A recent analysis of two feedback sheets for similar cattle from the same property, but sent to different works, showed just how simple it is to corrupt the feedback process and if you are an unscrupulous operator to cheat a producer out of income. While one works' feedback sheet gave full detail of each carcase assessment and its payment, the other works sent a vague document that after analysis, appeared to camouflage serious pricing flaws.

When you get your feedback sheet from a works does it have sufficient detail so that you can easily work out how much you were paid for each body and what penalties were applied? If the answer is no, then you are open to being a victim of the invisible ripoff. "Invisible" because the vagueness of some feedback sheets discourages you from trying to extract any meaningful pricing information from them. In fact you can't so you just put it aside. "Ripoff" because unscrupulous operators can rob you of significant income by hiding the details of how they arrived at their payments.

In a recent example of the "invisible ripoff", similar cattle from one property were sent to two different works for slaughter on similar grid specifications. A substantial difference in average returns per head from one works prompted the vendor to request Cattlefacts to analyse that works' feedback data against its original quote.

The analysis uncovered serious anomalies in the works' feedback sheet. Harsh penalties that it had applied for fat did not tally with their own summaries of the carcases or with the grid under which the cattle were sold. The 100 steers going to this works returned on average $27 per head or 10 c/kg less than if they had been sent to the alternative works. An income forfeit of $2700.

The crux of the matter was that the standard feedback format used by the works in question is so vague that it is unlikely any cattle producer could work out what they had been paid for their cattle let alone why. These vague formats make it possible for unscrupulous operators to make payments based on inaccurate or dishonest carcase assessments or the inappropriate application of penalties.

Most producers would be completely unable to detect any malpractice by looking at such feedback. This may be precisely the reason such a format is used- it can be virtually unfathomable. One of the reasons Cattlefacts was able to complete an analysis of the feedback sheet was that the inconsistencies were blatant and outstanding. (The full analysis report on this feedback sheet is available to Cattlefacts members in their members newsletter.)

The real question arising out of the analysis discoveries, is that if one producer can be unknowingly 'taken to the cleaners' by this works, why wouldn't the works be doing the same thing to all their clients? How long has it been occurring?

Accepting a feedback sheet (even an initial sheet) that does not have clear detail of the actual assessment of each body and the c/kg price that was realised for that body is virtually giving those so inclined a licence to deceive, either accidentally or intentionally. Either way, you the producer are the only looser. It's cold comfort and costly to be ignorant of the fact.

If anyone thinks there could be support out there to check such payment malpractice, don’t pin your hopes on it. For example, The MLA has got its head buried so far up its own business that scarcely a sound escapes that organisation these days (and it’s a $50m producer peak body?). Ausmeat (our industry carcase standards regulator) says it's not their type of issue and suggests that the producer confronts the processor directly (chickens!). Of course, the producer would have more sense than to suffer the intimidation or the fruitless hassle of confronting the works with such blatant theft of income. Especially if he thinks the rest of his industry isn't interested to support him. The ACCC (our price surveillance watchdog) would be an outside chance for interest but looks like its hands will be full with GST issues for quite some time. You are on your own, in case you hadn't realised this before.

Prevention, as they say, is better than cure and there is a boringly basic checklist that anyone selling cattle for slaughter on consignment could follow.