8 replies to this topic

[john123]

Here's one I might be able to bounce off of you guys... The background is that we are a 3rd party toller, primarily dehydrated vegetables. We warehouse, mill, grind, blend, package and ship products owned by our customers on their behalf.

Were still developing our training matrix. Right now, it consists of a spreadsheet listing the various positions in our small company, and the items that will be mandatory for training. I've attached a copy below. We plan on following up this document with a form for each individual employee noting the date they were trained in the item, leaving room to retrain as items are updated. Actual training is documented on an additional form and filed by date (allows for group training to occur and be signed off upon).

What I'm struggling with is what level of detail to go through during training of each category. For example, "cleaning procedures" is a broad category. We have 10 production lines in our facility that all feature different pieces of equipment, and the steps to clean each line is detailed in a procedure. The same employees running the equipment are responsible for cleaning it between projects. Would each employee have to be signed off on individual lines? Could employees be trained in an "overview" of the cleaning principals, such as what we define is clean, that management will direct the minor disassembly required, etc? I'm at a loss as to what detail needs to go into the training record.

Likewise with what we're calling our "FM Control" program. Our FM program is 15 separate policies and procedures, from the policy on wood control to procedures on how to test the metal detector. Obviously the MD procedure gets covered on CCP Monitoring, but could I create an overview of FM Control detailing the highlights of the policies? Or should our new hires be reading all 15 procedures in order to get signed off on FM?

Thoughts?

Attached Files

•  Food Safety Training Matrix Sample 1.16.13.xlsx   18.1KB   565 downloads

[HACCP Mentor]

The purpose of your training is to make sure that your staff know what they need to do and are competent in the activity. If say for your cleaning example - there is no major difference in how you would clean the different ie disassemble machine, wash, sanitise, dry, re-assemble machine - I would do an overview to cover the how, when, what, why and who as it relates to the training topic. This would be the same for your FM training.

To check out how you can determine the competence of the trained material check out this link - http://www.haccpment...ing-competency/

[bacon]

Here is what I implemented (and see attached) deployed to department supervisors.


2.9.7.1 Training Skills Register SOP



Filling out the matrix below (hard copy) will cover SQF Training requirements:



1) The “Training Matrix” will be in the front of a training section your Department Training Manual

a. It must be available for the SQF auditor in your department office.

2) This Matrix will hereafter be a hand-written hard copy only (anybody new, you can hand write their name/skill in)

3) Please place the DATE and your INITIAL in the box under the Employee name/skillset when the training is verified as COMPLETE (the trainee is competent).

4) Any outside training, please note it in the matrix with your INITIAL/DATE and have the separate sign-off as reference for the training.

a. replace the outside training documents when it happens again and update the Matrix.

5) Any Training Skill listed vertically across the top with “(QA)” in front is in the QA Training Manual.



The trainee may or may not have to read the training material (per your/the trainer’s judgment), as we know quite well that, depending on the caliber of the employee and the complexity of the instructions:

a. some will be read,

b. some will be “on-the-job-explaining” type of training



All job training material must be in the training manual for reference. It is up to you to decide HOW to “effectively” train them.



The matrix is necessary for the audit and the auditor will randomly interview employees to validate. Hence, the bottom line is that the employees must understand their tasks/training skills: this makes the training documents in the manual tools for the trainer to keep track of employee training, not just a bureaucratic need for the audit.



This can also address:

a. Expectations for work performance/annual reviews

b. Continuity/consistency of training



Note: You may or may not want a “sign off” from the employee. For the purposes of the audit, the employee signature is not needed at this point. But you, as a manager of the employees, may want them to be signed by the employees to impart commitment from the employee.



















_________________________________________________________________________________________________

2.9.7.1 A training skills register describing who has been trained in relevant skills shall be maintained.

The register shall indicate the:



i. Participant name; (name on the matrix)

ii. Skills description; (in the binder)

iii. Description of the training provided; (skill on the matrix)

iv. Date training completed; (date on the matrix)

v. Trainer or training provider; and (initial on the matrix)

vi. Supervisor’s verification the training was completed and that the trainee is competent to complete the required tasks. (initial on the matrix)

Attached Files

•  1 - Trainaing Matrix - Sanitation.xlsx   14.39KB   490 downloads

[Charles.C]

Dear john123,

I'm not familiar with any SQF specific training requirements but i can offer a few comments from experience.

I'm not sure any one-solution-for-all-processes exists.

Yr post indicates a primary difficulty with respect to sheer workload. For a large number of lines, some complexity is inevitable IMO and it may also strongly depend on the sensitivity of yr process.

It also may IMEX crucially depend on internal training capabilities / personnel access and as usual Top Management, eg budgeting, if any.

I liked HACCP Mentor's generalised concept but in practice I predict some "risk" prioritisation is also necessary. handling of chemicals for one, eg from bitter experience, totally different items which look identical .

Again, it can obviously strongly depend on the process / location but many plants rely heavily on OJT for operational aspects using designated / "authorised" leaders as signer-offers for areas (Sanitation is often the first target for this of course). This simplifies Records but risks being manipulated. Services would then be segmented as per yr matrix. In some cases (eg other threads here) an expectation of detailed reading of Procedures is simply non-existent.

It's an important topic but definitely not simple IMO. Sometimes tricky for the auditor also.

Rgds / Charles.C

[john123]

Thanks for the advice this far from all, I do appreciate it.

Right now, at least for sanitation purposes, I think we're going to develop a training document that spells out our overall expectations. Each line has a specialized checklist for cleaning, and the training document will tell the employees that they are to follow that checklist; it will include some definitions of what we consider to be clean, so there's no excuse of "I didn't think I needed to clean that..."; it will specify that management follows up on cleaning, and provides verbal cues of how to best complete cleaning (such as "take off these panels and clean inside"). Otherwise, I really don't see how we can logistically train 30+ employees on each individual line and then verify effectiveness of training, not to mention employee turnover once a month across 3 shifts.

Probably the same on my FM control. An overall document that highlights some of the key parts of our FM policies/procedures and summarizes the need to be vigilant, to keep an eye out for anything that could get into our product (or might already be in the product).

[Urban Explorer]

The thing I noticed your matrix didn't have was the dates the training was completed. If you keep this in a separate place, you may want to reference it on the register.

I currently have a worksheet, but I am creating a database to do this, which grabs existing employee data from our payroll table, and will create a simple place to log in things like training topics, date completed, the trainer and language/translator. From there, you can generate reports on individual employees or individual topics.

[john123]

The thing I noticed your matrix didn't have was the dates the training was completed. If you keep this in a separate place, you may want to reference it on the register.

I currently have a worksheet, but I am creating a database to do this, which grabs existing employee data from our payroll table, and will create a simple place to log in things like training topics, date completed, the trainer and language/translator. From there, you can generate reports on individual employees or individual topics.

Our company is a little behind the times, stuck in old ways. We don't have the ability to track things online or in a database because they're clinging to a system that requires all controlled documents to be stamped "official document" and kept in a binder. If we were to make changes to a documents in the computer, I'd have to update the version number and get 3 signatures plus a stamp every time I updated it. Talk about a PITA......

That training matrix I've attached is to provide a guideline to what positions need to receive which training. On a seperate form I'm calling the "Employee Training Record" we're capturing dates as to when training in that topic was completed. The Training Logs we create from those training sessions (either one on one or group settings) will be filed by date. So ideally, an auditor will see what we expect our employees to be trained in, be able to pull their individual file and see the date of training, then go to the file containing the dated record if they choose. Oy.

[Urban Explorer]

I thought my place was behind the times! Is this for every document, even simple things like a sanitation checklist (for example)? That is certainly a pain in the you-know-what. That seems a little extreme, but perhaps with the advent of SQF you might persuade them to let you go electronic.

I'm becoming more comfortable with Access databases, so I think this is the best option to look at everything at once. People here LOVE their spreadsheets, even though they don't know how to update them. Our main two databases house all our inventory and CCPs and payroll. Guess how many people know how to make a new query? Just me! When I started and I was asking questions about it, nobody knew anything. I couldn't believe it, you had this system that you rely on everything for, and you know nothing about it? Once word got out that I knew some Access, now I'm suddenly the IT person.

As long as you, the practitioner, know where everything is and you can find it within a reasonable amount of time, then that's all that matters. :)

[john123]

Yeah, no doubt. It's a family business, almost every management position is a family member, and out of the 10 we have I'd say 8 can't properly format an email. To have all our documents controlled with SharePoint, or heck even Access, would be a blessing. I was hired on to help with creating documents, and as such we have a 3 in binder full of clear sheet protectors, all of which house our forms and checklists (startup, post run sanitation, master cleaning schedules, everything an employee might fill out). It's a nightmare.