Jump to content

  • Quick Navigation
Photo
- - - - -

BRC V8 3.10.1 - Documentation & Action


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

#1 cabbie

cabbie

    Grade - Active

  • IFSQN Active
  • 6 posts
  • 1 thanks
0
Neutral

  • United Kingdom
    United Kingdom

Posted 28 November 2018 - 01:01 PM

Hi All,

 

Clause states " Actions appropriate to the seriousness and frequency of the problems identified shall be carried out promptly and effectively by appropriately trained staff". This I get, but does there needs to be a risk assessment put in place to determine the seriousness of the issue? How do I detail what type of response is required for each issue? Do I split into Food, Safety, Quality, Legality and how would I justify each response?

Many thanks

C

 



#2 Lesley.Roberts

Lesley.Roberts

    Grade - MIFSQN

  • IFSQN Member
  • 92 posts
  • 30 thanks
9
Neutral

  • United Kingdom
    United Kingdom
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:Manchester

Posted 28 November 2018 - 01:40 PM

Hi Cabbie - the interpretation notes for this clause (BRC 8) state:

 

The company should ensure there is a clear process for customers (and potentially consumers too) to raise legitimate complaints about the products. This is usually via the contact information on product labels. Where products are supplied into food service or through intermediaries, every effort should be made to ensure that complaints raised are relayed to the complaints department of the site.
All complaints need to be captured to a specified location to ensure they are adequately assessed and investigated, and the results of this investigation recorded. A documented complaints procedure is therefore required and the inclusion of a standardised complaint form may be useful.
Complaints must be handled by appropriately trained staff to ensure that a proactive system identifies the severity, and therefore the significance, of any complaints received. Actions must be appropriate to the seriousness of the complaint. A rapid response would be required for serious issues (such as a glass complaint) or where a number of complaints are received, suggesting a widespread problem.
Investigation must be completed within a defined timeframe and feedback provided to the complainant wherever contact details are provided.

 

 

 

BRC Seems very keen on risk assessments - so, when determining response time we do use a risk assessment (basic) to determine seriousness of the issue.  ie. did somebody get ill or was there potential for this and also how many complaints - ie. a "one off" or many complaints regarding one batch?. 

 

Allergen/serious foreign body, micro issue and/or multiple complaints would mean this is A grade,

Quality issues that would affect efficacy/quality ie. poor pack seal/clumping/extraneous vegetable matter would be B

Minor issues - eg. legible but feint date code, packaging out of registration, would be C

 

(examples would be dependant on your own product type & relative risk) 



#3 Scampi

Scampi

    Grade - FIFSQN

  • IFSQN Fellow
  • 2,106 posts
  • 571 thanks
186
Excellent

  • Canada
    Canada
  • Gender:Not Telling

Posted 28 November 2018 - 01:44 PM

I'm am not familiar with BRC, however, you may want to start with CCP's and work your way backwards from there

 

CCP's that are not met should have an immediate corrective action that is written into the monitoring program and if those steps are not followed written deviations should automatically occur.

 

You really don't need a risk assessment, but you should find the root cause........you cannot properly address the issue without that..........and knowing the root cause may help determine the severity

-so let's your finished goods are short weight (which is a big deal, but food safety is not impacted) all lots off the line with the issue should be produced and put on hold (corrective action), you spend time on the floor to figure out why and discover that employee A cannot reach the labeling machine, and when they reach for it, they are adding weight to the scale causing the check-weigher to allow the package to pass (when it's actually under weight) you have now found the root cause

 

Preventative measures are now required to ensure this doesn't happen again............so you put in a maintenance tickets to have the label machine moved and you verify package weights once this is complete and you increase monitoring for a week to make sure the preventative measure worked............you can know close your NCR

 

Hope this helps


Because we always have is never an appropriate response!


#4 pHruit

pHruit

    Grade - MIFSQN

  • IFSQN Member
  • 142 posts
  • 45 thanks
21
Excellent

  • United Kingdom
    United Kingdom

Posted 28 November 2018 - 02:40 PM

I'd echo Lesley's comments regarding a basic "risk assessment" to categorise complaints - ours are broken down into food safety issue, significant food quality or multiple smaller quality issues, minor quality issue, other "annoyances" that may result in an NC from a customer but don't affect safety or quality. As part of your procedure you can then define how the different categories are addressed.



#5 Scampi

Scampi

    Grade - FIFSQN

  • IFSQN Fellow
  • 2,106 posts
  • 571 thanks
186
Excellent

  • Canada
    Canada
  • Gender:Not Telling

Posted 28 November 2018 - 04:28 PM

how does a risk assessment help to prevent the re-occurance?  I know BRC loves them (as I've learned on this forum), but maybe not the best tool


Because we always have is never an appropriate response!


#6 pHruit

pHruit

    Grade - MIFSQN

  • IFSQN Member
  • 142 posts
  • 45 thanks
21
Excellent

  • United Kingdom
    United Kingdom

Posted 28 November 2018 - 04:33 PM

It's not (directly) about preventing recurrence in this context - it's about determining the severity of a complain issue and thus the type of response required.



#7 Scampi

Scampi

    Grade - FIFSQN

  • IFSQN Fellow
  • 2,106 posts
  • 571 thanks
186
Excellent

  • Canada
    Canada
  • Gender:Not Telling

Posted 28 November 2018 - 04:39 PM

got it!  thanks


Because we always have is never an appropriate response!


#8 trubertq

trubertq

    Grade - PIFSQN

  • IFSQN Principal
  • 605 posts
  • 243 thanks
107
Excellent

  • Ireland
    Ireland
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:Donegal

Posted 06 December 2018 - 03:26 PM

We trend the complaints and review monthly and use root cause to deal with serious complaints. Have no documented risk assessment though, all complaints are logged and actioned immediately with time scales recorded.


I'm entitled to my opinion, even a stopped clock is right twice a day




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users

EV SSL Certificate