Interested Parties

[Gil R.]

Hello,

I am currently involved in a surveillance audit. I just recently came onboard with this company and noticed the Quality Manual as well as all Procedures were "over-written", that is to say they were all at least twice as long as they need to be. Among the things I thought were overstated were the "Interested Parties", which included, among other things, OSHA. I'd never seen OSHA included in the IP list, but my auditor says they should be since safety is involved and OSHA could shut us down (we are a die casting company). Maybe I am misunderstanding the (AS9100) spec, but I thought interested parties were supposed to be "relevant to the quality management system".

Second question/issue: I have had charts with the following listed: Interested Parties, Requirements, and related QMS Processes
What I found at my current job is the Interested Parties list including: Needs & Expectations, QMS Risks & Opportunities, Actions Required & Effectiveness.
The information seems great, but is it really necessary for it to be included?
Thanks for your time and any input you can offer.

-Gil

 

[John Predmore]

Hello @Gil R.
If you have a critique of your QMS documents, I think you have to discuss with the management representative at your company. No one here can offer much insight on that question. As far as Interested Parties, there are 72 words in section 4.2, the description of the requirement is fairly straightforward. The auditor gave you a reasonable answer why OSHA should be on the list. There is no guidance on the length, format, frequency of review or level of detail except as it [affects] "the organization’s ability to consistently provide products and services that meet customer and applicable statutory and regulatory requirements". The company gets to decide the level of detail. Perhaps the company decided to err on the side of inclusion rather than risk overlooking something that may be important.

 

[Golfman25]

Hello,

I am currently involved in a surveillance audit. I just recently came onboard with this company and noticed the Quality Manual as well as all Procedures were "over-written", that is to say they were all at least twice as long as they need to be. Among the things I thought were overstated were the "Interested Parties", which included, among other things, OSHA. I'd never seen OSHA included in the IP list, but my auditor says they should be since safety is involved and OSHA could shut us down (we are a die casting company). Maybe I am misunderstanding the (AS9100) spec, but I thought interested parties were supposed to be "relevant to the quality management system".

Second question/issue: I have had charts with the following listed: Interested Parties, Requirements, and related QMS Processes
What I found at my current job is the Interested Parties list including: Needs & Expectations, QMS Risks & Opportunities, Actions Required & Effectiveness.
The information seems great, but is it really necessary for it to be included?
Thanks for your time and any input you can offer.

-Gil

Lazy auditors go to “training” where they get a list of interested parties. If your list doesn’t match their list you may have a problem. “The tell” here is the comment “osha could shut us down.“ Assuming they even have that power ( and the extent of that power) what is the likelihood they exercise it?

As to the second question, the lazy auditor standard applies again. Some of them love charts and stuff. You can show it to them and they move on after a cursory review.

I‘ll bet if you go over some past findings these issues may have come up and now it’s in your system. Don’t ask how I know.

 

[Big Jim]

Your list of interested parties is something you get to decide, not the auditor. The wording in the standard is "the organization shall determine".

Guidance information from training when both ISO 9001:2015 and AS9100D were introduced was that they are after categories of interested parties, not a list of all clients, all suppliers, all etc.

You are right, the standard talks about "interested parties that are relevant to the quality management system" and once again you get to determine if they are relevant or not, not the auditor.

ISO 9002:2016, which is written as a guidance document for implementing an ISO 9001:2015 system, provides a list of something like 18 examples of interested parties. This guidance does apply to your AS9100D system because element 4.2 has no aerospace enhancements. You might want to look over that list, but keep in mind that most companies only have four or five categories of interested parties identified.

I usually see something like OSHA included in a category called "statutory and regulatory bodies". A common list might include customers, suppliers, employees, owners, and regulatory bodies and that pretty much could include most any others in that list of 18 in the guidance material.

Ask for a different auditor next time. You deserve better.

 

[Randy]

Pretty good stretch, so does your list include "passengers" or people that actually fly in the things your stuff goes in or on? My being interested covers Boeing, Airbus, Embraer, Bombardier and all the associated junk that goes into them. With over 2,000,000 travel miles on one airline alone here in the US (that's in excess of 100,000 miles a year over the last 20 years or 200+ flight hours annually) so I'm definitely an interested party.

 

[Golfman25]

Pretty good stretch, so does your list include "passengers" or people that actually fly in the things your stuff goes in or on? My being interested covers Boeing, Airbus, Embraer, Bombardier and all the associated junk that goes into them. With over 2,000,000 travel miles on one airline alone here in the US (that's in excess of 100,000 miles a year over the last 20 years or 200+ flight hours annually) so I'm definitely an interested party.

Sounds like I‘ll be adding Randy. Curious to see the auditors comments.

 

[n25philly]

Pretty good stretch, so does your list include "passengers" or people that actually fly in the things your stuff goes in or on? My being interested covers Boeing, Airbus, Embraer, Bombardier and all the associated junk that goes into them. With over 2,000,000 travel miles on one airline alone here in the US (that's in excess of 100,000 miles a year over the last 20 years or 200+ flight hours annually) so I'm definitely an interested party.

Don't forget the coffee shops that the employees buy coffee from, they will lose business if you go out of business and your employees end up working somewhere else. Not to go too deep or anything though

 

[Randy]

Don't forget the coffee shops that the employees buy coffee from, they will lose business if you go out of business and your employees end up working somewhere else. Not to go too deep or anything though

Don't drink coffee and normally their tea stinks along with everything being way overpriced for value, so they can exclude me from that

 

[Tagin]

I'd never seen OSHA included in the IP list, but my auditor says they should be since safety is involved and OSHA could shut us down (we are a die casting company). Maybe I am misunderstanding the (AS9100) spec, but I thought interested parties were supposed to be "relevant to the quality management system".

Including OSHA seems a bit of a stretch to me. You could include the FBI, for that matter, because they could shut you down if they ever suspected illicit activity, and so on - it would be an endless list of government agencies that "could shut you down". So, unless you are under specific OSHA scrutiny, I would not include them. You could alternately include 'OSHA compliance' (or more generally, 'safety regulations compliance') in your 4.1 external issues.

TS9002 says "The intention is to focus on only those relevant interested parties which can have an impact on the organization’s ability to provide products and services that meet requirements." OSHA regulations are not regulations about requirements for the resulting product or service (unless maybe, say, your product is a ladder which has to have certain labeling, rating, etc. - not sure who regulates that kind of stuff).

What I found at my current job is the Interested Parties list including: Needs & Expectations, QMS Risks & Opportunities, Actions Required & Effectiveness.
The information seems great, but is it really necessary for it to be included?

I think its good, mainly because it provides a compact and explicit way to promote RBT, and easily document your exercise of reviewing 4.2.

 

[John Predmore]

Including OSHA seems a bit of a stretch to me.

I have worked in several manufacturing sites where there are undeniably safety hazards, due to the nature of the work. I have heard stories from my grandparents era when the workplace was physically dangerous to workmen, and some workers would lose fingers or eyesight or worse. Thank goodness I work in a era now when there are safety regulations and more importantly, employers embrace workplace safety culture. I agree with the opinion voiced earlier that the Interested Parties list include in principle all external forces with a significant potential impact on the continuation of operations able to fulfill its business purpose. Yet it is impractical to list all regulatory agencies with any potential influence, or limit our risk thinking to the finite list. If workplace safety is a relatively high concern for the OP's organization, listing OSHA on the Interested parties list could serve as a one-word encapsulation of all workplace safety considerations. Hopefully, OSHA enforcement is not the only reason why safety is a concern.