According to the ruling just issued by the IAF, no audits to the "old" versions of ISO 9001 and 14001 should be performed after March 15th, 2018. Not even surveillance audits.
IAF Ruling - No more ISO 9001:2008 nor ISO 14001:2004 audits after 2018-03-15
- Thread starter Sidney Vianna
- Start date
B
BoardGuy
The last line of the communique is very troubling.
“Note that failure to achieve certification to the 2015 standard by the deadline means that your certification is no longer valid and this may affect your ability to supply to all markets.”
If the last part of the sentence is true then it looks like IAF and ISO might have a little trouble with the World Trade Organization as this would interfere with international trade. Any idea what they are planning?
“Note that failure to achieve certification to the 2015 standard by the deadline means that your certification is no longer valid and this may affect your ability to supply to all markets.”
If the last part of the sentence is true then it looks like IAF and ISO might have a little trouble with the World Trade Organization as this would interfere with international trade. Any idea what they are planning?
Last edited:
I wouldn’t worry much about this. A feeble attempt to instill urgency on to procrastinators. As certification is, overwhelmingly, a result of customer mandates, only the customers could determine the consequences of suppliers missing certificate transition deadlines.
The biggest issue, in my mind, is the fact that the people who are supposed to lead the conformity assessment sector never seem to learn. Since 1994, every transition period shows a high percentage of late action. Procrastination is the name of the game. I can only imagine if people setting policies on transition considered the risks of registrants procrastination. Risk. Based. Not thinking.
The biggest issue, in my mind, is the fact that the people who are supposed to lead the conformity assessment sector never seem to learn. Since 1994, every transition period shows a high percentage of late action. Procrastination is the name of the game. I can only imagine if people setting policies on transition considered the risks of registrants procrastination. Risk. Based. Not thinking.
B
BoardGuy
With all the PR spin on how great this poorly worded revision of ISO 9001 is and then blaming the companies who cannot figure requirements is not acceptable. IAQG has already issued about 50 clarifications of the ISO 9001 element of AS9100D. Is there a problem with 9001, yup.
[FONT="]
No, if there is a problem with lagging registrations this time, the blame should be on the shoulders of TC 176 and ISO not the end users.[/FONT]
[FONT="]
No, if there is a problem with lagging registrations this time, the blame should be on the shoulders of TC 176 and ISO not the end users.[/FONT]
During the last transition cycle, from ISO 9001:2000 to ISO 9001:2008, practically speaking, there was absolutely no change in the requirements of the standard. Still, as usual, the overwhelming number of transition audits happened during the last 12 months of the cycle.
So, in my experience, the delay in making the transition has very little to do with the technical aspect of the requirements, and much more to do with the fact that, most organizations, when confronted with an artificial deadline, will procrastinate. "Corporate dysfunction", pure and simple.
If audits to ISO 9001:2008 can not be done after March 2018 - what happens to the audits of ISO 9001:2008 and AS 9100C?
According to the IAQG SR 003 document, all AS9100 audits performed after last June 15 should be done to the 2016 Edition.
Similar threads
Interesting Discussion
ISO 9001 audits from the perspective of registrants' customers - an interesting paper
