Well, it's official — the AMC has passed a motion requiring at least one member of the Hospitality Committee at gatherings to provide certification of having passed a food safety course. I understand that, as Mensa grows, it must continually reevaluate its policies and adapt to changing needs. However, we are a society of highly intelligent people; so why does this rule sound like every other piece of half-baked legislation passed down from some committee? This new rule seems hastily thrown together and difficult to enforce; and its efficacy is questionable at best.
I myself already have a food handler's card. Although it expired in Wichita County several years ago, I see no reason why Mensa wouldn't accept it; it is proof that I have taken a food safety course at the county level. However, the course I took lasted less than two hours and was about as informative as a defensive driving class. We watched several short videos on the most rudimentary aspects of safety and cleanliness in the kitchen and took a short, multiple-choice quiz. This course seemed to be primarily focused on educating fast-food employees as to why you shouldn't pick your nose over the prep table. However, it was a food-safety course.
Although Mensa membership has had its ups and downs, at the moment we're in a growth cycle. As the organization grows, so too does the scale of many of its tasks. The first AG had a mere 160 people in attendance; the past few have topped 1,500. There is, of course, a big difference between serving 160 people and serving a crowd of 1,600. It can still be done with volunteer labor; but on a scale that large, extensive planning and an experienced cook coordinating everything are essential. Anyone who can successfully put together a meal for 1,000 people already knows hand washing and safe temperatures inside out. However, that is about the extent of many federal, state, and county food safety courses.
As most of you already know, Mensa is administering a food-safety course as well. It was developed at Penn State and is titled "Cooking for Crowds." The course is quite different from what I took back in my foodservice days; it is a six- to eight-hour course that was designed specifically for non-profit groups. I have looked over some of the course material, and it seems ideal for Mensa: It is geared toward groups with limited resources, who don't cook large amounts of food often. Such groups often hold pancake brunches or cookouts as fundraisers. However, they frequently do not have the best equipment for the job or the experience necessary to anticipate the inevitable minor disasters that plague any large group function. Sound familiar? Remind you of the stack of microwaves, army of crockpots, and row of mini-fridges all crammed into one hotel room at an RG? We are the target audience for this course.
If Mensa is going to offer a food safety course, we couldn't have picked a better one. It is the sort of sound decision I would expect from the governing body of The High I.Q. Society. What I can't understand is why food safety has suddenly become such a concern. There haven't been any food-related incidents lately. We have, to my knowledge, never even been threatened with a food-related lawsuit, and there is no cogent reason to think that's going to change anytime soon. Nonetheless, a rule requiring certification from one of the hundreds, possibly thousands, of different food-safety courses available was hastily passed. The original draft required the Hospitality Chair to have the food-safety certification; that was later changed so that anyone on the Hospitality Committee can have the certification. Yet the formal verification of certification is part of the application process, several months ahead of the event. That means there's plenty of time for the one certified person to quit the committee before the gathering. There is no requirement that the certified individual be on the premises when food is served. So we have one person with a certificate from one of a wide variety of food-safety courses, who may or may not be around during mealtime? I fail to see how this leads to any reduction in practical risk.
Concerns have been raised about this rule's scaring off volunteers by placing the legal liability on the certified individual's head. While I believe this is not the case, the fear will remain no matter what. Given the inconsistency between the many courses, I don't see any reason why a certificate will make a difference. The course Mensa is offering is quite good, but it is one of many choices.
I believe the group would be better served by a less alarmist approach. Perhaps start off with a year of suggesting that Hospitality Chairs take the "Cooking for Crowds" course? After it has been offered a dozen times or so, it may prove prudent to require the course for any gathering over a certain size. Many Hospitality Chairs could benefit from a course designed for small groups that occasionally prepare food for large crowds. If the new rule really is just a means of managing risk, and not transferring liability or controlling situations, then a certificate is of little benefit; having everyone take the same specialized class would seem much more beneficial.
Adapting to the ever-changing scale of a growing Mensa is necessary. Suggesting that Hospitality Chairs review the material in "Cooking for Crowds" makes sense. But requiring any one person on the committee to have taken some kind of food safety course somewhere along the way doesn't really change a thing. Personally, I'd put a lot more trust in an experienced cook who has served on a few Hospitality Committees than in someone who has sat through two hours of videos about the "Danger Zone" and fundamentals of soap use.
I don't understand how having such a vaguely defined credential will make any difference in the event of a disaster. But then, I'm an engineer; I tend to understand only things that make sense.