16 replies to this topic

[cazcazcaz]

Hello

 

I would like to ask for peoples experience if possibe. I feel rather negative about our experience and unsure if we need to report this. We have recently undergone our 2nd BRCGS audit.

 

On the day, the auditor used the previous years full audit 2022 (published) report to make his notes for this years 2023 audit. The auditor would change some wording from 2022 and add anything in new they found 2023. 

Question; Would they not use a blank template and maybe do some copying and pasting to save time? 

 

Im confused why he would use 2022s report  and use this as a templare for 2023. This year we were auditted against Issue 9.

So from this, we are finding some identifical parapraphs from last year to this year even though we have moved premises and those mentioned things no longer exist or we have added new things to premises. 

 

It is obvoius in many places, he used the exact same text from 2022 and kept these at his own. Sometimes, the information is not correct including staff names, titles, R&Rs, training, evidential documents etc etc. The full audit is not a true reflection in many respects. 

 

Question; Is this acceptable?  

 

Also this auditor told us what grade we would be receiving about 30 mins into the audit and he ensured any N/C's didnt fall out of this bracket. 

 

Question; should I be pleased with the grade we recieved and stay shhssh or do I report our experience. 

 

 

Regards 

 

 

 

[Scampi]

Report the auditor immediately

 

You may be subjected to another audit, but we ALL pay alot of money for these and they should be impartial based on what they see during the actual audit

 

I'd report it to both your CB and BRC 

[Setanta]

Something is WAY off. Report this odd behavior.

[Sayed M Naim Khalid]

Three things to consider: 

 

1. using the same language is not a problem. Because the standard template is the same, so using the same kind of wording should not be a problem. 

 

2. using wrong information (incorrect names, extra information, missing information, incorrect information) is an ISSUE. It has to be considered seriously. 

 

3. Asking about acceptable grading, is an ethical issue. It questions the integrity of the auditor and the validity of the audit report. Grading has a standard method to be calculated. It is not how you/or the auditor wish to grade something. 

 

I would document the issues in an official letter with all the evidence in an objective and fair way and sent it to the certifying body. The decision of audit validity may come from the certification body, because they may have measures in place to check the strength of an audit or the auditor. However, you may have to report the observation and the situation. BUT BE objective, because the auditor can lose his/her job. So provide correct information not just opinion or , "I think" kind of report. 

thanks,
______________________
Sayed M Naim Khalid
FSQA Professional

Edited by Sayed M Naim Khalid, 20 June 2023 - 12:44 PM.

[MDaleDDF]

Man, I agree with everything above, but if I'm being honest, if I was happy with my grade and got my cert reupped, I may just walk into the sunset and let the auditor be someone else's problem later.  I did have an auditor issue once, but it was unfair to our company, and had a negative impact on our report that we didn't deserve.   I argued that and won.   But if it wouldn't have impacted the company, I probably would've said 'whatevs' and moved on...

[Scampi]

Man, I agree with everything above, but if I'm being honest, if I was happy with my grade and got my cert reupped, I may just walk into the sunset and let the auditor be someone else's problem later.  I did have an auditor issue once, but it was unfair to our company, and had a negative impact on our report that we didn't deserve.   I argued that and won.   But if it wouldn't have impacted the company, I probably would've said 'whatevs' and moved on...

That affects all of us............and ultimately will return us all to customer audits once everyone loses faith in GFSI

 

They (the B and the auditor) are getting paid to follow the scheme as written-------complacency breeds contempt

[SQFconsultant]

I used to be involved with something similar to Internal Affairs with food safety and hotel inspections.

Your Auditor committed FRAUD.

Submit your evidence and or statement direct to BRC and copy to your CB.

BRC will move quickly on a Fraud.

And once reviewed you will have a new Auditor and a new audit without cost to your company.

[MDaleDDF]

That affects all of us............and ultimately will return us all to customer audits once everyone loses faith in GFSI

 

They (the B and the auditor) are getting paid to follow the scheme as written-------complacency breeds contempt

Very true.   But is it the op's fault?   Is it their job to babysit the auditor?   Should they have to now set aside time to go through another audit?

I'm not saying it's right, but it's probably not the hill I'd choose to die on.   And I don't know for sure what I'd do, I'm not in the situation, but I'd certainly at least entertain moving on with my life and looking to the next audit.

But I agree with you 100%.

[Scampi]

It's my job to ensure things are done properly.......I'm not paying 15K for bull*&^*

[SQFconsultant]

Scampi - exactly!

[lynzy05]

From what I experienced, our auditor also used the same template as 2022. Apparently they all check the previous year's audit to see if there are any repeat findings. But thats where it should stop. From what my auditor tells me, they should still audit the site properly and just use the previous year as a guide. Not copy it. Usually I write down on a paper every person they talk to and make sure those are the names written on their report. It is both you and the auditor's responsibility that whatever they write on their report is correct. If it is a multi day audit, I ask at the end of the day what information they need for tomorrow that I need to clarify. 

 

You basically need to make sure what they have is correct. I find a lot of the time, they dont check and assume. 

 

As a company, if the result is great, they wouldnt want you to raise it. But maybe mention it before the next audit. To change auditors etc.

[Tony-C]

Hi cazcazcaz,

 

This audit report will be uploaded to the BRCGS directory, in the first instance, I would complain to the certification body. If you don’t get a satisfactory solution then use the Tell BRCGS reporting system.

 

From BRCGS Global Standard for Food Safety Issue 9 Part III Audit Protocol:

 

2.5 Audit reporting

The report shall accurately reflect the findings of the auditor during the audit.

The audit report shall be uploaded to the BRCGS Directory in a timely manner irrespective of whether a certificate is issued. The owner of the audit report may allocate access to the audit report to customers or other parties in the BRCGS Directory.

 

3.7 Complaints

BRCGS has implemented a formal complaints process, which is available to organisations involved with the BRCGS Global Standards. Details of the BRCGS complaints process can be found on the BRCGS website. Complaints can be reported confidentially on the Tell BRCGS reporting system.

 

Kind regards,

 

Tony

[MDaleDDF]

If you do complain, I bet you'll be bummed to see the same auditor walk back into your place in a year or two with revenge in their eyes, lol.....

[Charles.C]

Hi czx3,

 

JFI what kind of Product/Process is involved ?

 

Not directly related to the above discussed peculiarities but there have been a few, partially analogous, previous threads here (not BRC IIRC) where the risks associated with the Product/Process were so negligible that the auditor had nothing much to comment on and took the "least line of resistance".

[jfrey123]

The prior year audit is absolutely as basis for the current audit, in that they often review the prior year to ensure prior findings aren't repeating.  But when you see direct copy/paste for programs and processes that have changed, it directly shows the auditor didn't do their job.  I'd be complaining to high heaven, especially when the auditor knew your final score 30 minutes into a GFSI audit.  No way in hell that's enough time to properly audit a business as it sits that day.

[rhondakay]

This is most curious. I can understand using the previous report for reference but inputting incorrect information is a huge red flag. The auditors are suppose to be the ones finding these incorrect behavior within the places they are auditing not the other way around. I would say this should definitely be reported. Everyone should be held to the same standards, being an auditor doesn't exempt you from this. 

[WineSafe]

If you do complain, I bet you'll be bummed to see the same auditor walk back into your place in a year or two with revenge in their eyes, lol.....

If this happened I would complain and say this is a HUGE conflict of interest.