Is it ok to use a stamp instead of signing all CCP and Quality records?

Hi All,

 

All of the CCP & Quality records in my food manufacturing plant are paper, so, I am physically signing off on hundreds of records a day, is it acceptable for SQF to use a stamp instead?

 

Thanks in advance!

Could you simply create a cover sheet and remove all individual signatures?  For example one per line?

I guess my first thought would be do get rid of some of the papers. If you can't do that, can you designate someone else to sign off some of these papers? I know when I am gone, I keep some of the paperwork from building up too much by having one shift check the other shift. Second shift QA will verify 1st shift and visa-versa. It isn't a good idea to have someone check their own work.
To your point, if you had your stamp locked away so no one else could use it and it was on your register of signatures and initials, I would think that would make it OK for SQF .

Hi YNA QA!

 

Thank you for the quick response! sorry I'm not understanding what you mean.

Hi YNA QA!

 

Thank you for the quick response! sorry I'm not understanding what you mean.

We gather all documents utilized on a single line- Pre-Op, CCP Check, Operational checks etc and place them all together.  The QAM reviews all those documents and signs one cover sheet with verbiage stating that all documents in this packet are reviewed and approved.  

Stamp of your signature - yes, thar is fine.

...

All of the CCP & Quality records in my food manufacturing plant are paper, so, I am physically signing off on hundreds of records a day, is it acceptable for SQF to use a stamp instead?

 

Thanks in advance!

 

We have multiple people per shift trained to review CCP records and designated as qualified to sign for verification and preshipment review.  

 

If you have a very small team and can't find someone else to train, then the stamp should work if it is well secured when not in use.  A problem with this for a CCP may be a requirement for date and time to accompany the signature.

 

Failing one of those I would reconsider how the signature process is structured and eliminate them if it is just "busywork" that could be summarized elsewhere, like with YNA's coversheet.  

Stamping the signature instead of physically signing is Ok.

 

 

 

Stamping the signature instead of physically signing is Ok.

This thread has some ingenious methodologies to avoid due diligence. And promote Fraud ?

 

IMEX Auditors have expected to see (Lots of) Signatures for HACCP Verification activities. So would I.

This thread has some ingenious methodologies to avoid due diligence. And promote Fraud ?
 
IMEX Auditors have expected to see (Lots of) Signatures for HACCP Verification activities. So would I.

The question was about more than HACCP/CCP records, but your point stands.

A stamp with your signature and date would be fine.  I would take the precaution of keeping it in a lockable drawer so others can't sign off the paperwork with your signature without your knowledge.

SQF Code doesn't prohibit the use of a stamp, and one could argue it's similar to the use of an electronic signature.  But if you're going to open the door to this, you'll need to be prepared to defend the sanctity of that stamp.  The first time an employee other than yourself has it in their hand near the auditor, or admits to having access to it when you're not present, it opens the door to a critical non-conformance if the auditor finds evidence of someone falsely applying your stamp to records (especially CCP records).

 

I've got a bit of a hang up as to why a CCP record needs hundreds of signatures a day...  There might be some opportunities for you to review your process and see if so many signatures are truly necessary.

A stamp with your signature and date would be fine.  I would take the precaution of keeping it in a lockable drawer so others can't sign off the paperwork with your signature without your knowledge.

Hi paulw,

 

Indeed, reiterating Post 12, demonstrable evidence may be expected during Audits (= Show Me !).

 

Specific Product/Process/Jurisdiction (if any) unstated but the stamp option obviously collapses in cases where a HACCP Verification Regulatory requirement  (trumps SQF) applies. Otherwise it's "free-to-air" afaik although some customers may have reservations.

 

Personally, I have also used the Signature route as a defensible method for allowing relevant Personnel to acquire a little Overtime. :smile:

...

I've got a bit of a hang up as to why a CCP record needs hundreds of signatures a day...  There might be some opportunities for you to review your process and see if so many signatures are truly necessary.

 

I would expect a facility large enough to generate that many CCP records would also have adequate alternate personnel available to be trained for review and signing.  

 

When things were running at capacity during early covid and everyone wanted to fill their pantry up were were generating around 200 lethality records per day.  Some equipment updates have reduced those numbers, but an average day is still over 100 just for lethality records off 24 lines.

Yes, but you have to maintain control of the stamp.  I've used a date and signature or initials for my stamps.  This way one stamp with the date and your initials or signature.  Bang bang done!