Exposed: Wal-Mart’s Not-So-Independent Product Safety Testing Lab

Today’s Wall Street Journal article entitled “Bills Give Labs Job of Finding Risks In Kids’ Products” exposes the cozy, 20-year relationship between Wal-Mart and it’s product testing lab, Consumer Testing Laboratories (CTL).  In the wake of massive toy safety recalls, shaken consumer confidence and ramped up efforts by Congress to add some teeth to the CPSC, Wal-Mart magnanimously rolled out its own toy safety testing programs touting its “independent” lab testing of toys and other products. 

As it turns out, Wal-Mart’s testing laboratory is far from “independent.” The story mentions that CTL (conveniently located near Wal-Mart headquarters) gets 85% of its business from Wal-Mart.  Plus, CTL hasn’t even had the accreditations to actually test for the some of the substances it was supposedly testing. So, who is really running the testing program?  It sure sounds more like it’s just another extension of Wal-Mart.  Is it any wonder that unsafe toys and products continue to make their way to Wal-Mart’s shelves?  Once again, Wal-Mart shows it can’t be trusted – especially not when it comes to ensuring the safety of its customers. 

The Wal-Mart Watch Statement is available here.

Read the full Wall Street Journal Article here:

Congress is giving the job of ensuring that children’s products are safe to many of the same private laboratories that already work for importers, manufacturers and retailers.

A bill approved yesterday by the Senate—as well as a similar bill already passed by the House—aims to plug holes in the government’s consumer safety net that have been letting hazardous products aimed at children slip through. Dozens of toys were recalled by manufacturers in 2007 because of dangers including choking risks and contamination involving lead, asbestos and other toxic chemicals.

Under the new bills, the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission would develop procedures for certifying and monitoring the work of independent labs that test for conformance with federal safety standards. The commission would also have more powers, including the ability to assess fines of up to $20 million for violations of product safety laws.

Sen. Mark Pryor, a co-sponsor of the Senate bill, said the current system for consumer-product testing hasn’t done a good enough job. “The system has pretty much been voluntary and we have seen the result,” added Michael Teague, a spokesman for Sen. Pryor.

But turning over such a key consumer watchdog role to private laboratories is raising questions about how much protection consumers will get and how independent the labs really are. In some cases, the dangerous children’s toys and cribs recalled last year had passed through several test-lab reviews before landing on store shelves.

Of course, many of the labs that will do the testing are large, reputable companies. And keeping faulty products off the market is good for business. But historically, the labs’ testing has been narrowly focused on confirming that products work as claimed. The fees for testing are paid by product suppliers, and the labs must compete with rivals to win business.

Some of the children’s cribs and toys recalled last year had passed more than one—and in some cases as many as four—outside lab reviews prior to going on sale. Simplicity Inc., whose Nursery-in-a-Box crib was among those recalled, had received a seal of approval for the crib from the Juvenile Products Manufacturers Association.

A Simplicity spokesman said the multiple safety tests found no problems, but he declined to discuss the specific results. The manufacturers association said the cribs “passed the comprehensive and rigorous tests and review administrated at our qualified independent testing lab.”

Cases of dueling lab results aren’t unusual in consumer product testing. The Asbestos Disease Awareness Organization, a group that works to ban the use of asbestos, paid laboratories to test 250 consumer products. On Nov. 30, it reported results showed asbestos in five household products, including toy-fingerprint kits imported by Planet Toys Inc.

The group published its findings and documented the appearance of small amounts of tremolite, a type of asbestos fiber, through testing by three separate laboratories. In December, Planet Toys said its own tests “by a leading asbestos testing laboratory” showed no evidence of asbestos in the toys. Even after pulling the toys off the market, Planet Toys said the kits weren’t tainted. “It is one organization’s word against another,” said Eunnie Hur, Planet Toys director of new business development.

Some critics worry the thoroughness of testing can be compromised because labs are dependent on retailers and manufacturers for business. John W. de Gravelles, a Baton Rouge, La., attorney who represents consumers injured by faulty products, cites what he calls a “cozy arrangement” between Wal-Mart Stores Inc. and its primary testing lab, Consumer Testing Laboratories Inc. “How rigorous the testing is, I’m sure, is less determined by CTL than it is Wal-Mart,” he said.

Wal-Mart, the world’s biggest retailer, describes CTL on its Web site as both “independent” and “a joint effort.” Former CTL executive Ron Caviness says 85% of the lab’s business derives from Wal-Mart. The retailer has provided CTL with customer referrals, computer networking and equipment and, at one time, even office facilities, according to former CTL employees. In a 1991 Wal-Mart newsletter, CTL’s current president described the arrangement as “independent in-house testing.”

Despite a nearly 20-year relationship that has included testing clothing, furniture and food, CTL until recently didn’t have any of the laboratory accreditations that are common at large test labs. Last year, Wal-Mart stopped selling children’s toys that were found to contain lead. At that time, CTL was testing all Wal-Mart’s toys. But it was only last week that CTL was granted a Chemical Testing certificate by the American Association of Laboratory Accreditation to test for lead in nonmetals and metals.

Wal-Mart recently began shifting testing of most children’s products to two large laboratories used by its retail competitors, according to a spokeswoman. “We’re not using [CTL] as we had in the past,” said Wal-Mart spokeswoman Melissa O’Brien. She said Wal-Mart continues to use CTL on many other products, adding that the retailer has been satisfied with CTL’s test work.

CTL President Yefim Buzik declined to comment.

An article in Wal-Mart Today, the retailer’s employee newsletter, describes a partnership that began in 1989 and expanded to cover the testing of most Wal-Mart products. The relationship continues today with three facilities in or near Bentonville, Ark., Wal-Mart’s headquarters, as well as operations in India and China near Wal-Mart’s procurement offices. The article was provided by Flagler Productions Inc., a Lenexa, Kan., company with an archive of Wal-Mart videos and corporate materials.

Wal-Mart isn’t the only company closely linked to its testing lab. Many toy retailers, including J.C. Penney & Co., conduct their own product testing. In-house labs can respond to complaints more efficiently and can be more reliable, says Peter McGrath, J.C. Penney’s executive vice president and director of product development and sourcing. “We are as, or more, reliable than outside labs,” he says.

Posted by Eric Bull on Friday, March 07, 2008

Click Here for a Printer-Friendly Version