2 replies to this topic

[MRCRSHART]

My company distributes produce....

Product Sampling, Inspection and Analysis code says that our stock has to get inspected at regular intervals and by qualified personnel...

 

I'm unsure as to what makes a guy qualified or not to see a wilted pepper and say that its good or no good...

 

how are some of you tackling this issue?

 

SQF Level 2

[Charles.C]

My company distributes produce....

Product Sampling, Inspection and Analysis code says that our stock has to get inspected at regular intervals and by qualified personnel...

 

I'm unsure as to what makes a guy qualified or not to see a wilted pepper and say that its good or no good...

 

how are some of you tackling this issue?

 

SQF Level 2

2.5.6 audit guidance -

 

Inspections confirm specifications, label requirements and trade weights and measures;
Analyses are conducted by qualified individuals and to approved methods;
External laboratories are accredited to ISO 17025 or equivalent national standard;
Sensory evaluations are completed to internal and customer specifications;
Records of all inspections and analyses (including sensory analyses) are accurate and maintained
 

 

etc
 

So what is/are the approved method(s)  for determining whether pepper is unacceptably wilted ?.

 

All of PSIA including decision is done by one individual/divided responsibilities ?

 

The required level of qualification will presumably depend on the required scope/difficulty/responsibility of the associated work function ?

[Charles.C]

addendum -

 

Not a SQF user but I did a (SQF) search for “qualified” after penning the above post.

It seems that “qualified” to SQF is a bit like “Risk Assessment” to BRC. The term is amazingly popular although, as far as I could see, (almost)  never quantified. Occasionally one also meets “suitably qualified”.

 

Accordingly,  I suggest an ISO-type answer –

 

Qualified - possessing proper or necessary skills, knowledge, credentials, etc. for fulfilling a given purpose.

 

The potential scope of above is clearly substantial.

In the current context, I suggest that the above possibilities will require some kind of documented evidence, eg via  training, examination or career history.

 

From previous threads here, it is evident that SQF employs various of the options above depending on the specific application, eg

 

Auditor: "Did you have proof of food defense training?" 

Me: "Yes"  

Auditor: "Did you go to the FDA website and click through the pages and print it out and sign it and put it in a binder and everything?" 

Me: "Yes" <pulls out binder, flips to FDA print-a-cert> 

Auditor:"Good, I see you are qualified to train people to react to an emergency situation.  Let's move on."

 

Hey folks, I need some help here.  I have read the code over 20 times and am having trouble understanding whether or not "suitably qualified" means that as long as you are HACCP trained and certified, per section 2.1.2.5 (iii), you are qualified to implement and oversee an SQF Level 2 program

 

Verification is simply a visual review by qualified personnel (i.e. certified, experienced, or intimate knowledge of process) of relevant documents. "Normally" it's a management position, and under SQF this all trails back to the practitioner.

 

 

Basically, only those in the know, ie SQF users, will (probably) know.

 

Here’s hoping somebody knows in this case.