Jump to content

  • Quick Navigation
Photo
- - - - -

Audit Consequence to Reoccurring non-conformances ?


  • You cannot start a new topic
  • Please log in to reply
3 replies to this topic

#1 rachelellis

rachelellis

    Grade - Active

  • IFSQN Active
  • 1 posts
  • 0 thanks
0
Neutral

  • United States
    United States

Posted 09 August 2018 - 01:37 PM

I am searching for some information on reoccurring non-conformances such has food and drink in the warehouse and footprints on product. 

 

I know the auditor will review the non-conformances from last audit at our next audit.  If these problems are found again will that be a 1 point deduction or a major because we haven't fully corrected the problem?

 

We are a large food distribution warehouse that selects products for grocery chain stores.  We completed our first SQF audit in Oct of last year.  We had non-conformances in the area of food and drink in warehouse the auditor found Halls cough drop wrapper in a lift and gum wrapper in trash can.  He also found footprints on product where selectors were standing on product to reach other products.  We have re-trained, communicated, added pick sticks to reach products, counseled and even hire people but we still find evidence of both non conformances. 

 

 



#2 boomboomkj@

boomboomkj@

    Grade - Active

  • IFSQN Active
  • 1 posts
  • 0 thanks
0
Neutral

  • United States
    United States

Posted 09 August 2018 - 02:48 PM

I assume you have documented all the corrective actions and the non-conformances are not from the same person. Some things require constant retraining, e.g., the proper wearing of hairnets. It's been my experience that the auditor will look at the fact that you are continuing to monitor the situation and are attempting to get it resolved. If the non-conformance is coming from the same person(s) then you will need to be able to show a reprimand or disciplinary action (which may require termination or perhaps transfer to another department) to prevent this from becoming a major.



#3 SQFconsultant

SQFconsultant

    SQFconsultant

  • IFSQN Principal
  • 873 posts
  • 188 thanks
60
Excellent

  • Panama
    Panama
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:We specialize in helping small to mid-sized food, logistic and packaging companies to develop & implement SQF Systems to achieve certification in a relatively short period of time. In addition we offer a low-cost highly effective eConsultant Subscription, SQF Compliance Reviews and Internal Auditor Training. Don't let our location throw you off - Our market is the United States.
    Call us to discuss your needs 800-546-1452

Posted 09 August 2018 - 04:08 PM

You really have to look at how things are graded on an audit - the definition of each one will help you in understand how those items could effect in the future.

 

As a former SQF Auditor if I were the same auditor on the 2nd year audit I would review the past audit - items not corrected and found again might escalate the grading, however with a wrapper and cough drop I doubt it - it is the footprints that say careless disregard for the intregrity of the products that manufacturers place in your care during storage that would concern me greatly and that could easily cause a rabbit hole search by an Auditor.

 

There is no grey area here - meaning you either fully correct a situation or not - there are no half points taking off for trying to correct.


Warm regards,

 

Glenn Oster

 

SQF Certification & Implementation Consultant

Serving clients in: USA, Centro America & Caribbean Islands

International Toll-Free: 800-546-1452

USA Skype Number: 772-646-4115

 

www.GlennOsterConsulting.com


#4 jcieslowski

jcieslowski

    Grade - MIFSQN

  • IFSQN Member
  • 103 posts
  • 38 thanks
8
Neutral

  • United States
    United States
  • Gender:Male

Posted 15 August 2018 - 04:13 PM

You need to get senior management to tell plant management that if you find repeat findings (especially for people standing on product) that the plant management is going to get in hot water.  They need to be supervising their employees to make sure that they're not contributing to a food safety risk.  It's just a management enforcement issue. 






0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users