|
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
 Ford and GM Require ISO14001
|
 UBBFriend: Email This Page to Someone! |
next newest topic | next oldest topic |
| Author | Topic: Ford and GM Require ISO14001 |
|
dewie Forum Contributor Posts: 44 |
posted 06 November 1999 12:42 PM
   
Have anyone heard about Ford,s requirement about their supplier to get not only QS9000 but also ISO 14001? IP: Logged |
|
Mike525 Forum Contributor Posts: 49 |
posted 08 November 1999 11:01 AM
In the Ford-specific requirements section of the QSR manual, it says Ford suppliers are not required to pursue 3rd party registration to QS-9000. When did this change? [This message has been edited by Marc Smith (edited 05 March 2000).] IP: Logged |
|
Marc Smith Cheech Wizard Posts: 4119 |
posted 08 November 1999 12:40 PM
I don't think Ford ever specificaly required registration. They required a company to be working towards it, as I remember. I may be wrong here, however. IP: Logged |
|
Laura M Forum Contributor Posts: 299 |
posted 08 November 1999 06:43 PM
I always heard Ford required "compliance" not registration to QS. But they had a deadline..not just working towards. IP: Logged |
|
Marc Smith Cheech Wizard Posts: 4119 |
posted 08 November 1999 07:18 PM
Well - yeah. You have to have QOS and a plan for QS. Havta have a plan and havta be followin' the plan 'within reason'. IP: Logged |
|
Roger Eastin Forum Wizard Posts: 345 |
posted 09 November 1999 07:45 AM
I think the Ford requirement for ISO14001 compliance is world-wide. IP: Logged |
|
Spaceman Spiff Forum Contributor Posts: 64 |
posted 09 November 1999 08:00 AM
I just read on the Quality Digest website that GM also announced the ISO14000 compliance requirements for all its suppliers. Here we go again! IP: Logged |
|
dewie Forum Contributor Posts: 44 |
posted 09 November 1999 09:10 AM
I've heard that FORD's supplier need to register for QS9000 in the year 2000,but ISO14000 no exactly due date. So surprised that GM requires ISO14000, too. IP: Logged |
|
Marc Smith Cheech Wizard Posts: 4119 |
posted 10 November 1999 06:22 PM
Ford will require manufacturing suppliers to conform to ISO14001 by 1 July 2003. GM has set a deadline of 31 December 2002 for its suppliers and their own facilities (or so they say). IP: Logged |
|
Roger Eastin Forum Wizard Posts: 345 |
posted 11 November 1999 08:28 AM
I think the other Ford ISO14001 registration requirement is that you have to have one faciltiy registered by the end of 2001. GM's requirement, I think, is to have all facilities compliant (not necessarily registered) by Dec 2002. I don't think GM is requiring any registrations to ISO14001, just compliance. Also, Chrylser has not come out with anything on ISO14001 yet. IP: Logged |
|
CClark Lurker (<10 Posts) Posts: 1 |
posted 11 November 1999 03:17 PM
What does this mean to tier 2 suppliers? Also-will NACD Responsible care or NPCA Coatings Care requirements be acceptable alternatives, since they track very closely to ISO-14000? IP: Logged |
|
Randy Forum Wizard Posts: 228 |
posted 11 November 1999 04:01 PM
Only Tier 1 are required as of now, but the others should start looking into 14K themselves. IP: Logged |
|
ALM Forum Contributor Posts: 80 |
posted 22 November 1999 11:26 AM
What I find immensely humorous is that ISO 14001 doesn't even garner a sniff of the OSHA Standards to which we are (allegedly) following... Do the Big 3 just want to force us to spend money on whatever the hell whim strikes them in a given year? I am almost half expecting them to come out with "ISO 14001 + some extra stuff that the Big 3" want, just so they can generate some more income having to make purchases from the AIAG... ...then they'll follow with sanctioned interpretations and the like... ...what a racket. ALM IP: Logged |
|
Spaceman Spiff Forum Contributor Posts: 64 |
posted 22 November 1999 03:28 PM
Interesting point. With QS9000 going the way of ISO16949, AIAG has to justify it's existance, don't they? Let's all say it together now... QS14000! IP: Logged |
|
Marc Smith Cheech Wizard Posts: 4119 |
posted 22 November 1999 05:21 PM
Ah! QS-14000! Another automotive forum! IP: Logged |
|
dewie Forum Contributor Posts: 44 |
posted 23 November 1999 11:35 AM
Relax....pals. Let's think like an optimist. After you pay some grand for the system, you get some cent back. IP: Logged |
|
barb butrym Forum Contributor Posts: 637 |
posted 24 November 1999 07:36 AM
Oops...i did it again...(the 100th time this week....LOL) i wasn't complaining or venting...i was just joking around that i need to slow down...I really do...i am ready for a horse and buggy week..... Nothing to do with the standard...sorry if i sounded bitchy.... IP: Logged |
|
Bill Harris Lurker (<10 Posts) Posts: 4 |
posted 01 December 1999 10:57 AM
Don't apologize Barb, We all have weeks like that. I just figured it out...if I take every class that AIAG offers (no matter what it is) I should be COMPLETELY prepared for what ever the big 3 comes up with. Or they could just combine all of the programs and call it ISO/QS/TS 16949900012342000...whatcha think? IP: Logged |
|
Randy Forum Wizard Posts: 228 |
posted 01 December 1999 02:57 PM
Good Lord, All these numbers you guys keep spouting is starting to make my head spin and give me Exedrin headache #292. I thought I had a bunch to keep up with trying to comply with 29CFR, 40CFR, 49CFR, 10CFR, 8CCR, 22CCR, Army Regulations, Post Regulations, Corporate crap, and all the other stuff in the EHS realm. You guys got it tuff. IP: Logged |
|
ISO Queen Lurker (<10 Posts) Posts: 3 |
posted 10 December 1999 02:03 PM
Just read all the comments and thought I'd throw this in: my co-workers and I have heard that Ford told its suppliers that to qualify for Q1 status, they have to be QS-9000 registered. IP: Logged |
|
Marc Smith Cheech Wizard Posts: 4119 |
posted 10 December 1999 11:22 PM
Where did you folks 'hear' this? IP: Logged |
|
Elberth Ardila Tabera unregistered |
posted 29 December 1999 07:28 AM
Ford Venezolana told us, about requeriments to be a supplier. one of the requeriments is that we have to have a certified QS9k company. they ask us this requeriment in verbal form. IP: Logged |
|
Marc Smith Cheech Wizard Posts: 4119 |
posted 29 December 1999 07:32 AM
Elberth: Did they mention a requirement for ISO14001 compliance or registration? IP: Logged |
|
Elberth Ardila Tabera unregistered |
posted 29 December 1999 10:09 AM
Nope but they have and important internal "campaign" to complaince it IP: Logged |
|
Howard Atkins Forum Wizard Posts: 202 |
posted 31 December 1999 12:24 AM
I have not any experience with the OEM's but I have demands from Tier 1 to be ISO 14001 registered. I have been told by a company in England that I cannot be A status without ISO 14001. A company in Portugal reduces my supplier evaluation because of lack of ISO 14001. A non automotive customer, electronics telecomunications in Israel has demanded at least adhetrence to their enviromental policy. We will all not be able to ignore this for too long. IP: Logged |
|
dewie Forum Contributor Posts: 44 |
posted 02 January 2000 01:11 AM
I've heard that Japnaene companies need their suoolier to compliance with ISO14000. The business with no registered supplier will be terminated someday in Y2000, especially SONY Group. I'm not so wondered that EU country requires ISO14000, we'd better awared of BS8800. IP: Logged |
|
Roger Eastin Forum Wizard Posts: 345 |
posted 04 January 2000 09:41 AM
No doubt that the ISO14001 train is rolling and you'd better hop on the train or get off the tracks (wow, where did that come from?)! By the way, Dewie, what is BS8800? IP: Logged |
|
David Mullins Forum Contributor Posts: 248 |
posted 04 January 2000 05:49 PM
Dewie has finally put the last peice of the puzzle together. BS8800 is of course the safety standard in Britain, which was used, amongst numerous other standards, to create OHSAS 18000. Please let me point out something soooo obvious that you've all missed it. 9K + 14K + 18K = 41K, and as we all know 41 is the answer to life, the universe and everything. What's that I here you say, it's 42, not according to the ISO 41K Standard! ------------------ IP: Logged |
|
Elberth Ardila Tabera unregistered |
posted 11 January 2000 07:26 AM
David you have reason, I«m very impacient of release of 41 or 42K IP: Logged |
|
pmaizitis Forum Contributor Posts: 13 |
posted 21 January 2000 11:26 AM
I had read somewhere that Chrysler was also requiring ISO 14000 registration. I will have to check my sources. ------------------ IP: Logged |
|
Marc Smith Cheech Wizard Posts: 4119 |
posted 05 March 2000 04:05 PM
Has anyone heard any more on this issue? IP: Logged |
|
barb butrym Forum Contributor Posts: 637 |
posted 06 March 2000 08:55 AM
Ford and GM have set dates for compliance for teir 1& 2 suppliers....think its 2001, 2002...or maybe 2002, 2003....I have forgotten.....but the suppliers seem to be ignoring it, hoping it will go away (at least in my area)...Its alive and "out there" no question it will happen, registrars are talking it up...but there is so little real experience in this country....that companies seem to have their heads in the sand..so much controversy and resistance...... People seem to forget it is the one standard that actually pays for itself. Problem is, consultants tend to not know how to do it. Implementing 14k is backward to 9k, to do it properly.....Identification/recognition/measures of the current status are key...and so often overlooked. Having seen the UK approach, and comparing it to the US was an eye-opener for me...they are light years ahead of us. IP: Logged |
|
Marc Smith Cheech Wizard Posts: 4119 |
posted 06 March 2000 09:33 PM
quote:Is this written anywhere or hearsay? IP: Logged |
|
Roger Eastin Forum Wizard Posts: 345 |
posted 07 March 2000 08:41 AM
Whoa, Barb, did you mean Tier 2 as well as Tier 1? I'm with Marc, here. Is it written anywhere, especially about the Tier 2 (that's me!)about compliance? I think someone here may have posted or, at least, told us where the compliance letter (for Ford and GM) was available. IP: Logged |
|
barb butrym Forum Contributor Posts: 637 |
posted 08 March 2000 08:07 AM
A conversation with my registrar 'subject matter expert' at a dinner meeting was my source. He tells me it has been mandated....although I did not see the letter myself. The discussion was about consultancy projects and he was to provide a colleague of mine with the details/documents .......(as he is doing 14k projects) and he (my colleague) could use these to pitch sales....the 'expert' was surprised the consultant was not totally ovrwhelmed with work by now. So there you have it..... psuedo hearsay. I totally trust the guy, and take what he says as true.....he hasn't steered me wrong yet. AND he is 'IN' at Ford. My colleague is at Ford this week ...... and when he gets back I will check that out in more detail..... IP: Logged |
|
pmaizitis Forum Contributor Posts: 13 |
posted 27 June 2000 12:44 PM
Hi .... I'm back ..... Still nothing from Chrysler but firm commitments from Ford and GM. If you are a member of ASQ I would suggest getting on subscription for their Automotive Excellence publication although the last issue was disappointing as it did not touch on what I would perceive to be on everyone's minds .... ISO/TS 16949 and ISO 14001. The Winter Edition published the following: Ford: "Ford will require all production and non-production suppliers with manufacturing facilities to certify a minimum of one manufacturing site to ISO 14001 standard by December 31, 2001. Ford will require supplier manufacturing sites to be certified to ISO 14001 standard by July 1, 2003.ä GM: ãBy the end of 2002, GM will require its suppliers to certify the implementation of environmental systems (EMS) in their operations, in conformance with ISO 14001. It is our intent that all suppliers to General Motors implement an environmental management system by December 31, 2002.ä Unfortunately, none of my GM supplier clients has been officially notified by GM on this requirement. Has anyone seen an official communiquŽ through NAO Worldwide Purchasing or elsewhere? ------------------ IP: Logged |
|
Randy Forum Wizard Posts: 228 |
posted 27 June 2000 06:14 PM
If you look at this months "Business Standards" magazine from BSI, you will find an article about Ford, GM and ISO 14000. IP: Logged |
|
Marc Smith Cheech Wizard Posts: 4119 |
posted 20 July 2000 03:47 AM
Also see: https://elsmar.com/ubb/Forum6/HTML/000032.html IP: Logged |
|
Steven Truchon Forum Contributor Posts: 89 |
posted 28 July 2000 02:41 PM
At at recent Environmental lunch seminar put on by Motorola here in So. Florida, they [Motorola] stated that Ford was definitely requiring ISO 14001 but how deep in tiers they intended was not clear. What was interesting though is that Motorola has generated an internal standard that addresses all of the ISO 9000 and all of the applicable federal OSHA requirements and they claim that it clearly satifies the requirements of ISO 14001. I am currently trying to get a copy to review and will forward one to anyone desiring once I get it. IP: Logged |
|
Cheryl Forum Contributor Posts: 19 |
posted 03 January 2001 12:59 PM
I have a letter from DaimlerChrysler dated Oct. 5/00 it reads: Effective January 1, 2003, DaimlerChrysler will require its suppliers to be third party registered to an environmental management system based on ISO 14001. IP: Logged |
|
Gary Holland unregistered |
posted 27 January 2001 09:42 AM
ISO 14001 just became a liitle easier. A new website has been launched to provide a 21st Century approach to ISO 14001 www.iso14001-in-21.com The site has downloadable ISO 14001 templates, software and other resources. regards, Gary Holland. 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 
