I see in the latest ActionLine magazine that the AIAG is having a "Rollout Workshop" on ISO16949 on 13 December. Anyone going? I also see that it says in the text that the IATF has already developed (and apparently ready to discuss) 3rd party registration schemes. I guess they also have ready the Customer-specific requirements. The workshop lasts 2.5 hours. I wonder how much can be shared in that amount of time?

Where is it? How much? Only 2.5 hours? That's a 'workshop'?

I might go if it's up in Detroit if any of you want to meet there or something.

The "Workshop" is in Novi, Michigan (I assume this is close to Detroit), costs $125.00, and is scheduled for 13 December. You have your choice of a morning or afternoon session! I have to believe that this will be a "spoon-feed" session with some questions at the end of it. Since I live in South Carolina, it's hard to justify flying to a 2.5 hour seminar in Detroit, but, heck, if you are close to Detroit, it's probably worth it.

Well - it's 'sorta close' (well, 4 hours driving 1 way from Cincinnati) and if I'm not busy... I might. Could you please FAX me the info page you have?

Eastern Michigan University is offering a 2 day class on 16949. I am signed up for the class on 11/22 and 11/23/99.
This class is in Ypsilanti (due west of Detroit) about 1 hour normal drive time or 15 minutes Detroit type driving drive time


------------------

I hate to pay the AIAG. But then - they get their 'cut' one way or another. Lemme see. At their Novi 'Workshop' (I wondwer how these QS folks define Workshop!!!!) 500 souls per session times 2 sessions times US$125 = US$125,000.00 [to me US$125000 is real money...]. What can they tell you in 2 hours, pray tell?

Their cost = Not quite US$125,000.00 I betcha.

Ummm - think this is a ripoff or what!?!

I've decided to listen to the grapevine.

What's EMU charging and what's their 'agenda'?

I don't blame you for looking at the EMU seminar. However, I wonder with the "Heavies" (Steve Walsh,etc) speaking at the AIAG seminar whether they will have more information. I have read the 16949 standard and it isn't that much different than QS so my questions have to do more with customer-specific requirements (as well as PPAP,etc) and the auditor requirements than with the standard itself. Still, I know all that will be hard to cover in 2.5 hours. Of course, Lansing is no closer than Novi to South Carolina so I guess I'll just listen to those of you who are closer (and go to one of the seminars)!

The same for me, please let us have a report.
Israel is even further than South Carolina
Howard

Roll call!

Is anyone going to either of these?

Nope....will wait for the registrar's take on it all

Hello..I am new to this website and I would like to thank you all (especially Cheech Wizard) for putting together an excellent forum that in my opinion will provide more useful info than any other website.

I work in Detroit for a Tier 1 supplier that is in it's "start up" phase (less than a year). I am the newly hired QS-9000 administrator with the task in hand of preparing this company for certification. Everything was going along fine until I heard about TS 16949..I will be signing up for the Rollout workshop here, I am too late for the EMU class and I wonder about AIAG's pricing also. Seems to me that a lot of organizations stand to lose money if QS-9000 becomes defunct due to the tons of material, software and books for sale out there. Maybe this is why organizations are keeping very tight-lipped about TS-16949 replacing QS if that is going to happen.

Now that I have found a forum of discussion, I will relay any info that I receive from the "workshop" to here for all to look at.

Again, thanks for the information from all of you regarding a very confusing situation.

Do let us hear. I'm a cheap skate and really hate to fork over $ for a couple of hours of what I expect to be semi-dribble.

I'm with Barb on this one - let the registrars learn about it first.

Ok gang,I went to the TS-16949 rollout meeting yesterday to see what was up with this thing and this is what i found out:
1. TS-16949 is NOT going to replace QS-9000

2. It is an OPTION. You can either be certified to QS9000 or TS16949.

3.The main push for TS is an international one. The Big 3 want to sell more cars overseas. However, the europeans want to see the American Manufactures adopt to their standards. So the big 3 got together and incorporated their standards to America's QS-9000. However the Asian market wants nothing to do with it. So technically it is not a complete WORLD-WIDE Standard although the big 3 would like it to be. I feel this is the big 3's attempt to expand their market-base and if they can't get enough suppliers to jump on the TS16949 bandwagon, the next step for them is to make it mandatory to be certified to TS. The only reason (in my humble opinion) that they have not made it mandatory is due to the fact that it would cost the supplier community 1,000s of dollars to be re-certified to TS and that would anger the quality world to see a customer based body applying their muscle just to simply expand their market base. It always boils down to dollars, folks, but I guess that is just the way it is.
If you would like the exact specifics of the changes, please feel free to post a note and let me know and I will be more than happy to post the exact changes.

Any other details you want to take the time to post will be appreciated by all!

Yeah, please post some details. If there are a lot of details, make a .pdf file out of it. I don't buy the fact, though, that TS won't replace QS. I think that's temporary "hedge". OK, it may not be accepted completely yet, but I think it is a matter of time (and short time, at that). I think there are economic reasons for the B3 going to TS. The big one that Chrsyler brought out at the meeting that I went to, was the B3 won't have to maintain the same costly infrastructure to maintain the standard. Also, they won't have to "rein in" the auditors (they think!) they way they have to with QS. (They've been very disappointed with QS 3rd party auditors, as I mentioned before.) I think, at this point, they don't want to scare their suppliers with a "new" standard. This, I think, will change with the new year. That's my nickel's worth...

Can someone tell me how to get a copy of the draft? Email me on this. I guess it wouldn't be politically correct to post, unless there is a website that has the document.

------------------

I purchased a copy from AIAG. I like their terms and definitions much better than the QSR version. Very interesting.

Roger, I agree with you. The draft version of the automotive registrar registration scheme, include qualifications for TS auditors and (as it stands) requires auditors to be (re-in'ed) after a certain time period

Originally posted by Bill Harris on 14 December 1999

Ok gang, I went to the TS-16949 rollout meeting yesterday to see what was up with this thing and this is what i found out:

1. TS-16949 is NOT going to replace QS-9000

2. It is an OPTION. You can either be certified to QS9000 or TS16949.I wonder if this is still the 'Official' stance? Ford has dumped it. GM has effectively dumped it. Hasn't Chrysler made a statement? I forget what the status is with Chrysler.

Here we are. Almost 2 years later...