New Standard - Qs 4?? TS16949 will not pass the vote for a standard

[Teri - 2011]

Good Monday to all!!

Just had our surveillence audit. Our auditor dropped hints, that TS16949 will not pass the vote for a standard. She stated that TS was not doing what "they" (the big 3?) wanted it to do, and that many suppliers were having problems getting TS certified, she hinted at a new standard, coming soon (QS4).

Just curious,, has anybody heard of it? Any news out there?

 

[WALLACE]

I can verify that many of Ford's suppliers are either having an extreme struggle with the latest TS offering or just walking away from the standard and Ford, nothing short of anarchy at this time.
TS has been almost impossible for some suppliers to commit to.
That's all I can say.
Regarding a new standard for the auto sector. Yes, I have actually read some of the papers relating to the possibility of a Q standard that accommodates the auto sectors and their suppliers. the papers were Ford specific.
Again, that's all I can say.
Wallace.

 

[Bill Ryan - 2007]

I haven't heard anything but, to be honest, I wouldn't be very surprised. I wonder if it's truly "having problems getting TS certified" or some other "stuff".... hmmmmmm.

Back to "Flavor of the Month" in automotive.

 

[Kevin H]

Qs 4

Hi Terry,
I'm with a tier 2 supplier that is TS registered - haven't run across any hints of a QS 4 from either our customers (some of whom are still QS-9000 even though they're tier 1) or our registrar. I do have a friend who's working for a Tier 1 supplier - he told me 2 years ago that Ford was requiring both TS & Ford's Q1 of his company.

As far as US car manufacturer's being unsatisfied, I'm not surprised they basically require continual cost reduction in parts from their suppliers. With the changes in the market for raw materials this year, I doubt that they're getting as much back as they think they should. Our biggest raw material is scrap - cost up about 50 % so far this year. We've had to institute a surcharge to our customers to cover our raw material costs - I'm sure that they're trying to recover it from their automotive customers. My personal impression from working at a tier 1 and then a tier 2 for the past 10+ years is that the automotive companies are trying to beat a dead horse.

I'm interested to hear if anyone else can confirm this latest scoop on automotive quality requirements. If it's true, I'm not the least bit surprised.

 

[fransmead]

Hi. I've been reading this and asked our registrar. I was told there is a meeting next week with the IAOB but no one has heard anything about this.
This sight is great and helped me get our company TS registered in Sept.

 

[SilverHawk]

Ts 16949 : 2008

I have a quick glance thru the IAOB presenattion on 2nd Rule and may have read something about that the ISO/TS 16949:2002 will still remains as it is until the year 2008!!!!

IATF is going to seek the ISO Secretariat for permission to "keep" it that way until 2008. Usually, under the ISO standard rules, the any TS is required to undergo a "review" to debate whether it is still "good" and accepted for another three (3) before voted OUT and upgraded to ISO standard....

 

[dbrajkovich]

Simulation Requirements

Hi

I have heard that there is a Simulation requirement/element for the TS audit controls.

Can anyone elaborate? I have searched the web and have seen some articles but nothing in detail

Best Regards

Dave Brajkovich
ESSI Inc

 

[db]

Good Monday to all!!

Just had our surveillence audit. Our auditor dropped hints, that TS16949 will not pass the vote for a standard. She stated that TS was not doing what "they" (the big 3?) wanted it to do, and that many suppliers were having problems getting TS certified, she hinted at a new standard, coming soon (QS4).

Just curious,, has anybody heard of it? Any news out there?

The reason it is a TS is because it failed the vote (based on my understanding). As far as its longevity, remember the clock started ticking when TS first came out (1st edition)

 

[fransmead]

I just received an email from our registrar about the IAOB wants to know where I heard that there might be a new standard. I just told her it was on a quality site that I use. I will post again when she emails me back.

 

[vanputten]

I can share a couple of things. TS 16949:2002 is a document that was created and approved via the consensus processes under ISO. It is not a Ford, Chrysler, or GM document. It is an international document. If you look on page ii, you can see all of the auto industries that support TS. Also, the Foreword describes why this document is a Techniocal Specification. It did not "fail" a vote. It did only recieve 2/3 of the member body votes and therefore it became a TS. A document must get a 75% vote to be an international standard.

The reason 2008 is being associated with TS 16949, is because it looks like ISO 9001:2000 will not have a completed review cycle until 2008. Since TS 16949 is based upon ISO 9001:2000, it does not make sense to review TS 16949 until ISO 9001:2000 completes its review cycle. This was put to a vote and ISO member bodies voted an approval to not review TS 16949:2002 until ISO 9001:2000 is reviewed. There is not set date but educated guesses put these review cycles to be complete in 2008.

Being a member of the US Technical Advisory Group to ISO, I have heard nothing of a new automotive standard. To the contrary, support is being put to TS 16949:2002. If The Big 3 in the US create another non-consensus standard for their supppliers (like Q1), that is their decision.

Regards, Dirk