TS 16949 - Allow Auditor to see Performance Evaluations?

[SteelWoman]

Allow Auditor to see Performance Evals?

In developing our TS program, we place a lot of emphasis on performance evaluations as a measure of employee competence. Raises the issue of what is auditable and what isn't. Fer instance: if I say our employee eval is a measure of competence to perform job duties, can an auditor get away with (whoa, hold off on the avalanche of responses to that - yes, I know auditors can get away with most anything! ) asking to see the content of the eval - or just the score, which is graded between, say, "Outstanding" to "Unacceptable" ???

 

[Randy Stewart]

I would say NO WAY! Anything that goes into a personnel folder needs to stay there. If they must see something show a blank form. You open yourself up to civil action by showing evaluations, even if the name was covered.

Audtors should know this.

 

[CarolX]

I agree with Randy...and our auditor won't even touch the file...he has the department head pull out the training record (which contains no other personal info).


CarolX

 

[Icy Mountain]

I agree as well. I like to keep a training record and/or competence level summary matrix for all employees in my QA files. If an auditor would like to confirm (you know the type), HR removes and replaces a training cert, evaluation score, etc. from an individual employee record, under the ever vigilant gaze of the auditor, to satisfy the auditor.

 

[SteelWoman]

Yuppers, ya'll are echoing where I was going anyway, but it just seems I'm hearing so much emphasis on this "competence" thing, and if we rely heavily (we do) on employee evals as a measure of that competence, it seems like an auditor'd have a rough time auditing that....

 

[Claes Gefvenberg]

I would say NO WAY! Anything that goes into a personnel folder needs to stay there.

And I would agree too. As an auditor I would not ask to see those records.

/Claes

 

[Randy Stewart]

if we rely heavily (we do) on employee evals as a measure of that competence,

It's not the eval (paper) that you are relying on. It's the person doing the evaluation. This is the major issue I have with this stupid "competence" thingy! The company put a person in a position (manager) because they felt he was competent. That competent person evaluated a subordinate (who works for him and he sees all the time) and determined they were competent. Why should an auditor tell me that the system isn't "good" enough or that they (the auditor) don't see enough objective evidence? If the system you have in place fulfills the company needs, the auditor can't refute it. IMO

 

[gpainter]

An auditor may ask to see these records and you simply hold them up and say they are confidential. As an auditor, I would more than likely then ask to see the approved competence evaluation form ( not filled out of course). Same way with Management Review.

 

[Randy Stewart]

I would more than likely then ask to see the approved competence evaluation form

Tell me why I need a form? Tell me why I need to prove to you (who may not have a clue what a press operator does) that they are competent? I see no "shall" for proof. It states that I have a documented procedure for "identifying training needs and achieving competence. I don't see where I have to prove, by record, anything!

 

[Rob Nix]

I'm in absolute agreement with that Randy. Sometimes if we stare at something long enough we start see all sorts of non-existent things. This is one of them.