QS/TS Suppplier Stuff

[Bob Wright]

The owner of our small company, a supplier to the American steel industry wants us to maintain QS-9000 to differentiate us from "Garage Shops". Only one customer ever required QS, and we lost him anyway. It appears TS16949 will continue to require supplier ISO-9001 registration, etc.

Our suppliers are a joke! We purchase by-products, slags, and packaging supplies from handicapped people. Most of them don't test anything at all, or test characteristcs totally irrelevant to our use, so supplier SPC is not possible. Some of the larger ones are ISO, but many would just sell to someone else if we damanded registration. Is it possible to have non-critical suppliers for materials that go into the product or package for the application?

Should we convert to ISO9001:2000? It would make life a lot easier and still meet our customer's Big Three demands. How do I convince the boss? He still hasn't written a business plan after 5 years! Its also getting harder to "dance" with the auditors regarding these little non-conformities.


Thanks

 

[Dawn]

Bob,
You are going to need to comply to ISO 2000 by December of 2003 anyway if you want to amintain your QS cert. ISO is a stand alone certification-QS is not. Just thought I'd let you know. Hope It helps in making your decision. Also, you can separate your requirements for automobile and non-automobile. It isn't as hard as it might sound. Just state automobile specific rquiremtns in your procedures. I have done this in the past and it works fine.

 

[Howard Atkins]

According to a discussion that I had with a registrar they are not going to look at ISO9001:2000 for QS registered companies untill they get guidance from AIAG.
QS is not a stand alone document but can it be given with ISO9001:2000 as this is not part of the QS standard.
Has anyone got a definitive answer.

 

[Unregistered]

Howard,

Our registrar told me that if we do not upgrade to ISO 2000 by December 2003; we will no longer have a QS certificate either. If this is incorrect I would appreciate any other comments as I plan to bring this to the Board of Directors on Monday (Jan. 21).

 

[Roger Eastin]

Bob - I would try to convince your boss to ISO9001:2000. It gives your company a lot more flexibility and it has as good a name as QS9K! I am somewhat confused, though. You said at one point in your message that you don't have a customer that supplies the Big 3 anymore and then later in the message you state that ISO9001:2000 will satisfy your customer's who supply the Big 3. I ask that because if you have customers that supply the Big 3, then you have to go ISO9001:2000 if you go with a 3rd party audit or you can go QS9K or TS16949 if you want a 2nd party audit (your customer audits you - but this has to be approved by the Big 3).

 

[Dawn]

Are other people out there aware of the question on QS being a stand alone standard? I have questions in to the AIAG but never receive an answer from them. If our registrar states we will need to upgrade to ISO 2000 to maintain our QS certification; I have no choice than to believe them since they issue the certificate. To all the QS gurus out there-Do you realize you will no longer be certified to QS 9000 as of December 2003 if you do not upgrade to ISO 2000?

 

[D.Scott]

Did I miss something?

Where is this "must have 2000" coming from? QS-9000 is based on ISO-9000;1994 and I have read nothing stating that AIAG had any intention of upgrading the standard to fall in line with ISO -9000;2000.

Have I missed an announcement somewhere or is this a message from a particular registrar?

The latest I heard was that QS-9000 is still alive and kicking.

What is the official word?

Thanks

Note to Bob - If you are not a big 3 direct supplier, stay out of QS-9000. ISO-9000 will give you a good base and is just as saleable. I agree with Roger - go for the latest ISO.

Dave

 

[db]

QS v.s. ISO

I am going out on a limb here, as I am applying logic to QS (That is probably not a good thing ). QS is based on ISO 9001:1994. Companies that are QS are also ISO 9001, or ISO 9002. When 1994 expires, I think it will still be possible to maintain QS, but you will lose your ISO registration. Your certificate will only read “QS-9000 Compliant”. At least that is the way I see it.

But, I don’t think we will have to worry much about it. I see QS becoming officially obsoleted (is that a word?) by 16949.

 

[Greg Maggard]

So let me get this straight. I am in a plant now that supplies all over the world. We have 50% Automotive, 30% medical and 20% electronics. I was going for the TS16949, Is this going to be a problem for me. This plant has never been certified to any std. They tried about 2 years ago, but no cigar. Lead me in the right direction guys. My plan is to be certified by January 2003 TS or should I be looking at another option. We are a rubber company www.kokokuintech.com

If you're working with other people and your wanting to do a good job, always watch out for the person who's behind the person in front of you!

 

[db]

To TS, or not to TS...that is the question.

Greg,

I would hold off on TS for a couple of months at least. Wait until it comes out in its new realignment. If you need to get going immediately, then concentrate on ISO 9K2K. The realigned TS will be based on 9K2K. 9K2K also provides a great deal of flexibility for the organization. You might want to poke around the threads in that category for more information.

IMNSHO