IFS Section 1-2-4 KO N° 1 - Employee Awareness and Responsibility

Dear tarek,

Unfortunately not too many posters on this forum are using IFS.

I think the paragraph you quote refers to ensuring satisfactory communication between management and employees regarding aspects like policies and their implementation. This is a typical requirement in most FS systems. You might try a little searching on this forum for topics like "communication".

I have removed yr duplicate post.

Rgds / Charles.C

thanks a will try this search

1.2.4 KO n° 1:
The senior management shall ensure that employees are aware of their responsibilities related to food safety and quality and that mechanisms are in place to monitor the effectiveness of their operation. Such mechanisms shall be clearly identified and documented.

Thanks

The first part of your question seems quite straightforward. The quality manual (or similar document) should include the organization structure, roles and responsibilities relating to food safety and quality for different levels of employees from senior management to shop floor operators. At the very least this should be communicated, discussed and included in training to ensure it is thoroughly understood including the practicalities and not just the waffle. Not sure about the second part, perhaps this means ensuring people are doing what they are supposed to be doing and what they are supposed to be doing is effective in achieving the aims and objectives of the company policies.

Anyway that's my best shot, take it or leave it.

Shouldn't a consultant know this already.

Cheers,
Simon

Here is what our IFS auditor put against 1.2.4 last year:

The company ensured that employees were aware of their responsibilities via signed job descriptions. They monitored effectiveness via annual appraisals with the Factory Director for senior staff plus monthly evaluation of site nonconformities were used to highlight training needs/issues. All employees were trained on the job.

So Job Descriptions and Training seem to be key to this point.

p.s. no non conformances for us against this clause

Dear Monkeyman,

I apologise for the note of scepticism but you seem to be in the midst of a group of superbeings.

May i enquire as to the nature of yr process ?

Rgds / Charles.C

Here is what our IFS auditor put against 1.2.4 last year:

The company ensured that employees were aware of their responsibilities via signed job descriptions. They monitored effectiveness via annual appraisals with the Factory Director for senior staff plus monthly evaluation of site nonconformities were used to highlight training needs/issues. All employees were trained on the job.

So Job Descriptions and Training seem to be key to this point.

p.s. no non conformances for us against this clause

There are many ways to demonstrate conformity to this clause. I agree to the above as one of the methods available.

Dear Tarek

Signature in certain documents ( job description, instructions, training related to his/her job...) could be OK as to futfil this requirement. But in my opinion the best and effective way to achieve this purpose of the standard is by making visual checks from time to time on the floor line watching how the tasks are being carried out by the operators.
Regards
Esther

Dear all,

I agree with Esther, the assessment on the implementation is the most important point in my personal opinion. If during the audit, a lot of deviations identified by the auditor relating to the implementation of the procedures. The KO may be given according to this requirement although the papper works are well done.

Best regards,
Jason