Jump to content

  • Quick Navigation
Photo
- - - - -

Conical disposable cups


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

moshes

    Grade - AIFSQN

  • IFSQN Associate
  • 34 posts
  • 0 thanks
0
Neutral
  • Gender:Male
  • Location: Israel

Posted 27 September 2005 - 12:14 PM

In BRC/IOP 7.42 (B) is is written:
"Employers provide facilities for adequate storage of food and drink, including that brought from home. Drinking of water from purpose-made dispensers and/or by using
only disposable conical cups may be allowed provided it is confined to a designated area away from equipment". How this should be interpretated ?
Does it mean using only conical cups with conical bottoms (to prevent usage of self standing cups near the equipment ?)
We in Israel do not have production of conical cups with conical bottoms.
The way drinking water issue near equipment was trated before version 2 of BRC/IOP, was using personal one way closed bottles with either mineral or tap water.
What should be now used instead if this conflicts with the new requirments ?
Comments please.
:uhm:



Charles Chew

    Grade - FIFSQN

  • IFSQN Fellow
  • 1,178 posts
  • 52 thanks
8
Neutral

  • Malaysia
    Malaysia
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Malaysia
  • Interests:Food, food and food!

Posted 27 September 2005 - 04:04 PM

only disposable conical cups


Hi Moshes,
I find this issue rather silly and as a matter of fact becos it is so clearly stated that only disposable conical cups can be used, flat bottom ones would be a direct violation................ :doh:

This is when the standard can be so dangerous when compliant requirements are so clear and explicit that it brings along so other unknown or unexpected problems.............w/o discretional options extended.

IMO - If you are to follow the standard, you need to use conical bottom disposable cups (but I am not an expert in BRC-IOP) although I cannot resist giving my comments

Cheers
Charles Chew

Cheers,
Charles Chew
www.naturalmajor.com

Simon

    IFSQN...it's My Life

  • IFSQN Admin
  • 12,529 posts
  • 1318 thanks
721
Excellent

  • United Kingdom
    United Kingdom
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Manchester
  • Interests:Married to Michelle, Father of three boys (Oliver, Jacob and Louis). I enjoy cycling, walking and travelling, watching sport, especially football and Manchester United. Oh and I love food and beer and wine.

Posted 27 September 2005 - 09:27 PM

Hi Moshes,

I agree with Charles. It's a requirement and there's no way round it. :dunno:

Regards,
Simon


hand-pointing-down.gif
 
Get FREE bitesize education with IFSQN webinar recordings.
 
Download this handy excel for desktop access to over 140 Food Safety Friday's webinar recordings.
https://www.ifsqn.com/fsf/Free%20Food%20Safety%20Videos.xlsx

 
Check out IFSQN’s extensive library of FREE food safety videos
https://www.ifsqn.com/food_safety_videos.html

 

recommend-us-on-facebook.png


pacepavicius

    Grade - Active

  • IFSQN Associate
  • 10 posts
  • 3 thanks
0
Neutral

  • United Kingdom
    United Kingdom
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:UK

Posted 30 September 2005 - 07:21 AM

The Standard also says "purpose made dispensers". I believe the whole issue here is about control and assessment of the risks of spillage onto the product. Some water dispensers are designed so that cups of any description are not required.

My point is that while the Standard is quite prescriptive, there is some room for interpretation especially if the evaluator can be satisfied that there is no risk.

Peter


Peter Pacepavicius
Firecrest Consulting

Tel: +44 (0()1628 482709
Mob: +44 (0)77858 577466
E-mail: firecrest@onetel.com

Simon

    IFSQN...it's My Life

  • IFSQN Admin
  • 12,529 posts
  • 1318 thanks
721
Excellent

  • United Kingdom
    United Kingdom
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Manchester
  • Interests:Married to Michelle, Father of three boys (Oliver, Jacob and Louis). I enjoy cycling, walking and travelling, watching sport, especially football and Manchester United. Oh and I love food and beer and wine.

Posted 30 September 2005 - 07:30 AM

Good point Peter. ;)


hand-pointing-down.gif
 
Get FREE bitesize education with IFSQN webinar recordings.
 
Download this handy excel for desktop access to over 140 Food Safety Friday's webinar recordings.
https://www.ifsqn.com/fsf/Free%20Food%20Safety%20Videos.xlsx

 
Check out IFSQN’s extensive library of FREE food safety videos
https://www.ifsqn.com/food_safety_videos.html

 

recommend-us-on-facebook.png


Bonno

    Grade - AIFSQN

  • IFSQN Associate
  • 34 posts
  • 0 thanks
0
Neutral
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Derbyshire
  • Interests:Web design, Football (football team linked above), Music, Reading, Films - usual stuff really.<br /><br />Would like to give golf a try but have not got around to it yet.<br /><br />I have also heard that having weekends off is quite good, so intend to give that a try soon and see if I like it!

Posted 30 September 2005 - 10:46 AM

My point is that while the Standard is quite prescriptive, there is some room for interpretation especially if the evaluator can be satisfied that there is no risk.



I think that you have raised the point exactly. The opinion of the evaluator, together with their interpretation of the Standard is what will be the final answer.

Unfortunately the BRC standard is unlike any of the other standards that we work with at our site in that variation in interpretation is avoided at all costs. It has been written with all differing circumstances in mind - but this can never really be possible and in some cases compliance does not appear to make any sense at all.
While you are required to assess your risks and initiate controls were necessary/possible - should these assessments not identify a hazard, but the Standard requires controls, the Standard wins out and the controls will have to be implemented?

I have voiced my concerns regarding controls demanded where no risk is present, but in the end the Standard is recited and controls enacted.

Your mind is a parachute, it doesn't work when it's closed....Frank Zappa

Simon

    IFSQN...it's My Life

  • IFSQN Admin
  • 12,529 posts
  • 1318 thanks
721
Excellent

  • United Kingdom
    United Kingdom
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Manchester
  • Interests:Married to Michelle, Father of three boys (Oliver, Jacob and Louis). I enjoy cycling, walking and travelling, watching sport, especially football and Manchester United. Oh and I love food and beer and wine.

Posted 30 September 2005 - 10:56 AM

I have voiced my concerns regarding controls demanded where no risk is present, but in the end the Standard is recited and controls enacted.


Hi Bonno,

Remember the Standard does afford you the opportunity of applying for an exemption (or is it exclusion?) from a requirement of the Standard. This should be justified by documented hazard analysis and submitted to your Auditor; you can then have a debate as to whether there is or isn't a risk. Ultimately the auditor will decide whether to accept or reject the exclsuion.

Regards,
Simon

hand-pointing-down.gif
 
Get FREE bitesize education with IFSQN webinar recordings.
 
Download this handy excel for desktop access to over 140 Food Safety Friday's webinar recordings.
https://www.ifsqn.com/fsf/Free%20Food%20Safety%20Videos.xlsx

 
Check out IFSQN’s extensive library of FREE food safety videos
https://www.ifsqn.com/food_safety_videos.html

 

recommend-us-on-facebook.png


kerguilloten

    Grade - Active

  • IFSQN Active
  • 3 posts
  • 0 thanks
0
Neutral

Posted 05 October 2005 - 03:08 PM

I find this issue rather silly and as a matter of fact becos it is so clearly stated that only disposable conical cups can be used, flat bottom ones would be a direct violation..

I agree with you Chew, I've heard this story from a plastic cups producer who had to choose between stopping production of non conical cups or being BRC/IoP certified...
Moreover, why conical and not spherical bottom, easier to thermoform ? Most of the conical cups (available at a reasonable price) are made of paper, another biolo-illogical choice.
When it's written "No cups close to production areas" and you give evidence that it's done, I consider that my HACCP is correctly monitored.
Let's have a toast with a cristal glass a champagne to congratulate Simon for this warm place for smile and reason



Charles Chew

    Grade - FIFSQN

  • IFSQN Fellow
  • 1,178 posts
  • 52 thanks
8
Neutral

  • Malaysia
    Malaysia
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Malaysia
  • Interests:Food, food and food!

Posted 05 October 2005 - 04:07 PM

No cups close to production areas" and you give evidence that it's done, I consider that my HACCP is correctly monitored.

Kerg - I cannot agree more with that statement. You have taken the appropriate "preventative action" to nullify the BRC Standard. Congratulations :beer: and that would be the perfect answer to any auditor's query.

It has been written with all differing circumstances in mind - but this can never really be possible and in some cases compliance does not appear to make any sense at all.


Bonno - If you look at the ISO 22000 prescriptions, the demand for compliance on some "redundant issues" is
no different from that required by BRC. So I would rather have the form there to fulfill the auditor's unpreditable mindset and through annual reviews, highlight the rediculous policy and to rub salt onto wounds, let it sink in for a couple of years (you decide when), revalidate the program and take it off as inappropriate in the light of the org's process environment where the HACCP Plan remains effective and current. End of the subject!

I have voiced my concerns regarding controls demanded where no risk is present, but in the end the Standard is recited and controls enacted.


Bonno - "Uncertainty is the root cause of discretional power" - I have resigned to this fact :thumbdown: :doh: :crybaby:

Charles Chew

Cheers,
Charles Chew
www.naturalmajor.com

Simon

    IFSQN...it's My Life

  • IFSQN Admin
  • 12,529 posts
  • 1318 thanks
721
Excellent

  • United Kingdom
    United Kingdom
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Manchester
  • Interests:Married to Michelle, Father of three boys (Oliver, Jacob and Louis). I enjoy cycling, walking and travelling, watching sport, especially football and Manchester United. Oh and I love food and beer and wine.

Posted 09 October 2005 - 09:04 PM

Let's have a toast with a cristal glass a champagne to congratulate Simon for this warm place for smile and reason


Cheers. :beer:
BTW Moshes, what are you going to do? :uhm:

hand-pointing-down.gif
 
Get FREE bitesize education with IFSQN webinar recordings.
 
Download this handy excel for desktop access to over 140 Food Safety Friday's webinar recordings.
https://www.ifsqn.com/fsf/Free%20Food%20Safety%20Videos.xlsx

 
Check out IFSQN’s extensive library of FREE food safety videos
https://www.ifsqn.com/food_safety_videos.html

 

recommend-us-on-facebook.png


Brian Fowler

    Grade - Active

  • IFSQN Associate
  • 18 posts
  • 2 thanks
0
Neutral

  • United Kingdom
    United Kingdom

Posted 14 October 2005 - 01:05 PM

Cheers. :beer: BTW Moshes, what are you going to do? :uhm:

Once upon a time I was an Engineer (some fifty years since). and had to practice mechanical drawings.I believe that a truncated cone is still a cone, albeit with a flat bottom.I think Peter P is absolutely right, let the evaluator use his ability


okido

    Grade - MIFSQN

  • IFSQN Member
  • 205 posts
  • 14 thanks
1
Neutral

  • Netherlands
    Netherlands
  • Gender:Male

Posted 18 October 2005 - 09:59 AM


In a food environment I can imagine the hazard from cups standing around above fillers etc.
In the plastic food packaging business this is something different, who can come up with an example that cylindrical cups are a potential hazard if you apply the rules below.

1. cylindrical cups are used in a confined area's shielded from production by glass and walls
2. it is not allowed to eat or drink in production area's

Goodluck Moshes.

No worries, Okido


Simon

    IFSQN...it's My Life

  • IFSQN Admin
  • 12,529 posts
  • 1318 thanks
721
Excellent

  • United Kingdom
    United Kingdom
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Manchester
  • Interests:Married to Michelle, Father of three boys (Oliver, Jacob and Louis). I enjoy cycling, walking and travelling, watching sport, especially football and Manchester United. Oh and I love food and beer and wine.

Posted 18 October 2005 - 08:54 PM


In a food environment I can imagine the hazard from cups standing around above fillers etc.
In the plastic food packaging business this is something different, who can come up with an example that cylindrical cups are a potential hazard if you apply the rules below.

1. cylindrical cups are used in a confined area's shielded from production by glass and walls
2. it is not allowed to eat or drink in production area's

Goodluck Moshes.

No worries, Okido


Sounds good to me Okido.

hand-pointing-down.gif
 
Get FREE bitesize education with IFSQN webinar recordings.
 
Download this handy excel for desktop access to over 140 Food Safety Friday's webinar recordings.
https://www.ifsqn.com/fsf/Free%20Food%20Safety%20Videos.xlsx

 
Check out IFSQN’s extensive library of FREE food safety videos
https://www.ifsqn.com/food_safety_videos.html

 

recommend-us-on-facebook.png





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users