After trying to explain to the lady from GM that we will be TS certified and 17025 compliant by years end, the crushing blow came in a single sentence...
"I don't care where the lab data comes from as long as they are accredited to 17025."
There was one bit of humor though...she said she never heard of TS and wondered how it would affect out QS status! LMAO at that one but somehow her concern eludes me.
Let me know how I can help and I will do my best. If you can think of anything I might have that might give you a start or example, send me an e-mail so I have your address.
If the auditor isn't familiar with 16949 and how it fits the overall picture, strange questions come to mind.
Is she just someone on an assignment who "thinks" she knows the requirements? Maybe she has grabbed onto a piece of information and applied it to the wrong situation.
Her crushing statement (if your quote is verbatum) says "as long as THEY ...". This makes me grab on to the possibility she is referring to your outside labs. If she was referring to your internal data you would think she would say "as long as YOU ...".
End result - you are stuck with whatever your customer requires. I stand ready to help out any way I can.
I am waiting for a fax containing a memo GM said it sent to all suppliers in early 2000 concerning internal labs.
According to GM, since they were in the process of updating certain material specifications which would incorporate GMW and ISO test methods, GM was giving internal labs one year to become ISO17025 accredited.
Unfortunately, no one we have discussed this with within our company have any recollection of ever seeing this memo. And I bet most, if not all of you reading this have either.
A Search is a terrible thing to waste! One Test is Worth 1000 Expert Opinions - The plural of anecdote is not data.
We can't solve problems by using the same kind of thinking we used when we created them. - Unknown
Round #3 Goes to GM!
Good old GM
Linear Mode
