11 replies to this topic

[lavalienteQA]

Hi all,

 

I have a supplier of packaging material who I've now had multiple issues with packaging arriving with pest matter.

 

We've issued non-conformances and received corrective action..3 times.

They just recently passed their 3rd party audit somehow in that time.

We've requested our own pest control audit and it came back with some findings and issues in their system.

Now- we've gone through almost 8 pallets of packaging with pest matter and one PO arrived with a pest trap glued to it.

 

I am auditing their facility this week and going to be following up on these issues, of course.

Has anyone had a similar situation or had any other measures they would enforce?

We can't exactly drop the vendor as they are our main and works with corporate overhead.

but of course we are exploring other options.

 

Thanks. 

[Scampi]

Is corporate fully aware of your particular issues?  I certainly wouldn't be giving them a red cent moving forward--they have demonstrated that the don't think the issues is as serious as you believe it to be

 

start rejecting loads and having them returned, that will get everyone's attention quickly and help rectify it

 

If the vendor is on contract with your head office as the supplier of choice, your hands are quite tied --wish i had better news for you

[Brothbro]

As Scampi mentioned your corporate team should review the terms of your contract. They should be itching to get refunds based on your supplier breaching your terms. On the QA end I would suggest increasing your inspection scrutiny for this supplier and of course performing your own audit. If you weren't contracted to them I would have dropped them a long time ago but alas your hands do indeed seem tied. I am hoping your contract with this company entitles you to repayment for some of this defective product, it clearly isn't what you paid for.

[lavalienteQA]

Is corporate fully aware of your particular issues?  I certainly wouldn't be giving them a red cent moving forward--they have demonstrated that the don't think the issues is as serious as you believe it to be

 

start rejecting loads and having them returned, that will get everyone's attention quickly and help rectify it

 

If the vendor is on contract with your head office as the supplier of choice, your hands are quite tied --wish i had better news for you

 

 

Fully aware - similiar issue occurred at another distributing location and corporate QA visited and had ZERO findings.

I WAS SHOCKED.

 

 

Thanks Scampi! Any advice for some key topics to hit at our discussion during the audit except the obvious?

 

We are rejecting, we have proof, we've sent our own team, i've requested another audit, I've asked for paper documentation of review of loads prior to loading.. AH! 

[lavalienteQA]

As Scampi mentioned your corporate team should review the terms of your contract. They should be itching to get refunds based on your supplier breaching your terms. On the QA end I would suggest increasing your inspection scrutiny for this supplier and of course performing your own audit. If you weren't contracted to them I would have dropped them a long time ago but alas your hands do indeed seem tied. I am hoping your contract with this company entitles you to repayment for some of this defective product, it clearly isn't what you paid for.

Thanks Brothbro!  I WOULD have dropped them too. I will review contract.. 

[jfrey123]

Review contracts for whatever complaint resolutions they've agreed to.  Corporate buyers don't like having their hands tied by QA, but in this instance it is exactly what corporate and plant level QA functions are designed to help with.  Without them talking to us prior, we can find ourselves in a position where we legitimately should delist a vendor but contractual purchase requirements prevent it.

 

I would write up a summary of what you've found, and what has been done to date with the vendor (including their responses and audit performances), and recommend to your team that the vendor be placed on hold until they can provide true and meaningful change.  Highlight how they are putting your own facility and GFSI certificate in jeopardy.  Buyers will want to shrug this off in favor of the almighty bottom line, but you might be able to get the rest of the leadership behind your cause if they realize the dangers this vendor is putting your organization in.

[Tony-C]

Hi lavalienteQA,

 

It is great that you are auditing them this week, clearly you should have the NC’s and their responses to go through as well as their whole pest management system and how effectively it is implemented on site.

 

Be interesting know what the pest is?

 

Kind regards,

 

Tony

 

[MOHAMMED ZAMEERUDDIN]

Answer to your question is NO. Pest is a serious issue. You need to look for another supplier.

[Scampi]

I would ask to schedule the audit when the PCO is onsite ----either that person is lying or the manufacturer is                if you visit and follow the PCO you'll quickly find out who the culprit is

 

ask to see their deviations or NCRs generated from your complaints (doubting they actually have any) and that will open the door to the real issues they are covering up

 

I know this sound cynical --- i'd like to be proven wrong, but alas I've seen and heard far to much to take anyone at face value where food safety is concerned

[lavalienteQA]

Hi lavalienteQA,

 

It is great that you are auditing them this week, clearly you should have the NC’s and their responses to go through as well as their whole pest management system and how effectively it is implemented on site.

 

Be interesting know what the pest is?

 

Kind regards,

 

Tony

 

 

Definitely - that's the plan.

The pest is rat. 

[lavalienteQA]

Review contracts for whatever complaint resolutions they've agreed to.  Corporate buyers don't like having their hands tied by QA, but in this instance it is exactly what corporate and plant level QA functions are designed to help with.  Without them talking to us prior, we can find ourselves in a position where we legitimately should delist a vendor but contractual purchase requirements prevent it.

 

I would write up a summary of what you've found, and what has been done to date with the vendor (including their responses and audit performances), and recommend to your team that the vendor be placed on hold until they can provide true and meaningful change.  Highlight how they are putting your own facility and GFSI certificate in jeopardy.  Buyers will want to shrug this off in favor of the almighty bottom line, but you might be able to get the rest of the leadership behind your cause if they realize the dangers this vendor is putting your organization in.

Thanks Jfrey123, Summary written and ready! Contractual agreements are wishy washy here.

[Hoosiersmoker]

Not only reject the product but send a bill for the labor to inspect and detention charges for late delivery of acceptable product! Make it hurt their pocket book.