The consequences can be deadly. A 2024 listeria outbreak in deli meats resulted in 60 hospitalizations and 10 deaths, including an infant. Investigators traced the outbreak to a processing plant with severe sanitation issues—mold, mildew, and insects were found near food-contact surfaces. Such negligence becomes more probable when speed takes priority over safety.

A Better Path Forward: Solutions for Safer Poultry Processing

Alternatives exist that can improve efficiency without sacrificing safety:

1. Controlled Atmosphere Stunning (CAS)For poultry, CAS offers a less painful slaughter method by gradually reducing oxygen levels to render animals unconscious before processing. This approach:

Eliminates the need for stressful live shackling
Reduces handling errors that can lead to contamination
Improves worker safety by reducing animal handling

As part of their participation in the Better Chicken Commitment (BCC), Perdue Chicken has embraced CAS in several of its facilities, providing a better alternative to traditional slaughter methods, such as water bath stunning. Better Chicken compliant producers, such as Miller Poultry, Pitman Farms and Wayne-Sanderson Farms, as part of their participation in the Better Chicken Commitment also using CAS in addition to improving the on-farm living conditions of broiler chickens. This approach offers a model for the industry, demonstrating that it’s possible to prioritize both animal welfare and efficiency in poultry production.

2. Policy Reforms

Several specific policy changes could help create a safer, more ethical meat processing system:

Reinstate reasonable line speed limits: Return to the 140 birds per minute cap to ensure adequate time for proper handling and inspection
Expand humane slaughter requirements: Amend the Humane Methods of Slaughter Act (HMSA)--which currently only covers mammals--to include mandatory standards for poultry
Create transition incentives: Provide tax benefits or funding to help processors adopt safer technologies like CAS
Strengthen oversight: Give USDA inspectors more resources and authority to enforce safety and welfare standards

The True Cost of Cutting Corners

The drive to increase slaughter line speeds reflects a narrow focus on short-term efficiency gains at the expense of longer-term costs. These costs include:

Worker compensation claims and lost productivity due to injuries
Recalls and liability from foodborne illness outbreaks
Damage to consumer trust when safety failures make headlines

When we factor in these hidden costs, the economic case for ever-faster processing lines becomes much less compelling.

Choosing Safety Over Speed

Line speed regulations aren't arbitrary bureaucratic obstacles—they're vital safeguards that protect workers, animals, and consumers. Just as we wouldn't remove seatbelts from cars to eliminate the time it takes to buckle up, we shouldn't sacrifice safety measures in our food system for marginal productivity gains.

The USDA's decision to raise line speed limits may benefit industry profits in the short term, but it imposes significant costs on society. If we truly value animal welfare, safe working conditions, and food safety, we must demand a better approach—one that recognizes efficiency and ethics aren't mutually exclusive.

By investing in better technologies, maintaining reasonable line speeds, and prioritizing thorough inspections, we can create a meat processing system that delivers safe food without unnecessary suffering. The choice isn't between efficiency and safety—it's between a sustainable food system and one that cuts corners at everyone's expense.

Call to Action

Tell the USDA to protect animals, workers, and public health.