NZ Food Safety US 167 common mistakes
NZ Food Safety US 167 · Understand the traps and how to avoid them.
Citing a temperature or time limit from memory without stating the unit and the measurement point (for example saying 'chill to 4' without saying 4 °C measured at the core of the food), so the answer is marked wrong even though the number is right.
Candidates memorise bare numbers during revision and forget that the unit and where the reading is taken are part of the required knowledge. In the food business setting they rely on habit rather than the written procedure.
What to do instead
Always write temperature answers in the form 'X °C measured at the core/centre of the food', and pair each with the action to take if it is not met (continue cooking, reheat once, reject the delivery, or discard). Build a one-page table of the limits your workplace actually uses and check it against the business's food control plan before the assessment.
Describing handwashing as 'wash your hands before handling food' without listing the full sequence and the specific moments it must happen.
Handwashing is treated as common sense, so candidates give a summary instead of the step-by-step method and the trigger events. Assessors look for both the sequence and the occasions.
What to do instead
Learn and write the sequence: wet hands, apply soap, lather and rub including backs of hands, between fingers, thumbs and under nails, rinse, dry with a single-use towel or hand dryer. Then list the triggers: before starting work, after using the toilet, after handling raw meat or poultry, after touching the bin, after coughing or sneezing, after handling money, and after breaks. Practise saying it aloud until it is automatic.
Confusing cleaning with sanitising, and answering a question about sanitising with a description of washing with detergent only.
In everyday language 'clean' covers both, so candidates collapse the two steps. The exam distinguishes removing soil and grease from reducing micro-organisms to a safe level.
What to do instead
State the two-step process explicitly: clean first with detergent and hot water to remove grease and food residue, then sanitise with an approved sanitiser at its correct concentration and contact time, then allow to air dry. Give a concrete example such as a chopping board used for raw chicken, and name how the sanitiser strength is verified (for example test strips or a dispenser that doses automatically).
Giving a single cross-contamination example (usually raw meat above salad) and stopping there, missing the other routes such as hands, cloths, utensils, drip, pests and waste.
Candidates anchor on the most familiar example and do not structure their answer, so they run out of points before covering the routes the question asks about.
What to do instead
Use a fixed checklist for any cross-contamination question: hands, utensils and equipment, chopping boards and colour coding, cloths, storage separation (raw below ready-to-eat, covered, labelled), drip and spill, waste, pests, and staff movement between areas. Write one sentence per route with the control that prevents it.
Treating 'under supervision' as licence to skip reporting: the candidate describes noticing a problem (a fridge reading, a damaged delivery, an illness) but does not say they would tell the supervisor and record it.
New workers fear looking incompetent or being blamed, and revision notes focus on technical facts rather than the reporting chain. The unit is about working under supervision, so escalation is part of the assessed behaviour.
What to do instead
For every scenario answer, add the escalation step: stop work, tell the supervisor immediately, isolate or label the affected food so it cannot be used, and record what was found and what was done. Learn the difference between a corrective action you may take yourself under the food control plan and a decision that must be referred to the supervisor.
Answering a temperature-control question with only the cooking temperature and omitting the other stages of the temperature chain (receiving, storage, thawing, hot holding, cooling, reheating).
Candidates revise cooking as the headline hazard control and do not see the question as asking about the whole chain from delivery to service.
What to do instead
Draw the chain as a timeline and attach the control and limit to each stage: check deliveries on arrival and reject out-of-range food, store chilled and frozen correctly, thaw in the fridge or under running water not on the bench, cook to the required core temperature, hold hot food above the required temperature, cool rapidly within the specified time, reheat to the required temperature and only once. Answer with the stage names so the assessor can see the coverage.
Describing a hazard as a 'risk' and mixing up the three hazard types, for example calling a piece of glass a biological hazard or calling bacteria a chemical hazard.
The words hazard and risk are used interchangeably in everyday speech, and candidates have not practised sorting examples into biological, chemical, physical and allergen categories.
What to do instead
Learn the definitions: a hazard is something that can cause harm; a risk is the chance of that harm happening. Sort ten real examples from your workplace into the four types, and note that allergens are usually treated as a separate category. Check yourself by explaining why each example belongs to its type.
Giving a vague personal hygiene answer such as 'be clean and tidy' instead of the specific requirements about clothing, jewellery, hair, nails, illness and cuts.
Personal presentation rules feel obvious, so candidates summarise them. Assessors are looking for the concrete items a supervisor would check before a shift starts.
What to do instead
Write a pre-shift checklist: clean uniform or apron, hair restrained, no jewellery or watches, short clean nails with no polish or false nails, no strong perfume, cuts covered with a detectable waterproof dressing, and exclusion from food handling when vomiting or diarrhoea has occurred with the required stand-down period. State what to do for each item, not just that it matters.
Describing pest control or waste as 'keep the place clean' without the specific practices: sealed containers, lids, regular removal, no standing water, screens, and reporting signs of pests.
These topics look like housekeeping rather than food safety controls, so candidates give one-line answers and lose the marks for the specific practices.
What to do instead
Learn the practical controls: waste in lidded, labelled bins emptied at set intervals, food stored off the floor and in sealed containers, no standing water or food debris, doors and windows screened, and any sign of pests (droppings, gnaw marks, insects, nesting material) reported to the supervisor and recorded. Write each as an action with a frequency.
Answering record-keeping questions as 'write it down' without saying what is recorded, when, by whom, and what happens when a reading is out of range.
Candidates see monitoring as paperwork and do not connect it to the corrective action that makes the record meaningful. They also forget that records must be legible, dated, signed and kept for the period the plan requires.
What to do instead
For each monitoring point, state the reading taken, the limit, the frequency, the person responsible, and the corrective action if the limit is breached (for example re-check, adjust, move food, discard, notify supervisor), plus the record itself with date, time, initials and the action taken. Practise with one real log sheet from a food business so the structure is familiar.