Are Unethical Registrars a Small Minority of the Registration Community?

Are Unethical Registrars a Small Minority of the Registration Community?

  • Yes, Unethical CBs are a small minority

    Votes: 14 73.7%
  • No, unethical CBs are the majority

    Votes: 1 5.3%
  • I don't know

    Votes: 4 21.1%

  • Total voters
    19

Sidney Vianna

Post Responsibly
Leader
Admin
You can do some background checks. When was the last time and how many total times was the CB you can dig into subjected to a witness audit in India? By which of the ABs it holds accreditation from? In how many years of its functioning? Does this satisfy ISO/IEC requirements in this regard? If not, why did they get / why do they continue to hold the accreditation?
You hide under semi-anonymity and make insinuations. If you have FACTS to disclose, go ahead. Nobody in this Forum (and elsewhere) has been as vocal as myself in the quest for transparency of the accredited certification process. I have no idea of the details related to the accreditation oversight experienced by DNV in India. I am busy enough with my assignments in North America. But I would point out the cross border protocol developed under the auspices of the IAF at the risk of mentioning something you already know and may take offense to it.

I do hope you realize that innuendo and insinuations are useless to fix what you believe are unethical practices. And you obviously have an axe to grind with the certification process in India. For your mental health sake, I would suggest that you either do something constructive about it and go through the proper channels or LET GO.

Do not try to engage on a "dialogue" with me if you are going to try to cast shadows on the players, but is not willing to provide facts to support your position.
 
P

potdar

You hide under semi-anonymity and make insinuations. If you have FACTS to disclose, go ahead. Nobody in this Forum (and elsewhere) has been as vocal as myself in the quest for transparency of the accredited certification process. I have no idea of the details related to the accreditation oversight experienced by DNV in India. I am busy enough with my assignments in North America. But I would point out the cross border protocol developed under the auspices of the IAF at the risk of mentioning something you already know and may take offense to it.

I do hope you realize that innuendo and insinuations are useless to fix what you believe are unethical practices. And you obviously have an axe to grind with the certification process in India. For your mental health sake, I would suggest that you either do something constructive about it and go through the proper channels or LET GO.

Do not try to engage on a "dialogue" with me if you are going to try to cast shadows on the players, but is not willing to provide facts to support your position.

My personal apologies to you. I chose wrong words to express myself.

You are right in concluding that I have an axe to grind against the accreditation (not certification) process - only I am not alluding to India only, but the process in general. Again, as you have suggested, I have already LET GO about four years ago. Only I couldnt hold back when the topic came up for discussion here again.

Having said that, let me try again to say what I had set out to say but went astray. I have only one point to put up and I am inviting people (not Sidney per se) to think on it:

If there are unethical registrars around (again, not DNV specifically), which I think people generally seem to agree with so far, do the ABs not carry their share of the blame? What are they / should they be doing about it?

My share of facts and figures, which came to me as a part of my work, was put up through official channels for consideration. The effort was a waste. I would never discuss any official information in a public forum even at the cost of being labelled as 'hiding under semi anonymity and insinuating'. For the same reason, I would understand it if anyone does his bit of research but does not want to put up the details here. If anyone puts up even an indicative note here, which is more of a norm, I take him at face value.

I do not intend to force my standards on anybody. Unfortunately my expression, improperly worded, was taken on a personal and offensive note.

I can definitely provide certain well known facts which are in public domain. The cross border protocol or even the ISO/IEC standard are recent developments. Accreditated CBs were present in India as long ago as 1980s. One can rarely find any record of an oversight being conducted. I would not stretch my neck any further.

I do not accept the onus of proving myself NOT GUILTY. Ignore me if that suits you.:truce:
 

Marc

Fully vaccinated are you?
Leader
I can definitely provide certain well known facts which are in public domain.
Then please do so...

Sidney and Potdar - Please remember you are in an international forum where your words represent you as individuals.

I advise both of you to cite facts and refrain from 'darting' each other in your posts.

Thank you.

Marc
 
P

potdar

Then please do so...

I have given the facts.

Accreditated CBs were present in India as long ago as 1980s. One can rarely find any record of an oversight being conducted. I would not stretch my neck any further.

I will not be making any statements like 'CB ABC was accreditated by AB XYZ in year 9999 without conducting an oversight'. If I have any details of this sort with me, then they are due to official involvement. These specifics are not for public consumption.

Sidney and Potdar - Please remember you are in an international forum where your words represent you as individuals.

I advise both of you to cite facts and refrain from 'darting' each other in your posts.

Thank you.

Marc

I edited my post when I agreed that it was inappropriately worded and could be misread. This time I thought I had written a concilliatary note with a clarification. If it still appears personally addressed, I am again sorry. I would request that these posts be deleted as a moderating action.

I intended to generate a different branch of thinking on this subject. But it is degenerating into something undesirable. If it continues in the same line, I would rather LET GO.
 

Sidney Vianna

Post Responsibly
Leader
Admin
This is an old, old thread, but some (broken link removed) are worth reporting here:

In an offbeat decision for an accreditation body, NABCB had decided to engage private detective agencies to investigate antecedents of owners of certification bodies and suspected cases of unethical practices given that the certification scene in India is bedevilled by malpractices and poor quality of certification.
 
P

potdar

Thanks Sidney for reviving the thread. I had LET GO of even discussing this issue almost 6 years ago.

Kudos to NABCB for picking up the gauntlet. Hope other ABs all over the world take a cue.

Good to speak to you all. The issue brings me back to the Cove after a very long gap.
 
P

potdar

P.S.

Doing some research on the issue I discover that hiring of detective agencies is something new but NABCB first suspended Accreditation of some CBs as early as 2007 and have been regularly at it. :applause:
 

somashekar

Leader
Admin
What is your take on CB's like URS, BAS, TNV, QMS global, Quay, BV group, TUV austria, SWISS Cert, KVAQ .... and many more
and AB's like DAC, EGAC, ASCB (E), QS, NORSK Akkreditering, ..... and a few more.
Between them they have covered the Asia and the middle east majorly.
 
Top Bottom