Training records and "grandfather" clauses

[ISO_Man]

I'm reviewing training records for a group, and some of these employees have been doing their jobs for 30+ years. When I asked about training records, someone produced a blank training checklist with the words "grandfathered in due to demonstrated ability" written across the bottom. How does one address this for an ISO traceability perspective?

 

[Randy]

Pretty common, besides demonstrated ability isn't an indicator of training but it is that of competence

 

[Golfman25]

Pretty common, besides demonstrated ability isn't an indicator of training but it is that of competence

And isn't that what we are really going for -- competence.

 

[Randy]

And isn't that what we are really going for -- competence.

Yep, but try to convince people that training by itself ain't it

 

[Kiran Walimbe]

I understand that, more than Training records, what matters for both; IATF as well as VDA 6.3; is verifiable Qualification matrix. Will someone confirm this, please.

 

[JoshuaFroud]

At the end of the day, you train people to achieve competence. If someone has demonstrated competence due to previous experience gained there is little value putting them through a "new" training process. Especially if their competence is reviewed at regular interval to ensure it is not slipping.

As long as there is provision for this within the training and competence procedure/process than I see no problem with it. You would need to cover grandfathering within the process, as if the procedure states "all employees must complete the training plan" and someone has not (due to grandfathering) then that would not be in compliance with your own internal procedures.

Note: I have no experience with IATF or VDA 6.3 so if there is any specific requirement in there I am unaware. My experience is with 9001 and 13485 (Medical Devices).