Hello All,
I recently joined a company that is preparing to make their own commercially branded product using a few small co-manufacturers. I was informed that they were actively looking to pursue BRC for Brokers/Agents and had hired a few consultants to help jump start their food safety and quality management system. As such, these consultants wrote policies using verbiage such as "The company must have...." for every requirement. I don't feel this language is viable; shouldn't the language in the case of policies be more focused on how the company policy meets a requirement or what the policy is used for?
For example one of the policies for control of non-conforming product states:
"There must be a defined, documented and effective system in place and agreed to prevent inadvertent movement or use product or materials."
Shouldn't the policy use words that explain the system so someone reading it would understand how the company handles non-conforming product?
Sorry if this is a simple question and I'm overthinking it, but I just feel all these "Should have" statements are wrong in this context.
Thanks!
There must be a defined, documented and effective system in place and agreed to prevent inadvertent movement or use product or materials.
