito.
posted by peeedro at 9:27 PM on December 23, 2015


"I'm generally not one for a conspiracy, but the way that "ethical sourcing" seems to be taking the blame for a lot of the problems really suggests to me that this story arrived at the press pre-spun -- it's not really the first (or second, or third) conclusion that I'd jump to. Even before the current "crisis" broke, I've noticed a really strong undercurrent of anti-Chipotle sentiment in the press that seemingly emerged from nowhere."
The sudden anti-Chiptole spin emerged from their conspicuously inadequate business practices that lead to independent multi-state outbreaks of entirely preventable communicable disease. The solutions to the problems that Chipotle is experiencing were figured out 60 years ago and perfected in the early 90s, there is no conceivable excuse for them now and no defensible way to put a pro-Chipotle spin on this story.

Its exactly this kind of eagerly cynical paranoia, that we'd rightly see as borderline pathological in most other contexts, that will prevent the activist community that did so much good a generation ago from accomplishing a goddamn thing for a long damn time. Having sold its soul to the laughably disguised marketers selling orthorexia to college educated whites with more money than sense, which Chipotle represent so well, there really isn't anyone left in leftist activist communities with any interest in understanding the systems they claim to be critiquing. Chipotle has made so much money on the illusion of healthy food that their clear hypocrisy being exposed is generating attention should not be remotely surprising.

Besides, this kind of conspiratorial thinking about the media reaction can only even start to make sense if you are deep enough into the liberal bubble that you can no longer relate to the reasons why most Americans, and the vast majority of the world, does not give a shit about Chipote or its mission.
posted by Blasdelb at 9:35 PM on December 23, 2015 [3 favorites]


I can assure you, vehemently, that quantifying risk is an activity that is not limited to market-fetish Libertarians.

I can assure you, with equal vehemence, that you did not read my entire comment. Allow me to reiterate the very point you missed, my acknowledgement that zero risk is impossible: There's enough risk when everyone follows all the rules, thank you very much.

I know there's risk. I'm not looking for zero risk, because, as you would agree, that's a fool's errand. But it's stupid to say you're OK with increasing your risk from one outlet because you hate Monstanto and Sysco, so Chipotle gets a pass on being a little slipshod. If anything, that's a political or ideological stance, not a valid risk management approach.
posted by chimaera at 9:46 PM on December 23, 2015


You are currently experiencing a "slim risk" (at the very least) of literally every single bad thing that can befall a human being, including infection with all the different foodborne pathogens.

But let's be clear: The "slim risk" of food poisoning is easily preventable. Invest in a public health system, including epidemiological surveillance. Create a health code and require restaurants to follow it lest they be shut down. Require inspection of food from farm to kitchen.

Now, in America we've decimated the public health system, fought the health code at every turn because raw milk is being held back by The Man, and essentially left large meat packers to their own devices on meat inspection. Still, what's left does work, and it means that in this country, getting Shigella from food is a rare occurrence (in fact, a friend of mine has been bedridden for a week with it) while elsewhere in the world it kills a million a year.

I agree that Chipotle is certainly more edible than, say, McDonald's. But I also know that right now, my "slim risk" of getting a debilitating and possibly deadly foodborne illness from what passes as "food" at McD's is not the same "slim risk" of eating at Chipotle. Safety records should mean something.
posted by dw at 9:52 PM on December 23, 2015


Its exactly this kind of eagerly cynical paranoia, that we'd rightly see as borderline pathological in most other contexts
...
Besides, this kind of conspiratorial thinking about the media reaction can only even start to make sense if...


I think an absence of cynicism about significant portions of what one finds in the media, this story included, represents ignorance or willful blindness about the massive industry of media PR firms out there. That news stories do not merely arise but are suggested to journalists by individuals paid to suggest them shouldn't be a surprise, and this is true for stories across the political spectrum.

That's a separate question from how we should feel about Chipotle, which is where I have mixed feelings (largely because I've always found their food kinda gross). But to ask "why is this story being spun in this particular way?" isn't "eagerly cynical paranoia" or "conspiratorial thinking" but basic civic participation and critical thinking by an informed public.
posted by salvia at 9:55 PM on December 23, 2015 [5 favorites]


> It's an NBC suit. The kind they wore for the ebola outbreak.

Possibly splitting hairs, but it's a hazmat suit; NBC is generally a military PPE; hazmat is civilian.
posted by Sunburnt at 10:13 PM on December 23, 2015


What a weird hit piece of an article.

I've worked in restaurants, and you are basically rolling the dice on getting e coli, salmonella, etc., *every time you eat out*

I was going to say exactly the same thing. It’s amazing it doesn’t happen more often. Someone just has to be careless for a second.

I’m just surprised to learn that I’m apparently a gullible fashion slave hoity toity fool for eating a fast food burrito. Maybe I’m also a hipster? Anything seems possible, I can’t even trust myself about this anymore. Now I’ve seen what happened to that guy who tried to "eat ethically" and how he learned his lesson. Fuck, I even go to Starbucks occasionally, I might as well wear a dress. A communist muslim dress.
posted by bongo_x at 11:09 PM on December 23, 2015 [8 favorites]


I have had discussions with friends who find the food borne illness risk incredibly scary--the lack of control is a big part of it when we discuss.

But any time I read an article like this I feel like I can't figure how safe we manage to make it despite all the problems with our food production. Going through the inset box they have in the article, the high profile food incidents in the last 30 years are 110 people dead. This from an activity 300 million Americans do multiple times a day. Accepting that's not a full accounting--but you get that many traffic fatalities in a day and a half.

I'm glad people have that response--since this level is achievable level of safety there's no reason not to achieve it, we'd be at least 10 times worse if everyone had my attitude. And I'm fine with big corporations getting dinged if they're sloppy.

But objectively it seems such a tiny risk, I'm sure the 'risky' fresh vegetables are way healthier (at least for me) than things that might be orders of magnitude safer but are more processed / saltier / more starchy / etc.
posted by mark k at 11:45 PM on December 23, 2015 [1 favorite]


Fun Fact:

Typhoid Mary infected 51 people.
posted by mikelieman at 12:07 AM on December 24, 2015 [1 favorite]


And one year later, she founded Monsanto.
posted by Drinky Die at 12:28 AM on December 24, 2015 [3 favorites]


The end result of this process is that the word "safe" will lose all meaning, or even develop a negative connotation. Just like "chemical", which is now more associated with chemical additives than the science of chemistry.

As a culture, we'll still have vague subconscious healthy habits that have been drilled into us since grade school, but we're losing the ability to independently judge statements about safety and science. In the end this puts more pressure on our social system to manage food safety and health education. It's a beautiful downward spiral we're all taking part in.
posted by formless at 1:22 AM on December 24, 2015


Their guacamole is still the freshest I've ever eaten. Do we have similar studies on other fast food restaurants e.g: Burger King? their restaurants hygiene is often doubtful.
posted by nims at 5:15 AM on December 24, 2015


their restaurants hygiene is often doubtful.

They also serve less raw food and so are offering an overall lower-risk proposition.
posted by Dysk at 5:30 AM on December 24, 2015 [1 favorite]


Honestly, I don't get the attention on Chipotle.

Multiple outbreaks of different strains of e. coli at the same chain is pretty unusual. Usually it is just a one-time case that causes a single outbreak.
posted by smackfu at 6:16 AM on December 24, 2015


Dysk: i agree, but other fast food restaurants serve raw letuce, tomato, and onions as well.
posted by nims at 6:37 AM on December 24, 2015


Nims, this wasn't a "study." It was real-world incidents that were traced back to Chipotle. If these were caused by Burger King & McDonald's they would have been traced back there.

Since these are rare events it could be bad luck (either on the "causing an outbreak" or on the "getting nailed" side of the equation), but it was multiple incidents so I think the reasonable statistical conclusion is Chipotle's is higher risk at this point*. It may have little to do with "hygiene" and more with sourcing (per the article in the OP) and, for norovirus, the fact that Chipotle's does more human handling.

*IMHO even the higher risk is negligible but YMMV.
posted by mark k at 7:14 AM on December 24, 2015


Yup, the reality of a low-wage job is that you have your shift covered, either by yourself, working healthy or sick, or by somebody else (but not somebody who is over 40 hours this week because we're not paying overtime 30 hours this week because we're not paying benefits for you to have a day off).

If you're lucky enough to not get fired for calling in sick, then you better have a doctor's note when you return. So instead of resting when you're sick, you're spending the day schlepping across town to pay $50 (cash, no insurance) for a doctor to tell you that you need to stay home and rest.
posted by headnsouth at 7:59 AM on December 24, 2015 [4 favorites]


peeedro: "where do you think their wheat, corn, dairy, soy, tomatoes, onions, and all the animal feed that their meats depend on come from? "

From local farms, which is exactly how this crisis spawned (with inadequate controls on tracking and standards). Chipotle are fairly notable for bucking industry trends of purchasing from large agriculture conglomerates.

That being said, the fact that Chipotle very suddenly had multiple (and seemingly unconnected) outbreaks is a huge WTF. I'm interested in an explanation for why this happened so suddenly and simultaneously.
posted by schmod at 9:08 AM on December 24, 2015 [4 favorites]


Pedant alert: The scientific name of the organism in question is Escherichia coli or E. coli for short. The italics, capitalization of the genus, and non-capitalization of the species are all part of the scientific name.
posted by hydropsyche at 10:39 AM on December 24, 2015 [3 favorites]


Cool Papa Bell: ""Don't panic, order will be restored to the universe."

I would burn that place to the motherfucking ground.
"

Stay cool, ummm, Cool Papa Bell, stay cool.
posted by Samizdata at 11:51 AM on December 24, 2015


Do us all a solid and break that down for us, please...

Or maybe you just want to feel better about paying $8 for a fucking burrito.


I work a full time job, as does my partner, we have two small kids, and I have a long-ish commute to a suburban wasteland where there are virtually no decent food options, and none that meet the kind of fair-labor / environmental / local food standards you lay out. I don't always have time to make myself a lunch, and on those days I need to eat something.

Chipotle's food is less unhealthy than my other nearby options, they do source some of their food (recently, chicken and beef, at least per their promotions) regionally, and I don't feel like gagging getting it down. I'd love to be able to have even higher personal standards on this kind of thing, and have in the past, but right now I'm sprinting just to stay even.

Also, the hostility here is way out of measure to my limply defending a burrito place, honestly. And the salad bowl is $6 and change, which is on par with other local options.
posted by ryanshepard at 12:45 PM on December 24, 2015 [7 favorites]


Chipotle is, for people in most parts of the country, the least-worst fast-food option.

Whether that makes someone feel good or feel bad about eating there says more about the person than it does the restaurant chain.
posted by box at 2:11 PM on December 25, 2015


cmonkey: "Rick Berman, the guy who runs it, is a fascinatingly horrible person. I haven't eaten at Chipotle in a decade, but if one of Rick Berman's front groups is opposing them, they must be doing something right."

Oh, cute. I recognized a few of the names on their staff as some of the "concerned students" who invented/organized the conservative media shitstorm that basically destroyed my college while I was there (whilst notably getting a series of huge "anonymous" donations to set up newspapers to promote/legitimize their locally-unpopular viewpoints).

Glad to see that they found employment with some other fascinatingly horrible people, and found a way to monetize their sociopathy.
posted by schmod at 10:58 AM on December 26, 2015 [1 favorite]


Stay cool, ummm, Cool Papa Bell, stay cool.

I'm imagining a state of mind after leaving a child at the hospital, where their kidneys are failing, and running across this snarky, wannabe-hipster bullshit. Gasoline is only two bucks a gallon. I'd bring some very cost-effective order to their universe.

This is why I believe in strong gun control. I recognize that I ought not have one. :-)
posted by Cool Papa Bell at 7:54 PM on December 27, 2015


Great, now I'm imagining the consequences for a severely ill child of having a parent imprisoned for arson.
posted by howfar at 9:45 AM on December 28, 2015


« Older Chrindie '95   |   Inequality impacts retailers too Newer »


This thread has been archived and is closed to new comments