In Reply to Parent Post by J Allen
I just completed the registrars surveillance audit of my company to AS9100 Rev B and ISO 9001:2008.
I received a minor for not updating my QA Manual to ISO 9001:2008. I took a look at the changes that were made so I could incorporate them into my manual and realized that the changes that were made for "clarification" did not really affect my QMS. It makes me wonder why so much effort was put into the revision from 2000 that turns out to be of little substance.
I see this as the auditor trying to justify his/her existance, what actual part of the standard was this raised against, i assume it was 4.2.3 f/g
As someone said earlier, it was a money making exercise and although most of the changes are "for guidence" or clarification. Not only does it bring in revenue for new copies of the standard but it also facilitates extra auditing/consulting/review days for external auditing bodies and consultants.
A prime example of which is our external auditor is dragging it holding up the "sword of damocles" over our heads, we have a new MR who is a relevant rookie when it comes to ISO, and at first seemed to cling to the word of the auditor, until after their first meeting, I explained her tactics and thankfully the MR saw through the auditor but by this time the auditor has got 4 extra days out of us this year.
The recent changes to TS16949 were even less to the extent that we saw no point in purchasing the required 15 copies at £69 each as they are not available in downloadable pdf format in the UK. These also only come in A5 size in the UK and I like my standards in A4 as I keep them all in one ring binder which is helpful when you are referring to 5.
If they are going to charge huge amounts of money for these at least give them to us in a usable format.
As we work for a very large international company our external TS auditor from germany laughed when we stressed that the four of us in the audit were sharing one copy - yeah right
and also inferred that it was a money making exercise.