4 replies to this topic

[GMO]

On the SQF v 10 thread someone mentioned about how they're going back to the drawing board on GFSI.  I just saw another comment on Linkedin about how GFSI were insisting on a food science degree for auditors in this latest round of benchmarking.

 

1. Is this true?  I like many come from a science but not food science background.  
2. I assume it only means for GFSI approved 3rd party auditors but is this a slippery slope?
3. Does this mean GFSI believe that microbiologists, chemists, biologists, biochemists, biomedical scientists (etc) don't understand food science?  Did they check our degree syllabuses?!
4. Does it mean they don't value our experience?
5. Could this be (one) of the reasons they've gone back for more discussion?
6. If not, if anyone has influence, please can you nudge them about this?  Because if you think there's an auditor crisis now, just you wait...

[Scampi]

is this the linkedin post your referring to?

https://www.linkedin...d-m-naim-khalid

 

SQFI says this

https://www.sqfi.com...nical-reviewers

[GMO]

No, I've just found it, this:

 

Benchmarking_Requirements_v2024_Implementation_Handbook_Part_II.pdf

 

p22

 

 

Bioscience degree with focus on food, specified syllabus (including food waste, you find me a university bothered about that in the 1990s) and no grandfather rights.

 

So I can work as a senior technical / food safety employee but I couldn't audit the people who work / worked for me?

 

That's what GFSI are saying.

[jfrey123]

If I'm reading that right, the food science degree applies to auditors working at a CB.

 

P23 of your link has some other interesting caveats to the degree requirement:

 

Educational Qualifications

• Auditors must hold a degree in a relevant discipline or have completed a related higher education course.

• Certification Bodies must confirm and retain records of all qualifications.

 

No Grandfather Rights

All auditors, regardless of tenure, must meet current requirements. Certification Bodies should review qualifications and experience to ensure compliance.

 

Degree Relevance:

The degree subject must be appropriate for the auditor’s sector. For example, Chemistry and Veterinary Science may be acceptable for scopes A1, A2, and C0, while Veterinary Science is less suitable for C4, and Environmental Biology is generally not appropriate.

 

Justification and Equivalence:

Justifications for "relevant" higher education courses or "equivalent" qualifications must be robust and defensible, with evidence and consideration of course details including learning outcomes and duration or professional experience.

HACCP Training: HACCP or Hazard and Risk Assessment training must be separate from other qualifications (e. g., degrees) and aligned with the auditor's sector of activities.

Framework Reference: The GFSI Food Safety Auditor Professional Development Framework may be used as a reference for qualifications and training standards.

 

Then on P24, section 4.11 covers "Scope Extension of Auditor Activities" which appears to allow wiggle room for existing auditors to receive training in a new sector if their prior education isn't sufficient for a new area of activity.

 

 

BUT THEN...

 

I skimmed down to P46, 6.17 for Internal Auditors.  "Internal auditors shall meet similar or comparable requirements to those for external auditors, as set out within each Certification Programme Owner’s rules. This shall include, at a minimum, requirements related to internal auditor education, training, work experience or other qualifications. Their qualifications shall be assessed annually by the Certification Body.

 

Certification Programme Owners may require the organisation’s internal auditors to successfully complete the Certification Programme Owners specific auditor training."

 

So, if I'm reading that correctly, self-auditing one's company to SQF standard could be updated to require specific paid SQF training courses (whereas current SQF practitioners can just demonstrate proficiency), and possibly the degree in food science.

 

What a fuster cluck...

[TimG]

Oh wow, for internal auditors "Their qualifications shall be assessed annually by the Certification Body."

So, at time of audit by the auditor? Or are they going to enroll us in an annual subscription service to their qualification assessment? (sarcasm here, kind of...)

I kind of smell an attempt to generate income by 'requiring' qualifications and then offering training for said qualifications, but I might be wrong..