67 replies to this topic

[Madam A. D-tor]

Great!

 

Not that the audits don't cost enough, but I am wondering how they'll re-coup costs.

I

thought that I had heard that the fee will be higher.

And BRC has introduced BRC Participate. Which cost the same price as one printed edition of the standard.

 

I saw today that the guidelines, which were previously free to download, now costs 25 pound?

[Madam A. D-tor]

I did not see the packaging standard available. 

 

go to BRC website

Go to bookstore

then choose packaging and materials

free to download standard is there

 

same for broker and agents, storage and distribution and consumer goods

[Snookie]

go to BRC website

Go to bookstore

then choose packaging and materials

free to download standard is there

 

same for broker and agents, storage and distribution and consumer goods

 

 

Thank you. 

[Tony-C]

And BRC has introduced BRC Participate. Which cost the same price as one printed edition of the standard.

 

For an annual subscription ..............

 

Regards,

 

Tony

[Snookie]

Got and it let me print several times as my printer messed up.  Yahooo.  That you could print it once was ridiculous. 

[MWidra]

Downloaded my copy and have looked it over.  It appears to be a pretty straightforward performance-based standard, as opposed to a compliance-based standard.

 

For those of you who are certified by BRC, or those who are experts in it, is that a correct assessment?  Do they mostly assess your compliance by whether or not you meet the goals of the standard?  That, of course, would not include those requirements that specifically state that you shall have this document or that one, or do things a certain way.  But I was not seeing as much of that as I had expected.

 

If that is the case, how much are your audit results based on the beliefs of the auditor as to what they think is OK or what they think is not OK?  Are the auditors open-minded when they see something that protects the product, but in a way that is not what they are used to seeing?

 

And does the phase of the moon come into play...?

 

Martha

[Charles.C]

Dear MWidra,

 

Looks like bait for some BRC-rants ?

 

TGIT

 

Rgds / Charles.C

[rp_kerrison]

Will there be an interpretation guide available as well?

[Tony-C]

Will there be an interpretation guide available as well?

 

 

BRC Global Standard for Food Safety Issue 7 can be downloaded here for free.

 

BRC Global Standard for Food Safety Issue 7 Interpretation Guideline UK Unlocked PDF Version is also available now (£40).

 

BRC Global Standard for Food Safety Issue 7 Download Options.png

 

Regards,

 

Tony

[rp_kerrison]

 

I am just wondering if the interpretation guide outlines in detail the changes between 6 and 7?  Or whether it is requirement to pick through it clause by clause and try to ascertain what the amendments are.  Would obviously be really useful to not have to go through 6 and 7 next to each other with a fine tooth-comb.  I have found a few presentations online that kind-of do this, but obviously want to be sure that I pick up every change that is present.

[cazyncymru]

I

thought that I had heard that the fee will be higher.

And BRC has introduced BRC Participate. Which cost the same price as one printed edition of the standard.

 

I saw today that the guidelines, which were previously free to download, now costs 25 pound?

 

 

Guidelines are £40!

 

They've also increased annual registration fee by £50

 

 

Lets say there are 1000 sites with a fee of £90 per site (for the book) that's nearly a million quid! they can't afford to lose that!

 

So I'm sure it will take each auditor an extra hour to get to each site. and the audit time will get longer. And now you can bolt the unannounced Adsa audit on for a fee!

 

God I'm cynical

Edited by cazyncymru, 08 January 2015 - 08:19 AM.

[Tech - QF]

Is it just me that is celebrating that section numbers have stayed the same as v6?

 

Little things please little minds.

[Dood]

Is it just me that is celebrating that section numbers have stayed the same as v6?

 

Little things please little minds.

Section number are the same, but working through a gap analysis at the moment and they have re-jigged some of the clause numbers

[cazyncymru]

No need to, someone did it already. can remember who though (but thank you!!)

Attached Files

•  BRC VER 7 Comments.docx   19.49KB   81 downloads

[infoiqc]

The money paid for the audit goes to the CB not to BRC so they can't recoup the missing cost of the standardby making the audit longer. They can increase the fees, but I think that lots of people will buy a copy since the free file can't be printed.

 

Gail

IQC

israel

[cazyncymru]

The money paid for the audit goes to the CB not to BRC so they can't recoup the missing cost of the standardby making the audit longer. They can increase the fees, but I think that lots of people will buy a copy since the free file can't be printed.

 

Gail

IQC

Israel

 

 

I've managed to print it.......twice!

[Dood]

No need to, someone did it already. can remember who though (but thank you!!)

This one was done for the draft consultation wasn't it, are we sure there are no additional changes? (However insignificant they might be)

 

edit: Looking through this document, there are things that don't match either the current v6 or v7.

 

Por exemple.

 

 

4.12.5 – NEW. Surplus customer branded products shall be disposed of in accordance with customer specific requirements. Customer brand names shall be removed from packed surplus products under the control of the factory before product enters the supply chain unless authorized by the customer. The way I read this, any packaging that has a customer, or company brand name on it, has to be removed from any food waste.

This is in neither of the copies on my desk. (Which are suitably covered in highlighter scribbles and notes :/ )

Edited by Dood, 08 January 2015 - 01:11 PM.

[infoiqc]

I've managed to print it.......twice!

 

The copy I downloaded from http://www.brcbooksh...e-7-uk-free-pdf

cannot be printed.

The ver. 6 can be printed

[cazyncymru]

This one was done for the draft consultation wasn't it, are we sure there are no additional changes? (However insignificant they might be)

 

edit: Looking through this document, there are things that don't match either the current v6 or v7.

 

Por exemple.

 

This is in neither of the copies on my desk. (Which are suitably covered in highlighter scribbles and notes :/ )

 

 

Feel free to do a GAP analysis and post for us!

[cazyncymru]

The copy I downloaded from http://www.brcbooksh...e-7-uk-free-pdf

cannot be printed.

The ver. 6 can be printed

 

 

MMM I can print it!

[Dood]

Feel free to do a GAP analysis and post for us!

I'm on it, nearly finished section 4. My eyes hurt.

[MWidra]

MMM I can print it!

Try opening the downloaded document and then doing a Save As.  This is a common problem with pdf documents that are downloaded either online or as email attachments.  If you do as Save As, then it becomes a different document somehow.

 

It's worth a try...

 

Martha

[MWidra]

Dear MWidra,

 

Looks like bait for some BRC-rants ?

 

TGIT

 

Rgds / Charles.C

LOL, Charles. C

 

I really am interested in hearing the experiences of people who are certified by any scheme before I select one or the other.  You can't get a free copy of the ISO standards that the FSSC standard uses, so it is hard to know what the standard actually says.  

 

But what any standard says is sometimes a bit different from how it is applied.  And, yes, different auditors have their own quirks and biases, but if the certifying agency sets guidelines on what can and can't be done, then these will have a limited impact on an audit.  The auditor may be a PIA to deal with, but they can't burn you unreasonably if the agency does not allow it.

 

So......PLEASE, give me your HONEST assessment of your experience with BRC.  I depend on this group to be honest, and brutally honest at times, for the betterment of food safety and to help each other out.

 

And if anyone uses FSSC, I would love to hear how it works and your opinion of it. 

 

For everyone, would you recommend using your current standard if it has good applicability to someone's situation?

 

Inquiring minds DO want to know, and I want to make the most informed decision that I can before I commit to one scheme or another.

 

I have ruled out SQF, BTW, because we could never meet one of their critical requirements because of the machinery that is used for our product.  It is just not a good fit for us.

 

Martha

[mgourley]

I did the comments that Dood referenced above. And yes, it was based upon the draft version.

Some numbering and language have indeed changed from the draft to the final issue.

 

Marshall

[it_rains_inside]

I just saved the PDF onto out network drive. Anyone of our managers are able to print the standard if they choose. 

 

We have not had a problem with limited printing.