Boundary of Clause 8.3 - Control of Nonconforming Product

[nabilpk]

Is this right that this clause is for products manufacture/produced in the company and purchased products both? Somebody told me that any violation of rules/policies/SOPs non conformance also covers that for example if someone in the organization not following leave procedure then this clause will be applied. Please suggest.

 

[somashekar]

Re: Boundary of 8.3 clause - Control of nonconforming product

Is this right that this clause is for products manufacture/produced in the company and purchased products both? Somebody told me that any violation of rules/policies/SOPs non conformance also covers that for example if someone in the organization not following leave procedure then this clause will be applied. Please suggest.

Good one this ...
This will not even come under the 8.2.3, however when you read the NOTE under the 8.2.3, you can consider how correction / corrective action can be taken up for your situation.

 

[snappy]

Re: Boundary of 8.3 clause - Control of nonconforming product

Yes, 8.3 also applies to purchased product. 7.4.1 and 7.4.3 require purchased product to be verified to meet purchasing requirements before use. If product is found not to meet requirements, it is treated as nonconforming product.

However, failure to follow a procedure itself is not nonconforming product. It is a nonconformity, however, treated according to 8.5.2--not 8.3.

 

[Big Jim]

Re: Boundary of 8.3 clause - Control of nonconforming product

Yes, 8.3 also applies to purchased product. 7.4.1 and 7.4.3 require purchased product to be verified to meet purchasing requirements before use. If product is found not to meet requirements, it is treated as nonconforming product.

However, failure to follow a procedure itself is not nonconforming product. It is a nonconformity, however, treated according to 8.5.2--not 8.3.

Unless nonconforming product is the result of not following a procedure. For example, not following a procedure for a special process could create a problem that may not be identifiable until it has been in use for some time.

 

[snappy]

Re: Boundary of 8.3 clause - Control of nonconforming product

Unless nonconforming product is the result of not following a procedure. For example, not following a procedure for a special process could create a problem that may not be identifiable until it has been in use for some time.

It is true that nonconforming product may result from not following a procedure. Are you saying in a case of a special process, for example, that not following the procedure is itself nonconforming product? Not following a procedure is not a product in the first place, thus cannot be nonconforming product.

That's why I stated that not following the procedure ITSELF is not nonconforming product. At least in this case.

 

[Big Jim]

Re: Boundary of 8.3 clause - Control of nonconforming product

It is true that nonconforming product may result from not following a procedure. Are you saying in a case of a special process, for example, that not following the procedure is itself nonconforming product? Not following a procedure is not a product in the first place, thus cannot be nonconforming product.

That's why I stated that not following the procedure ITSELF is not nonconforming product. At least in this case.

So how would you handle that situation? Would you knowingly leave questionable product in use once you discovered that it may have been compromised?

 

[nabilpk]

Actually my question has two parts:

1) Whether 8.3 clause of standard covers both manufactured and purchased products?

2) We have made one Employee Handbook in which code of conduct are mentioned plus leave taking procedures etc. This handbook is under the HR department. If someone is not following leave procedure then non-conformance should be raised. In our NC form we have to mention ISO standard clause as well. Kindly confirm which clause should be mentioned there? Is this 6.2.1 or something else?

 

[ssz102]

1. yes, that clause is covered not meet customer or yourself company requirements all products

2. if that worker had trained, this ncn doesn't belong to clause 6.2.1 and is clause 8.3

 

[Big Jim]

1. Yes.

2. Yes. 6.2.1 deals with competency first, and this employee is demonstrating a lack of it. Training does not necessarily equal competency. There really could be more than one way to deal with this sort of thing, but from what you have provided that would be my opinion.

 

[Jim Wynne]

Re: Boundary of 8.3 clause - Control of nonconforming product

Yes, 8.3 also applies to purchased product. 7.4.1 and 7.4.3 require purchased product to be verified to meet purchasing requirements before use. If product is found not to meet requirements, it is treated as nonconforming product.

However, failure to follow a procedure itself is not nonconforming product. It is a nonconformity, however, treated according to 8.5.2--not 8.3.

Unless nonconforming product is the result of not following a procedure. For example, not following a procedure for a special process could create a problem that may not be identifiable until it has been in use for some time.

It is true that nonconforming product may result from not following a procedure. Are you saying in a case of a special process, for example, that not following the procedure is itself nonconforming product? Not following a procedure is not a product in the first place, thus cannot be nonconforming product.

That's why I stated that not following the procedure ITSELF is not nonconforming product. At least in this case.

So how would you handle that situation? Would you knowingly leave questionable product in use once you discovered that it may have been compromised?

Not following the procedure is a nonconformity. Whether or not nonconforming product exists in your example is unknown, but it should be treated as nonconforming until proven otherwise. That is, it should be contained, segregated and verified.