Jump to content

  • Quick Navigation
Photo
- - - - -

SQF Corrective Action versus ISO Corrective Action


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

#1 Tony Z

Tony Z

    Grade - AIFSQN

  • IFSQN Associate
  • 27 posts
  • 3 thanks
1
Neutral

  • United States
    United States
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Minnesota

Posted 29 April 2013 - 03:32 PM

Hello Everyone - Looking for opinions on the topic description - We're a food packaging printer and during a recent Management Review, Corrective Action was discussed and the discussion surrounded quality problems and customer complaints regarding corrective actions for the quality problems. I contended that the corrective action discussion for meeting the Management Review requirement in SQF was for discussing food safety corrective actions - ie. Internal audit findings, traceability non-compliance, cleaning logs incomplete, employee GMP violations, customer complaints regarding food safety, etc. . My question is: Does the SQF requirement for corrective actions include quality problems not related to food safety? We are SQF Level 1 and the standard simply states 2.5.5.1 "Corrective action shall be undertaken to resolve non-compliance" I believe that corrective actions regarding quality issues should be discussed in another management review meeting regarding quality issues.


Please let me know your thoughts and as always - thank you



#2 esquef

esquef

    Grade - SIFSQN

  • IFSQN Senior
  • 374 posts
  • 232 thanks
40
Excellent

  • United States
    United States
  • Gender:Male

Posted 29 April 2013 - 03:44 PM

Tony,
Only Level 3 includes quality in its scope. From the SQF website:

There are three levels of certification for the SQF standard. Level 1 is mainly for low risk products and it incorporates fundamental food safety controls. Level 2 is a certified HACCP food safety plan that is benchmarked by GFSI. Level 3 is a comprehensive implementation of safety and quality management systems that incorporates Level 2. In many cases, a supplier’s customer has already designated a minimum level of certification.



Thanked by 1 Member:

#3 3kdi

3kdi

    Grade - Active

  • IFSQN Associate
  • 10 posts
  • 1 thanks
0
Neutral

  • United States
    United States

Posted 29 April 2013 - 04:39 PM

I work at a level two certified facility and we use to have two different types of corrective actions. One was more towards food safety and related to a lot of the HACCP standars. The other was towards food quality issues and other small issues that did not jeoprodize the food safety.

We recently switched to having only one type of corrective action procedure/form for both safety and quality issues. Our SQF auditor made it appear that more facilities use just one form for all types of corrective actions. However, he did not have any problem when we had two forms/procedures. In my experience, I would say having two forms/procedures just made things more complicated for the employees using them and its much easier to keep all corrective action forms in one area and the same format.



Thanked by 1 Member:

#4 esquef

esquef

    Grade - SIFSQN

  • IFSQN Senior
  • 374 posts
  • 232 thanks
40
Excellent

  • United States
    United States
  • Gender:Male

Posted 29 April 2013 - 06:56 PM

This is what we do also, but I've consolidated them into one spreadsheet format with a column that designates whether the action request is related to quality or safety and the priority. Other columns are necessary info such as action #, root cause investigation, description of correction, responsibility, expected date of completion, actual date of completion, verification of effectiveness, etc. An automated CAPA system is no doubt easier, but this is workable too.


Edited by esquef, 29 April 2013 - 06:58 PM.


Thanked by 2 Members:

#5 Bill Cusack

Bill Cusack

    Grade - Active

  • IFSQN Active
  • 6 posts
  • 3 thanks
2
Neutral

  • Canada
    Canada

Posted 30 April 2013 - 09:18 PM

I think you are right. The Management review is in regard food safety and systemic issues at level 1. If you are at level 3 you definitely want to involve quality. A win win is to summarize / chart your quality complaints on a semi regular basis, what was done about it and get managers to sign off.



#6 Bill Wheatley

Bill Wheatley

    Grade - Active

  • IFSQN Associate
  • 10 posts
  • 1 thanks
0
Neutral

  • United States
    United States

Posted 01 May 2013 - 12:46 PM

Tony,
Only Level 3 includes quality in its scope. From the SQF website:



This is probably the best answer. It wouldn't hurt to include quality issues in your management review.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

EV SSL Certificate