Each group should consider themselves as the supply chain manager at Ryding-Regency Meat Packers Ltd. The scope of your responsibility is to:
research and analyze the company’s current problem
provide recommendations to the company’s senior management team on how to make the appropriate recall arrangements from Wisconsin*, and
better align the company’s reverse logistics capabilities in future with their stated company mission and their perceived approach to strategic competitive advantage*
*These recommendations should be addressed in a summary page(s) at the beginning of your report.
In order to ensure your report focuses on key issues, the senior management team has asked you to also respond to the following eight (8) specific questions.
Answer the following eight (8) questions:
a) Describe the recall situation in this example.
Who are the stakeholders involved and what are their objectives?
How was the information communicated to stakeholders?
Could Ryding-Regency Meat Packers Ltd. have communicated the information to stakeholders more effectively?
a) Where were the contaminated meat products produced?
Where were they shipped?
What are Ryding-Regency Meat Packers Ltd.’s shipping terms of sale?
How were the contaminated products likely shipped to the Wisconsin correctional facilities?
If an Incoterm (Incoterms 2010) was used when shipping to the Wisconsin facilities, what might it have been, and why?
a) Describe how the procurement team at the Wisconsin DOC could have mitigated the risks
associated with purchasing from a foreign producer in this situation.
Describe the ethical risks associated with offshore purchasing in this situation.
Based on the strategic importance of outsourcing/offshore suppliers, which Supplier Interaction Model best describes the relationship that exists between Ryding-Regency Meat Packers Ltd. and the Wisconsin DOC.
What should it be?
Identify and explain the processing stages that Ryding-Regency Meat Packers Ltd. might have followed in conducting the recall.
How could Ryding-Regency Meat Packers Ltd. use this recall as an example in conducting a self-assessment of its ability to transition to a circular economy model?
a) Which mode of transport, and type of equipment, would Ryding-Regency Meat Packers Ltd. likely have used to ship products to the Wisconsin correctional facilities involved in the recall of its meat products?
b) What legal considerations would Ryding-Regency Meat Packers Ltd. have to be aware of when selecting carriers for domestic and international shipments of products involved in this recall? Why?
Distribution of Ryding-Regency meat products to correctional facilities in Wisconsin is coordinated by the DOC in Madison, Wisconsin (https://doc.wi.gov/Pages/Home.aspx).
Orders for the five correctional facilities in Wisconsin are consolidated and DOC places aggregate orders weekly with Ryding-Regency in Toronto. Ryding-Regency ships consolidated orders by intermodal, palletised and labelled by correctional facility, to Chicago, IL at which point the intermodal trailers are offloaded and moved by truck to a distribution centre in Milwaukee, WI.
The DOC in Madison, Wisconsin has identified 12 pallets of E. coli-contaminated meat products still in inventory in the distribution centre in Milwaukee, and approximately 2 pallets at each of the 5 correctional facilities.
Ryding-Regency’s supply chain manager has already spoken with the company’s Canadian Customs broker, US Customs and Border Protection (CBP), and the Canada Border Services Agency (CBSA) regarding arrangements to return the contaminated products to Canada. CBP and CBSA have requested that the shipping documentation, and the pallets of returning goods, include the following statement/warning labels:
RECALLED CONTAMINATED PRODUCT –– DO NOT CONSUME
NOT FOR RESALE - GOODS RETURNED TO CANADA FOR DISPOSAL ONLY
Since the returning shipment will not be subjected to the same level of scrutiny as a commercial import shipment, CBP and CBSA expressed concerns that someone might target the shipment for smuggling or terrorism purposes. As a result, CBSA has insisted the shipment be consolidated and enter Canada within 30 days.
Describe the possible surface transportation of contaminated meat products from Wisconsin locations to Canada.
What carrier(s) might be available to move the contaminated meat from Wisconsin to Canada?
Assuming the shipments travel by road from Wisconsin to Canada, describe the route and possible carriers involved.
Where will the shipment encounter CBSA when it leaves the U.S. and enters Canada?