Jump to content

  • Quick Navigation
Photo

Costco addendum finding resulted in SQF deduction

Share this

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

gaardendan

    Grade - Active

  • IFSQN Associate
  • 23 posts
  • 1 thanks
2
Neutral

  • Canada
    Canada
  • Gender:Not Telling

Posted 16 June 2022 - 03:21 PM

We recently completed an unannounced SQF audit with a Costco addendum. During the audit, the auditor informed us that Costco and his CB were working together to 'trial' a new concept with the scoring. Any findings on the addendum would result in a deduction  on your SQF score in the future. He said that we would be trialing it this year and that it may be implemented as a permanent addition next year. Those were his exact words. At the end of the audit, we learned that our Costco deduction resulted in a SQF deduction (Section 2.4.1.1). We could find no evidence of a change to the code; any reference to customer requirements in section 2.4.1.1, or reference to this type of scoring in any Costco documents or communications, nor could the auditor. We argued the point to no avail and are now in the process of appealing it.

Please let me know if you have any relevant information for this alleged change. 


Edited by gaardendan, 16 June 2022 - 03:23 PM.


G M

    Grade - SIFSQN

  • IFSQN Senior
  • 443 posts
  • 90 thanks
120
Excellent

  • United States
    United States
  • Gender:Male

Posted 16 June 2022 - 03:35 PM

What was the nature of the non-conformance in the Costco addendum?  If it was marked off for your audit as part of 2.4.1.1, how was it worded in the report?



Scampi

    Fellow

  • IFSQN Fellow
  • 5,389 posts
  • 1498 thanks
1,500
Excellent

  • Canada
    Canada
  • Gender:Not Telling

Posted 16 June 2022 - 03:46 PM

who is your CB?

 

What exactly was caught during the costco addendum?  Most things should have been caught during the regular audit---with perhaps the exception of the "no hands policy" that costco specifically has

 

Our unannounced SQF/Costco audit was in April and no such thing even hinted at

 

I would argue this one all day long-all the way to SQFI (ask to speak with Leanne Chubboff)


Edited by Scampi, 16 June 2022 - 03:52 PM.

Please stop referring to me as Sir/sirs


Setanta

    Grade - FIFSQN

  • IFSQN Fellow
  • 1,584 posts
  • 365 thanks
377
Excellent

  • United States
    United States
  • Gender:Female
  • Interests:Reading: historical fiction, fantasy, Sci-Fi
    Movies
    Gardening
    Birding

Posted 16 June 2022 - 03:55 PM

That's not cool.


-Setanta         

 

 

 


kingstudruler1

    Grade - PIFSQN

  • IFSQN Principal
  • 800 posts
  • 275 thanks
231
Excellent

  • United States
    United States

Posted 16 June 2022 - 05:41 PM

hmmm.   Are you sure it was 2.4.1.1. and not 2.1.1.1?   2.1.1.1 kinda illudes to following customer food safety requirements.   


eb2fee_785dceddab034fa1a30dd80c7e21f1d7~

    Twofishfs@gmail.com

 


SQFconsultant

    SQFconsultant

  • IFSQN Fellow
  • 4,585 posts
  • 1132 thanks
1,102
Excellent

  • United States
    United States
  • Gender:Male
  • Interests:Watching the MV HOME Ferry going back and forth from your own patio can be very fulfilling!

Posted 16 June 2022 - 05:43 PM

Not acceptable.

Contact SQFI directly concerning this.

There can no side deals.

Contact the CB and inform them you want this bullshit in writing.

They will not be able to provide it.

Then watch the dance.


All the Best,

 

All Rights Reserved,

Without Prejudice,

Glenn Oster.

The Business of Food CONSULTANT

ceo - Glenn Oster Consulting, LLC

ceo - Goodstart Coastal Enterprises, LLC

ceo - VikingStone, LLC

Partner - Lighthouse Health & Wellness, PMA

http://www.GCEMVI.XYZ


jfrey123

    Grade - PIFSQN

  • IFSQN Principal
  • 541 posts
  • 154 thanks
254
Excellent

  • United States
    United States
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Sparks, NV

Posted 16 June 2022 - 10:33 PM

I’d be screaming to high heaven over taking a double ding. If your auditor found you compliant for SQF on an item, but Costco doesn’t like it, that’s a Costco thing and shouldn’t result in a hit against your SQF cert.

Thanks for posting this for me to be aware of, as all 7 of my facilities are on unannounced schedules this year.



Ryan M.

    Grade - FIFSQN

  • IFSQN Fellow
  • 1,320 posts
  • 479 thanks
289
Excellent

  • United States
    United States
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Birmingham, AL
  • Interests:Reading, crosswords, passionate discussions, laughing at US politics.

Posted 22 June 2022 - 11:19 PM

Nope. There are no "side trials" unless it is previously authorized beforehand.  



Hoosiersmoker

    Grade - PIFSQN

  • IFSQN Principal
  • 681 posts
  • 228 thanks
122
Excellent

  • United States
    United States

Posted 28 June 2022 - 06:22 PM

If they didn't find an issue within SQF Ed 9 code, how can they deduct a point? I'd love to see the justification of the point deduction: "Costco doesn't like it so we decided to take a point too" ??? Someone at your CB is riding a new Harley for that one! SQF might just delist that CB too!



Thanked by 1 Member:

Tony-C

    Grade - FIFSQN

  • IFSQN Fellow
  • 4,219 posts
  • 1285 thanks
604
Excellent

  • United Kingdom
    United Kingdom
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:World
  • Interests:My main interests are sports particularly football, pool, scuba diving, skiing and ten pin bowling.

Posted 29 June 2022 - 05:06 AM

We recently completed an unannounced SQF audit with a Costco addendum. During the audit, the auditor informed us that Costco and his CB were working together to 'trial' a new concept with the scoring. Any findings on the addendum would result in a deduction  on your SQF score in the future. He said that we would be trialing it this year and that it may be implemented as a permanent addition next year. Those were his exact words. At the end of the audit, we learned that our Costco deduction resulted in a SQF deduction (Section 2.4.1.1). We could find no evidence of a change to the code; any reference to customer requirements in section 2.4.1.1, or reference to this type of scoring in any Costco documents or communications, nor could the auditor. We argued the point to no avail and are now in the process of appealing it.

Please let me know if you have any relevant information for this alleged change. 

 

Hi gaardendan,

 

SQF Food Safety Code: Food Manufacturing, Edition 9

2.4.1 Food Legislation (Mandatory)

Requirement is: 2.4.1.1 The site shall ensure that at the time of delivery to customers finished products shall comply with food safety legislation applicable in the country of manufacture and sale. This includes compliance with legislative requirements applicable to maximum residue limits, food safety, packaging, product description, net weights, nutritional, allergen, and additive labeling, labeling of identity preserved foods, any other criteria listed under food legislation, and to relevant established industry codes of practice.

 

I fail to see how you can have an SQF non-conformance if the auditor found that your products complied with food safety legislation?

 

Either way you are doing the right thing by appealing. The process should work, I have previous had a major non-conformance removed on appeal (over-zealous auditor).

 

Kind regards,

Tony



Scampi

    Fellow

  • IFSQN Fellow
  • 5,389 posts
  • 1498 thanks
1,500
Excellent

  • Canada
    Canada
  • Gender:Not Telling

Posted 29 June 2022 - 03:36 PM

To make this situation worse, I just went through our Costco addendum questions and NONE of them relate to 2.4.1, not even close as a matter of fact

 

 

Do you mind sharing the section of the addendum that they claimed you had a non conformance in?

 

Also----perhaps reaching out to Costco might be in order-----they want what they want they way they want it, the data is no good to them is CBs are "adjusting" scoring without consulting them


Please stop referring to me as Sir/sirs




Share this

0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users