Former Employee Alleges Driscoll’s Violated Pesticide Safety Laws And Tried To Cover It Up
VENTURA COUNTY, Calif. (KEYT) – A former employee of the world's largest distributor of berries alleges that the company knowingly violated Canadian import rules and over applied pesticides in violation of California state law for years before asking him to assist in covering it up.
When the now-former employee declined to help unless the company publicly acknowledged the dangerous, years-long violations, he was forced to resign.
According to a civil suit filed in Ventura County Superior Court late last month naming California-based Driscoll's Inc. and multiple employees as defendants, when the internationally recognized berry distributor punished and eventually pushed David Harada out, they violated state and federal labor laws.
"This lawsuit arises out of the unlawful retaliation suffered by plaintiff David Harada ("HARADA") after he disclosed that his employer, Driscoll's Inc. ('DRISCOLL'S") had knowledge that it was selling and exporting produce in violation of Federal and State laws and regulations regarding pesticides, as well as Canadian food safety laws," opened the civil suit alleging unlawful retaliation and wrongful termination. "DRISCOLL'S response to HARADA's disclosures was to direct HARADA to focus on maintaining DRISCOLL'S profitability and determining DRISCOLL'S plausible deniability for the violations of the law."
David Harada was hired by Driscoll's in September of 2022 as a Pest Control Advisor/Agronomist and within six months, he was promoted to a full-time Agronomist for Pest and Disease at the company.
By March of 2024, he was promoted to Manager of Food Safety and Regulatory Compliance for the United States and Canada.
National and international regulations limit the maximum amount of pesticide residue that can remain on the produce that makes it to consumers.
These safety limits are known as tolerances in the industry, and distributors, like Driscoll's, use pesticide labels to let receivers know the minimum amount of time that must pass before pesticide residue is considered legally safe.
Complying with those tolerances and sharing that information on labels is required by the California Food and Agriculture Code as well as the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act and violators are subject to criminal penalties.
Food that is exported to another country is also required to meet the health and safety codes in that country and as the world's largest berry distributor, Driscoll's must comply with a myriad of international regulations to ensure its produce makes it to stores around the world.
To do that, it uses an internal system known as a Food Safety and Compliance Tracking System (FACTS).
In October of 2022, Driscoll's received a second notice in three months from the Canadian Food Inspection Agency (CFIA) about higher than legally allowed levels of Bifenthrin, a synthetic insecticide developed from pyrethins found in chrysanthemum flowers, found on Driscoll's produce entering Canada shared the suit.
According to the suit, recently-hired David Harada sent an email to his regional supervisors that at least two of Driscoll's growers were violating pesticide label limits and just days later, Driscoll's Senior Agronomist Felix Zorita replied to the email stating, "Please read David Harada's (Our Agronomy extension and PCA) email below. We don't want to draw any early conclusions, but if the over limits are confirmed this is something that needs to be addressed. Please help."
Mr. Harada then confirmed that two other growers had violated pesticide label limits and shared that he believed others may be in violation of safety regulations in an email to supervisors on November 8, 2022, the suit detailed.
The next day, the suit relayed that Driscoll's Southern California Food Safety and Compliance Manager Vladimir Guardado replied to Mr. Harada's email acknowledging his findings stating, "According to the information [sent by Mr. Harada the day before], there is evidence that growers (ranches in question) did not following recommendations of the labels, which is the law".
Mr. Harada continued his investigation and shared in an email with his superviors on November 18, 2022, that four additional growers were in violation of pesticide label laws, growing the number of non-compliant growers to eight, stated the suit.
"Driscoll's has a stringent International Food Safety program in place," boasts Driscoll's Frequently Asked Questions webpage. "Our program ensures that our berries are produced with the highest standards of safety regardless of where they are grown. Driscoll's has imposed upon itself and the independent farmers who grow Driscoll's berries, a comprehensive program of third-party audits, product testing, and grower education."
According to the civil suit, Driscoll's Director of Agronomy/Nursery Brian Hostert had a call with Mr. Harada in November of 2022, where he asked what level of plausible deniability the company had regarding the multiple violations discovered and shared by Mr. Harada and external safety warnings sent to the company.
Mr. Harada explained in the civil suit that he was, "surprised by Hostert's request because DRISCOLL’S would be hard-pressed to deny the violations as it had documents in its possession evidencing the violations", including the emails Mr. Harada had already shared with supervisors, and that the focus on maintaining profits rather than public safety alarmed him.
Nevertheless, Mr. Harada continued investigating and sharing his findings with his supervisors.
In June of 2023, Mr. Harada and Driscoll's acting manager of Food Safety and Compliance prepared and presented a PowerPoint presentation stating that at least 27 growers were violating pesticide label laws and explaining the risk of fines and reputational damage the company was facing noted the suit.
The next month, Mr. Harada was tasked by a groups of supervisors, including Mr. Hostert, the advisor who had already asked Mr. Harada about the level of Driscoll's plausible deniability regarding the violations in November of 2022, with solving all of the issues leading to the pesticide label violations at Driscoll's growers detailed the suit.
A situation that Mr. Harada noted would make him the point person on a problem he and external regulators had been warning Driscoll's about for months at that point.
"HARADA felt that he was being set up to be the scapegoat for these issues and that he was being retaliated against for his disclosures," explained the civil suit. "HARADA believed that in order to fix
all the issues with DRISCOLL'S growers, his superiors should make the public aware of the violations of law and the potential harms resulting therefrom."
Even internal and third-parties began to note the risk inherent in Driscoll's response to selling produce with unlawful levels of pesticide residue.
On August 30, 2023, Driscoll's own risk analysis personnel and a third-party product quality control company, RQA Inc., met with Mr. Harada and other employees about the pesticide label violations identified by Mr. Harada stated the civil suit.
In early October of 2023, RQA Inc. sent its report on pesticide application at Driscoll's growers to the company which confirmed Mr. Harada's findings and that a "significant number of pesticide applications" over the legal limit noted the suit.
"Driscoll's primary concern is for the wholesomeness of our product and the safety of berry consumers," shared the company's Frequently Asked Questions webpage. "For this reason, any pesticide used must be in compliance with federal and state laws, and must comply with the registration policies of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (US EPA). They must also be within the legal tolerances enforced by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (US FDA). To reduce the use of pesticides, Driscoll's independent farmers use an Integrated Pest Management (IPM) method, which uses a combination of natural and synthetic means to reduce disease and control pests."
During the first half of 2024, Driscoll's began to receive multiple reports from Canadian companies and consumers that people were starting to get sick from Driscoll's produce.
In March of 2024, Sysco Corporation warned Driscoll's that its produce had been flagged more than once by Canadian officials with the CFIA for excessive amounts of pesticides the suit stated.
"As a manufacturer/supplier of the food, it is your responsibility to ensure that the products you supply to Sysco Canada meet Safe Food for Canadians Regulations," warned the multinational food distributor in March of 2024. "Sysco does not modify or transform your product and therefore, your firm remains responsible for ensuring the food safety and SFCR [Safe Food for Canadians Regulations] requirements are met for your Canadian labelling requirements, and preventive controls."
By May of 2024, Driscoll's was exchanging emails with the CFIA regarding a "strong smell" coming off of the company's strawberries and that at least one consumer "felt dizzy and had headaches after consuming" noted the suit.
Later the same month, Mr. Harada exchanged emails with Driscoll's Vice President of Sales for Canada, Casey Rose, and Driscoll's Director of Canada Sales, Michael DeSimone regarding changes made to the FACTS system regarding two chemicals because the change, "may adversely affect Sales" detailed the civil suit.
According to the civil suit, Mr. Rose explained his primary concern about the changes stating, "I am concerned this will greatly affect our plans with Canadian Business, especially in a peak time period."
Below is a screenshot of the entire email, including multiple Driscoll's employee recipients, where Mr. Rose notes his primary concerns about the changes intended to improve the safety for consumers shared by Mr. Harada with Your New Channel.
Eventually, Mr. Harada found that the FACTS system Driscoll's and its growers used to verify safe pesticide uses and labelling wasn't just out of date, it was entirely removed years before.
"In 2022, DRISCOLL'S removed the Canadian pesticide restriction rules in FACTS [Food Safety and Compliance System] as to PHIs [pre-harvest intervals] and MRLs [maximum residue limits] for exports to Canada," stated the civil suit. "This action was taken at the direction of DRISCOLL'S Vice President of Food Safety, William Brodegard. Thereafter, DRISCOLL'S exports (and sales) to Canada soared. Not only were safeguards removed but no previous data was available. By DRISCOLL'S own estimates, approximately more than fifty percent of all shipments to Canada from 2022 to 2024 had fruit that exceeded Canadian MRLs. In total, this equated to nearly $100,000,000 of possibly tainted shipments to Canada."
In April of 2024, Mr. Harada also found that information in FACTS about the degradation curve for Captan, an analysis of how long it takes for the fungicide to wear down to safe levels used to properly label produce, was inaccurate and should not be used when exporting produce to Canada shared the civil suit.
In fact, Mr. Harada's report regarding the the inaccuracy called into question "all degradation rate studies and determinations" across Driscoll's FACTS program added the suit.
The civil suit noted that on August 14 and August 21, 2024, the CFIA once again reached out to Driscoll's about their imported strawberries noting, "an excessive amount of Bifenthrin and Captan on DRISCOLL'S strawberries being imported into Canada."
On December 5, 2024, Mr. Harada met with Driscoll's Vice President Ryan Commons to outline all of his concerns including the removal of internal audits in September of 2024 which would put liability regarding violations on the shoulders of growers instead of the company, nursery contaminations in the United States and Mexico, the dangerous and inaccurate labels on produce heading to Canada, and the over application of pesticides above the legal limits set in California state law detailed the civil suit.
The same day, Driscoll's received a fourth notice of excessive amounts of Bifenthrin on Driscoll's produce in Canada stated the suit.
"Driscoll's has a stringent Global Food Safety program in place," stated the company's Frequently Asked Questions webpage. "Our Global Food Safety program ensures that our berries are produced with the highest standards of safety regardless of where they’re grown. The independent farmers who grow Driscoll's berries must strictly adhere to our Food Safety program. To ensure compliance, Driscoll's conducts over 2,500 audits annually at fields, packing houses and coolers."
On February 20, 2025, Mr. Harada sent an email to Mr. Brodegard asking that Canadian export standards be put back into FACTS, but during a meeting about the request, the civil suit shared that Mr. Brodegard, "stated he would like to avoid changes to the MRLs/PHIs standards for Canada exports in order to ensure
that there were no disruptions in DRISCOLL'S supply chain and sales."
In March and April of 2025, Mr. Harada began to have meeting with Driscoll's Internal Audit group regarding the pesticide labeling violations and during one meeting, the group shared that, "more than fifty percent of all shipments to Canada from 2022 to 2024 had fruit that exceeded Canadian" import standards stated the civil suit.
By early April, it wasn't just the Canadian government alerting Driscoll's that people were starting to get sick from its produce.
On April 2 and April 4, 2025, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration sent Driscoll's two separate notices about people getting sick from eating the company's produce shared the civil suit.
Your News Channel reached out to the Food and Drug Administration for more information about the notices and its response will be added to this article when it is received.
On April 7, 2025, Sysco Corporation again informed Driscoll's that the CFIA had notified them that Driscoll's strawberries had "non-conforming levels of pesticides" and in response, Driscoll's Vice President of Food Safety informed Sysco that Driscoll's was amending its FACTS system to "address potential problems" without disclosing that he had authorized the removal of Canadian pesticide rules from the same system years before explained the civil suit.
On April 18, 2025, Driscoll's Internal Audit group determined during a Teams meeting that included Mr. Harada, that Mr. Brodegard's earlier response to Sysco Corporation was "not credible" noted the suit.
On May 6, 2025, Mr. Harada emailed his supervisors that he would not sign the Panera Food Addendum and Expectation Manual because he, "knew that DRISCOLL'S had not met all written regulations as he had raised issues regarding MRL over tolerances, removal of MRL/PHI Data, and likely violations of Federal law (Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act) and State Law (California Food and Agriculture Code)".
The same day, Mr. Harada emailed Mr. Brodegard stating, "Driscoll's Inc. has exposed many people to these toxic products and has intentionally failed to tell them about" regarding the compliance conditions Mr. Brodegard had previously removed from the FACTS system and the fallout from shipping unsafe produce noted the civil suit.
Mr. Brodegard responded via email by asking for explicit instances where, "Driscoll's has shipped product that does not follow the label directions" to which Mr. Harada noted, "I am aware that Driscoll's Inc. was either on notice or should have been on notice of an over tolerance of pesticides and over application. This was evident from the notifications per the CFIA over tolerances reported from our customers and prior information I brought forth in 2023 regarding the over applications. Moreover, Driscoll's Inc. has the ability to determine over applications and when products should be in compliance per the FACTS system, however the values were erased at your discretion in 2022."
"As for your question of whether I am aware of an instance where fruit containing toxic levels of chemicals was knowingly shipped to Canada, I cannot answer that because of your decision to erase MRL/PHI Data which caused product to be shipped regardless of MRL values," Mr. Harada noted again before adding, "It is impossible for me to answer your question about Driscoll's knowledge about an MRL exceedance that was not reported because of your decision to erase MRL/PHI Data in FACTS. Without this data, it is impossible to track which shipments exceed the Maximum Residue Limits."
According to the civil suit, by early May of 2025, food safety complaints about Driscoll's produce began to increase and by mid-May, Driscoll's announced that Mr. Brodegard was no longer with the company.
The next day, Mr. Harada informed Driscoll's Chief Operating Office Sandor Nagy during a meeting that he was, "unwilling to take part in any efforts by DRISCOLL'S to conceal these issues unless and until DRISCOLL'S publicly disclosed its knowledge of the overapplication of pesticides on its products and that it issued a recall of the produce."
Mr. Harada followed that meeting up with emails to Mr. Nagy the following day stating he would provide no further assistance to Driscoll's efforts to coverup the issues after being asked previously to come up with ways that the company could minimize its exposure, including plans to blame its growers explained the civil suit and detailed emails shared by Mr. Harada with Your News Channel.
The civil suit noted that on May 28, 2025, Driscoll's Vice President of Sales for Canada wrote to coworkers, "Canada eligible fruit continues to haunt me and enter my nightmares…While I do appreciate the consistent review of MRL's and degradation curves, is this really and has it been a problem for us at current levels?"
The Canadian Food Inspection Agency sent at least its fifth warning to Driscoll's regarding consumers finding a chemical taste when consuming the company's produce on June 23, 2025.
Your News Channel reached out to the Canadian Food Inspection Agency to confirm the claims made in the civil suit and for more information and its response will be added to this article when it is received.
On June 24, 2025, Costco Canada informed Driscoll's that it had received complaints from ten of its warehouses regarding Driscoll's berries having a chemical/nail polish taste which was a "major concern" for the Canadian company to which Driscoll's Director of Canada sales wrote to coworkers, "This seems like an overreaction to be throwing away entire pallets of product over one consumer complaint about flavor profile, but I want to do our due diligence here" shared the civil suit.
Mr. Harada's civil suit shared that his mental health had suffered during the years-long process and he sought professional help by June of 2025.
In late August, Mr. Harada received a reprimand for "failing to perform his duties" which he believed to be retaliatory in nature and he was increasingly excluded from activities he had participated in earlier in his employment.
Despite becoming increasingly ostracized in the workplace, on September 4, 2025, Mr. Harada was tasked with preparing an action plan for Driscoll's to share with Sysco Corporation regarding the dangerous conditions of its produce reaching Canadian markets noted the civil suit.
Mr. Harada declined to prepare such a report until Driscoll's publicly stated that it had removed the Canada-specific compliance measures from its internal tracking system in 2022, and reiterated his concerns about continued violations of state, federal, and international pesticide safety laws stated the civil suit.
The civil suit noted that on September 10, 2025, Driscoll's Chief Operating Officer emailed Mr. Harada that he was being reprimanded for his decision to be, "absent from matters of MRL compliance" to which Mr. Harada asked in an emailed response, "I am to understand that you are requiring my participation in the MRL Compliance Project meetings knowing that Driscoll's has violated the law such that I would be complicit in this cover-up."
By late September, Mr. Harada was placed on a performance improvement plan for a "variety of workplace issues" directly related to his disclosures the civil suit argued.
According to the civil suit, Driscoll's "constructively terminated" Mr. Harada on October 1, 2025.
The civil suit concluded by requesting that the courts award him unspecified general and specific damages, a civil penalty of up to $10,000 for each violation of the California Labor Code, coverage of his attorney's fees, and punitive damages as allowed by law.
Your News Channel reached out to Driscoll's Inc. regarding the allegations made in the civil suit, including an extensive list of emails and notices noted in the civil suit as well as the multiple external notifications sent by the Canadian and American governments.
The company declined to respond to those direct questions and instead shared the following statement attributable to a Driscoll's spokesperson:
"While this lawsuit filed by a former employee is fundamentally an employment matter, we reject its allegations and will vigorously defend the company through the legal process.
As a family-owned company, food safety, quality, and integrity are fundamental to who we are. We maintain robust food safety and compliance programs and rigorous standards designed to support compliance with applicable regulatory requirements.
We encourage employees to raise concerns in good faith, and we prohibit retaliation against anyone who does so. Any concerns raised are reviewed through established processes, and we are confident in those processes and in the standards we uphold."
