Feeling safe on Tier 2? New GM requirement on their PR/R

[D.Scott]

Feeling safe on Tier 2?

Has anybody noticed the new GM requirement on their PR/R?

When a tier 1 supplier receives a PR/R as a result of a tier 2 supplier, the tier 1 supplier is required to identify the tier 2 supplier by Duns number, company name and address in their report to GM.

This is presumably to exert pressure - containment - probation - etc. on the suppliers in the lower tiers and not registered to TS.

Past experience should give us all the confidence that none of our suppliers would ever infer that we were the cause of a problem just to dodge the bullet. I can rest comfortably knowing that the stuff rolling down the hill is not really what it looks and smells like.

Dave

 

[Marc]

Anyone???

 

[Wes Bucey]

Anyone???

Some truths don't need elaboration.
Gravity is gravity.
Dung is dung.
Dung always rolls downhill.

 

[The Taz!]

Some truths don't need elaboration.
Gravity is gravity.
Dung is dung.
Dung always rolls downhill.

And some people have way too much time on their hands. . .

 

[Joe Cruse]

Been there and done that already

FedEx issued a PRR into GM's system against us a couple of weeks ago. The bar code on our product label showed the incorrect part number for the alloy, which was a new product for us to ship GM at this melt shop.

Per the directive, FedEx issued, which we were obligated to answer. It took 2 people from the GM location, 2 from their ESN people, and one person from FedEx to track down what happened.

Here's kicker #1: We typed in a letter O in place of the number 0 in the part# on our customer profile. When I obtained a copy of GM's PO to us, I had great difficulty distinguishing O from 0, in their font, myself. Since it went into our system this way, all labels and paperwork was prepared with this mistake.

Kicker #2: The GM plant does not even USE the bar codes! If FedEx had not raised the issue, it never would have been raised.

I answered the PRR with the root cause given above, and told them the profile and all associated lableing/paperwork entries were audited and corrected.

I also told them in the answer that they should look at either dropping the use of zeros or letter O's from part#'s or use a font that better delineates the two characters. They accepted the response and closed it before I had the chance to add final comments to the PRR. I've seen several companies out there that don't use the letter O in part#'s or serial#'s, because of such mistakes.

Joe

 

[Bigfoot]

What No Labeling FMEA??

Been there and done that already

FedEx issued a PRR into GM's system against us a couple of weeks ago. The bar code on our product label showed the incorrect part number for the alloy, which was a new product for us to ship GM at this melt shop.

Per the directive, FedEx issued, which we were obligated to answer. It took 2 people from the GM location, 2 from their ESN people, and one person from FedEx to track down what happened.

Here's kicker #1: We typed in a letter O in place of the number 0 in the part# on our customer profile. When I obtained a copy of GM's PO to us, I had great difficulty distinguishing O from 0, in their font, myself. Since it went into our system this way, all labels and paperwork was prepared with this mistake.

Kicker #2: The GM plant does not even USE the bar codes! If FedEx had not raised the issue, it never would have been raised.

I answered the PRR with the root cause given above, and told them the profile and all associated lableing/paperwork entries were audited and corrected.

I also told them in the answer that they should look at either dropping the use of zeros or letter O's from part#'s or use a font that better delineates the two characters. They accepted the response and closed it before I had the chance to add final comments to the PRR. I've seen several companies out there that don't use the letter O in part#'s or serial#'s, because of such mistakes.

Joe

Joe - I had a similar experience due to a rack location not being printed on the bar code label. Turned out that the information for the rack location was supposed to be transmitted via EDI (or whatever the electronic torment they are choosing) by the same location that issued us the PRR. During this episode we found that all of the hoopla over the rack location was not because they couldn't scan it, they did not have the ability to scan the 2D bar code labels. Then they started suggesting that we do a labeling FMEA for this process.