Jump to content

  • Quick Navigation
Photo
- - - - -

What action should I take when supplier has confirmed malicious contamination?

Taccp advice contamination supplier disciplinary malicious contamination non conformance food defense supply chain foreign body

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

#1 EJ2020

EJ2020

    Grade - Active

  • IFSQN Active
  • 9 posts
  • 0 thanks
0
Neutral

  • Ireland
    Ireland

Posted 28 July 2020 - 08:45 AM

Hi there, 

 

I'm looking for advice with regards to a supplier. We recieved multiple shipments in of a product, and all the deliveries were from the same batch produced. There were two foreign bodies found in two separate bags across the different shipments. They seemed like a piece of rubber and a bristle from a brush, not exactly ideal but they seemed like unintentional foreign bodies. We recieved a response and CAPAs for those. However, in one bag, we found a pair of fully intact safety glasses.

 

The supplier came back to us and confirmed that the pair of glasses was put in the bag deliberately by a member of staff. They have come back with a response assuring us that the staff member has been given a disciplinary, staff have been retrained and also they have installed CCTV on site. 

 

I'm looking for advice as to what anybody else would do? I know it was malicious contamination, so I am in favour of seeking out a new supplier if we can find them. Would most of you drop this supplier after this or feel like you had to after knowing what has happened? Regardless of their CAPAs, I don't feel confident about them?

 

Thanks,

 

ER


Edited by Simon, 28 July 2020 - 02:43 PM.


#2 Sarah_89_Vegan

Sarah_89_Vegan

    Grade - Active

  • IFSQN Active
  • 8 posts
  • 0 thanks
2
Neutral

  • Earth
    Earth

Posted 28 July 2020 - 08:49 AM

I'd look to go to a different supplier, are they GFSI accredited? As part of the BRC standard you have food safety culture as a large chunk so i'd also ask for their piece around that to help understand. 



#3 EJ2020

EJ2020

    Grade - Active

  • IFSQN Active
  • 9 posts
  • 0 thanks
0
Neutral

  • Ireland
    Ireland

Posted 28 July 2020 - 08:59 AM

I'd look to go to a different supplier, are they GFSI accredited? As part of the BRC standard you have food safety culture as a large chunk so i'd also ask for their piece around that to help understand. 

They have SQF certification and are based in the US/Mexico. I'm not overly familiar with SQF and how strict/not strict a certification it is?


Edited by EJ2020, 28 July 2020 - 09:01 AM.


#4 pHruit

pHruit

    Grade - FIFSQN

  • IFSQN Fellow
  • 1,435 posts
  • 610 thanks
315
Excellent

  • United Kingdom
    United Kingdom
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:Composing/listening to classical music, electronics, mountain biking, science, sarcasm

Posted 28 July 2020 - 10:03 AM

I'm looking for advice as to what anybody else would do? I know it was malicious contamination, so I am in favour of seeking out a new supplier if we can find them. Would most of you drop this supplier after this or feel like you had to after knowing what has happened? Regardless of their CAPAs, I don't feel confident about them?

 

 

Based on the summary you've given of the response, yes, I'd drop the supplier instantly.

I would expect any person who undertakes an intentional malicious act of contamination to be instantly dismissed for gross misconduct, and indeed to then potentially be subject to legal action both from the employer and from the police or equivalent.

I'd also expect it to trigger a full review of site security plans as it suggests the existing one has potentially failed - a slap on the wrist, a bit of refresher training, and a camera or two that may or may not actual be monitored doesn't seem to me to be proportionate to the severity of the issue, notwithstanding the good fortune that it has (hopefully?) been caught before causing any harm to anyone.



#5 TimG

TimG

    Grade - MIFSQN

  • IFSQN Member
  • 227 posts
  • 86 thanks
86
Excellent

  • United States
    United States

Posted 28 July 2020 - 01:06 PM

'Retraining' is going to be ineffective as the person already knew what he was doing was wrong. I can't think of any situation where if I found undeniable evidence a specific temp worker or employee maliciously contaminated our product, they would retain their job. Here stateside, intentional adulteration of food can be prosecuted at the misdemeanor or felony level depending on severity.

I hate to say it, but it sounds like the issues there run deeper then just a couple of disgruntled employees. I would start finding backup suppliers and drop that company like a hot potato ASAP.



#6 SQFconsultant

SQFconsultant

    SQFconsultant

  • IFSQN Fellow
  • 3,165 posts
  • 814 thanks
670
Excellent

  • United States
    United States
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:Truth is like a delicious slice of watermelon... you just want more and more!

Posted 28 July 2020 - 02:30 PM

Dump them.


Kind regards,
Glenn Oster
 
GOC Group | +1.772.646.4115 | Serving the Food, Food Packaging, DC, Restaurant & Hotel Industry 
SQF On-Site & Remote System Development, Implementation & Certification Consultants
GFSI (Broadscope) Certification Continuity eConsultants | EMF Consulting | Approved Supplier
Business Operations Consultants | Food Business Turn-Around Consultant
Internal Auditor, PCQI & Consultant Start-Up Training | eConsultant | SQF-GAP | EMF Consulting
Serving Small to Large Businesses in the United States, Costa Rica, Panama & Caribbean Islands

http://www.GlennOsterConsulting.com  

 

 

 

An Open Letter to The President of the United States

https://glennosterco...m/ogfc/goc-news


#7 Charles.C

Charles.C

    Grade - FIFSQN

  • IFSQN Moderator
  • 17,499 posts
  • 4869 thanks
954
Excellent

  • Earth
    Earth
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:SF
    TV
    Movies

Posted 28 July 2020 - 09:18 PM

It may relate to quantities involved and whether there are alternative suppliers of the unknown product and the its criticality.

 

If you are forced to continue with the same supplier, consider deducting the cost of (intensive) inspecting their consignments from their bill.


Kind Regards,

 

Charles.C






Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: Taccp, advice, contamination, supplier, disciplinary, malicious contamination, non conformance, food defense, supply chain, foreign body

0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users