9 replies to this topic

[Jim Wade]

Here's another standard - THE SMALL BUSINESS STANDARD

It is described as a "basic standard for quality management systems in micro, small or medium sized businesses where certification is not a requirement".

Words fail me - for the moment, at least.

Comments?

rgds Jim
www.bin.co.uk
0118 987 5120
077 88 6666 08

Attached Files

•  small_business_standard.pdf   31.49KB   86 downloads

[Simon]

Yippee! Another badge - quick I need to start a micro business. Oh no! I've just realised it doesn't come with a badge - well what's the point of that then?

Once a cub scout always a cub scout?

Simon

[rheath]

Yet another to add to the long list.

FEFCO are due to launch their GMP Standard at the end of September, an extract from FEFCO release as:

"In the past weeks the GMP task force has made its final touches on the International Good Manufacturing Practices Standard for the Corrugated and solid board industries. The standard is our industries answer at the developments in the field of Food Safety."

I do not wish to undermine my industries experiences & knowledge in this field but I can not help but feel that FEFCO have missed the boat & do not realise what IOP stands for.

The BRC/IOP standard whole inception was developed around participation & more significantly the buy in of all stakeholders including customers, packaging businesses (including significant corrugated representation), certification experts etc etc.

Why release a new standard when the BRC/IOP scheme is being recognised and widely adopted?

My company has held AIB Accreditation, RSPH Accreditation & now holds the BRC/IOP certification. Of all these, the BRC approach is the most pragmatic in that we are focused on preventing contamination of the product (not that the length of the grass outside the factory grounds is greater than 15mm - one of my favourite non conformances).

I hope that the BRC businesses maintain their purchasing position and insist upon what I believe is the best standard.

I would be interested to know, will packaging buyers recognise this new standard as an alternative to BRC/IOP?

As I have had my rant it has all clicked into place - BRC/IOP has personally meant to me, less wasted time, less customer audits, better management controls (effectively less work for me), less food safety related complaints.

This means that there must be a pool of quality professionals needing something to do.. I know; lets write a new standard!!

That's my rant over; Going home for my long weekend..

[Simon]

Very interesting post Richard.

I was on an FDA audit the other day - being audited to yet another standard, so I know exactly what you mean.

The everlasting problem with certification standards too much self-interest...why? Because there's bucket loads of money involved.

Like you say AIB, ADAS, RSPH, and then we think we've got agreement at last and then FEFCO - I don't know what the acronym stands for but I can guess the F & C.

When we can't get a single standard in one industry, in one country, what hope is there? For all the faults at least ISO have managed to develop a range of worldwide standards - on paper anyway.

FUFCO aside, The BRC/IoP Packaging Standard is very strong in the UK now, but any hopes of it being adopted EU-wide or worldwide will not happen no matter how good it is. The Germans have apparently written their own version, it's almost word for word BRC/IoP but it's their own. Perhaps we should have left the 'British' out of the title.

I think ISO 22000 will be the one to unite the world on food safety, just because it is an ISO standard. That's why I think we need to keep a close eye on it - especially if we export!

Cheers,
Simon

[mikelond]

Without wishing to throw a curve-ball into this arena, I had a recent discussion with a very eminent food hygiene auditor who had input into the development of the BRC/IOP (apparently pronounced berkyop - wasn't that the name of an american detective series in the 70's?).
Anyway, his understanding was that the upcoming review of the standard is to broaden the scope to include the supply of all packaging materials to the major multiples, not just primary/tertiary food packaging.
As this stands, would this not cover what FEFCO are trying to implement by way of a separate standard? I'm afraid I don't have any further details as to the extent of the potential increase of the scope, but concerns were raised as to the effectiveness of the subsequent BRC/IOP standard with regard to direct food contact packaging as a result.

as a footnote, isn't FEFCO an anagram of the much used Irish expletive FECOF?

[Simon]

Very funny, I like your style Mike. Its amazing how much interest the new SMALL BUSINESS STANDARD has provoked - it must be a winner!

During the PIRA seminar earlier this year Terry Robbins discussed the proposed changes to BERKYOP with regard to widening the scope to encompass non-food.

See this thread: PIRA Seminar

Anyway its bank holiday weekend so I'm going to FECOF and grab myself a cup of COFFE...

:D
Simon

[Franco]

Hi Saferpakers.
Not being able to find out the added value of such standard.
Maybe it could be useful, but IMHO small businesses don't need such standards.
They HAVE to stay on the market regardless their Management point of view, they HAVE to satisfy their stakeholders.
Otherwise they are simply out of the market.
Sometimes they have five or ten employees. It's non sense.
Large businesses are more prone to deviate from quality culture and customer focus: they need standards to keep it in mind.

[Franco]

The Germans have apparently written their own version, it’s almost word for word BRC/IoP but it’s their own.  Perhaps we should have left the 'British' out of the title.

Simon, are you talking about http://www.food-care.info ?

Maybe it's my browser's fault, but I'm not able to find out a single English word in the Website.

Perhaps our German Saferpaker could help us.

Regards. Franco

[Simon]

Yes Franco,

I believe that www.food-care.info is the home of the International Food Standard (IFS). If you want to go global with a standard I think having 'International' in the title rather than 'British' is a good idea. However, they do recognise valid BRC Certificates as sufficient to meet the requirements of IFS (is that because it's the same standard?).

Anyway I translated some of the FAQ's of the website into English using the google taskbar. It's not perfect English but you should get the picture:
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
What is IFS?

German retailers developed the IFS for auditing of self-marks, International Food standard. Starting point for the standard is The Global Food Safety Initiative (GFSI), those in the year 2000 for the improvement of food security by the trade association CIES. The was created global Food Business forum. 40 trading ventures from Europe, North America and Australia belong to this initiative and in a task Force united. A goal of the GFSI is the definition of international safety standards for enterprises, which supply the trade with self-marks.

For this purpose the GFSI arranged key criteria, on which food safety standards are based.

How is the IFS arranged?

The IFS internationally Food standard is divided into the following chapters:
- Requirements of the quality management system,
- Responsibilities of the management,
- Resource management,
- Production process and
- Measurements, analyses, improvements.

Which German retail trade companies support the IFS?

All retail trade companies, which cooperate in the BDH committee food right and quality assurance. These are among other things. Metro AG, REWE, EDEKA, ALDI, Tengelmann, AVA, tegut..., Saliently, Lidl, save, COO (Switzerland), Migros (Switzerland) and globe.

Is the IFS used also outside of Germany?

Yes, French retail trade companies, e.g. Carrefour, system U, Monoprix etc. co-operate with the German trade and starting from autumn 2003 also their suppliers will request to let be audited after IFS.

With further countries, e.g. Poland, Oestereich, Belgium, the Netherlands, England and Italy first discussions run. A goal is it to establish the IFS in Europe.

If already a BRC Audit is present, is sufficient this or must in each case after IFS an audit be made?

Already available BRC audits are recognized, as long as the BRC audit is valid. With the next regular audit then an IFS audit is to be provided.

Are there differences between IFS and BRC?

The substantial differences between IFS and BRC are appropriate in the range training courses -, the evaluation and documentation system.

- The IFS permits a differentiated evaluation of the individual requirements. The BRC permits against it only an existence or a Nichtbestanden. Thereby the supplier receives a clearly state-abler audit report, which can be used in particular to the further improvement process in the enterprise.
- The measure catalog is not with the IFS in contrast to the BRC a component of the evaluation. The IFS audit is a deadline evaluation.
- Beyond that the international Food standard is after 45011 accredited a standard, with the associated consequences for the depth of the audit as well as to temporal connection and thus the care character between enterprise and certification company.

Does it give to buy internationally the Food standard?

The IFS is in printed form in the languages German, English, Italian, Netherlands and Polish. A Spanish and French version is in work.
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Not perfect I know but probably no worse than my usual waffle.

Simon

[Franco]

Anyway I translated some of the FAQ's of the website into English using the google taskbar.  It's not perfect English but you should get the picture.

I used to say perfect before being involved in Quality Assurance, but now I say only thank you very much Simon.