|
This thread is carried over and continued in the Current Elsmar Cove Forums 
|
|
|
This thread is carried over and continued in the Current Elsmar Cove Forums
|
The New Elsmar Cove Forums
|
 The New Elsmar Cove Forums
 QS-9000
 New IASG 3rd Edition Interpretations
|
 UBBFriend: Email This Page to Someone! |
next newest topic | next oldest topic |
| Author | Topic: New IASG 3rd Edition Interpretations |
|
Joe Ptak Lurker (<10 Posts) Posts: 4 |
posted 28 January 1999 04:46 PM
   
I just received a fax from our registrar which mentioned the newly-issued IASG QS-9000 3rd Edition Sanctioned Interpretations of January 22, 1999. Anyone hear anything about this, or if they are available anywhere on the web? IP: Logged |
|
Bryon C Simmons Forum Contributor Posts: 65 |
posted 28 January 1999 04:51 PM
Really??? News to me......I didnt know there were going to be any more Interpretations published by IASG. I would like to get me a copy too.......if anybody knows where or how. Bryon IP: Logged |
|
Marc Smith Cheech Wizard Posts: 4119 |
posted 28 January 1999 04:55 PM
Here we go again! IP: Logged |
|
Bryon C Simmons Forum Contributor Posts: 65 |
posted 28 January 1999 07:12 PM
No kidding, Marc. THe merry-go-round is spinning faster....is it ever gonna stop?
Bryon IP: Logged |
|
Marc Smith Cheech Wizard Posts: 4119 |
posted 29 January 1999 09:05 AM
rdparris wrote: quote: Well, I see you're new to this game! NOTE!!! No more interpretations exist! He he he! Yeah, big 3, right. No more need for interpretations.... Chuckle chuckle! Tee hee hee! Haw haw haw! Note to dparris: I'm not aiming this 'humour' at you. I just wanted to use the quote because of the context! [This message has been edited by Marc Smith (edited 20 August 1999).] IP: Logged |
|
Roger Eastin Forum Wizard Posts: 345 |
posted 29 January 1999 04:03 PM
I guess your faith in the QS9K standard is better than mine. I never see Sanctioned Interpretations going away. QS attempts to look like a generic spec like ISO, but it is actually very prescriptive. Along with that comes Sanctioned Interpretations. Look at how many questions (cumulative) we get in this Q&A forum for QS-stuff compared to ISO. In fact, I think we ain't seen nothin' yet if QS continues to get more prescriptive! Maybe the ISO light will go off in the Big 3 think tank and QS will get simpler! Somehow I don't think so........ IP: Logged |
|
Marc Smith Cheech Wizard Posts: 4119 |
posted 29 January 1999 04:18 PM
Yeah - I know. It was just that rumour that I fell for (interpretations by AISG [or whatever] were extinct). Nope - I have no 'faith' in QS9000. QS9000 is a customer requirement, not an international spec. Because of my military manufacturing experience, I equate it to the vague (sometimes) or simply confusing or just plain stupid (often) Mil-Specs I used to work with. Remember $500 hammers? On the other hand there 'some' good points to QS9000. One is my business increases (he he he No, really, QS has good points. Just poorly written, attempts to address a wide spectrum of industries but is too narrow to do so, etc., etc. And I just LOVE the copyright on the interpretations! IP: Logged |
|
rdparris Lurker (<10 Posts) Posts: 2 |
posted 29 January 1999 08:55 PM
In response to Marc's comments about the interpretations. I personally attended the big 3 roll out meeting in Detroit held by the top taskforce members with suppliers and was told (no rumor) that there would be no need for more interpretations. That there would be no interpretations. I just found out today that we're back into this circle again. Am I management rep....or a lawyer just trying to keep up with ever variable laws? IP: Logged |
|
Marc Smith Cheech Wizard Posts: 4119 |
posted 31 January 1999 09:44 PM
quote: Now that you mention it..... You're a lawyer! Take a good look at what I wrote back when I set this site up. AIAG, IASG, Plexus - it's not bribery and it may not technically be criminal, but it's usery. "You need our training! You need our books! You need 'certified' internal auditors! You need registration! You need to put Ford, GM and Chrysler FIRST! However I will say, when a company chooses to court Ford, GM and Chrysler, their choice is to (attampt to) comply. The old 'You asked for it!' Can you say: "Moving Target"? "Vague"? "Interest Group"? "Conflict of Interest"? "Inflexible"? "Expensive"? "More 'Interpretations'"? [This message has been edited by Marc Smith (edited 20 August 1999).] IP: Logged |
|
Gordon Forum Contributor Posts: 10 |
posted 16 February 1999 11:52 AM
Doesn't QS9K sound more like the Mafia and the "protection money" racket... IP: Logged |
|
Dawn Forum Contributor Posts: 245 |
posted 16 February 1999 06:14 PM
As far as getting a hold of the Big 3, I have tried over 3 months ago, called and faxed and never received an answer. My question was answered though....on this Forum. IP: Logged |
|
Marc Smith Cheech Wizard Posts: 4119 |
posted 19 February 1999 06:17 PM
I long ago learned - with the big three its typically: Don't call me - I'll call you... IP: Logged |
|
Howard Atkins Forum Wizard Posts: 202 |
posted 19 February 1999 10:58 PM
Marc is right, if we treated our suppliers as they treated us we would all get non-conformances etc. Delphi is now learning from GM the real story, they were part of the gang and now they are on their own and hurting, see https://elsmar.com/ubb/Forum3/HTML/000015.html IP: Logged |
|
Marc Smith Cheech Wizard Posts: 4119 |
posted 19 March 1999 11:45 PM
Has anyone heard of any more plans for 'interpretations'? [This message has been edited by Marc Smith (edited 03-19-99).] IP: Logged |
|
Linda Flaherty Lurker (<10 Posts) Posts: 1 |
posted 14 June 1999 08:46 AM
When new interpretations come out, you'll see them at: www.asq.org/standcert/qs-9000/offcpub.html I would expect more. ADMIN NOTE: Don't get caught printing them out or downloading them unless you get written permission first or the AIAG may threaten to sue. See the following. [This message has been edited by admin (edited 20 August 1999).] IP: Logged |
|
Marc Smith Cheech Wizard Posts: 4119 |
posted 20 August 1999 03:23 PM
Had to take the interpretations down. Beth is being childish. If all the companies that pass around copies of interpretations, not to mention those that have them on their intranet, are sued for copyright infringement - heck - 'nuff said... Most interesting especially is that the portion of QS9000 which was posted was from the obsolete version - it was posted to give people a 'flavour' for what QS9000 is. I get calls with regularity asking 'What is this QS9000 that I'm being required to do?' Figured this would be better than an explaination, but I guess Beth doesn't agree. Oh well - for your amazement, Beth's followup e-mail threat follows: Subject: QS-9000 Copyright violation Marc T. Smith: As per my email to you dated April 30, 1999, and my conversation with you today, August 20, 1999, you are to immediately remove the DaimlerChrysler, Ford and General Motors Quality System Requirements, QS-9000 manual text from your website. The QS-9000 manual is the intellectual (sic) property of DaimlerChrysler, Ford and General Motors, and is copyright-protected. Under copyright law, the QS-9000 or any QS-9000 extract, may not be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic, photocopy, recording or otherwise, without prior written permission. Any reproduction may be subject to royalty payment(s) and/or licensing agreement. Violators will be prosecuted. Your placement of QS-9000, ISO/TS 16949, IASG Sanctioned Interpretations, or any other DaimlerChrysler, Ford and General Motors quality manual on your website is unauthorized and is considered copyright infringement. The Automotive Industry Action Group, AIAG, on behalf of DaimlerChrysler, Ford and General Motors, is demanding the material be removed immediately. Per our August 20 conversation you indicated the material would be removed today (in 30 minutes). If AIAG, or the Big 3, find this material, or any other Big 3 material, is not removed, or reappears on your website, legal action will be immediately pursued. If this email is not clear to you or you have any further questions, please do not hesitate to give me a call. I can be reached at(248)358-3253 or send me an email. Thank you for giving this matter your prompt attention. Elizabeth E. Baker [This message has been edited by Marc Smith (edited 20 August 1999).] IP: Logged |
|
Rea Forum Contributor Posts: 12 |
posted 18 November 1999 10:25 AM
Interpretations dated 1 November 99 are now available at:- www.asq.org/standcert/qs-9000/offcpub.html IP: Logged |
|
David Guffey Forum Contributor Posts: 49 |
posted 19 November 1999 03:24 PM
Believe her...they really are. IP: Logged |
|
Elberth Ardila Tabera unregistered |
posted 25 November 1999 07:05 PM
The interpretations have some interesting topics about registration/accreditation comments? IP: Logged |
All times are Eastern Standard Time (USA) | next newest topic | next oldest topic |
  |
Hop to: |
Your Input Into These Forums Is Appreciated! Thanks!
Main Site Search 
)