The Elsmar Cove Business Standards Discussion Forums More Free Files Forum Discussion Thread Post Attachments Listing Elsmar Cove Discussion Forums Main Page
Welcome to what was The Original Cayman Cove Forums!
This thread is carried over and continued in the Current Elsmar Cove Forums

Search the Elsmar Cove!

Wooden Line
This is a "Frozen" Legacy Forum.
Most links on this page do NOT work.
Discussions since 2001 are HERE

Owl Line
The New Elsmar Cove Forums   The New Elsmar Cove Forums
  QS-9000
  Versions/editions

Post New Topic  Post A Reply
profile | register | preferences | faq | search

UBBFriend: Email This Page to Someone! next newest topic | next oldest topic
Author Topic:   Versions/editions
Michel Saad
Forum Contributor

Posts: 18
From:Bromont, Quebec, Canada
Registered: Apr 2000

posted 22 June 2000 01:56 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Michel Saad     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Hi folks,

Wasn't sure where to post this question, but since I am working on QS9000, I figured this would be as good of a place as any.

I our quality manual, we state that "our quality system is based on ISO9001 (1994) and QS9000 (3rd edition)."

Do we have to state the revision/edition or could we simply state "ISO9001 and QS9000" taking for granted that by the next audit by the registrar, we have to meet the latest version.

Thanks

Michel

IP: Logged

tim banic
Forum Contributor

Posts: 28
From:St George, Ontario, canada
Registered: Apr 2000

posted 22 June 2000 02:42 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for tim banic   Click Here to Email tim banic     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Hello Michel

I wrote our manual as stating the version we were setting the program up to. I feel It just defines it a little more, but I haven't gone through my registration audit yet.

Good luck
tim banic
"if it moves train it...if it doesn't move calibrate it...if it isn't written down, it never happened!" Unwritten rules of QS/ISO

IP: Logged

Spaceman Spiff
Forum Contributor

Posts: 64
From:FL
Registered: Mar 99

posted 22 June 2000 04:04 PM     Click Here to See the Profile for Spaceman Spiff   Click Here to Email Spaceman Spiff     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
In reading about the demise of QS9K, I guess that doesn't matter now, does it? I doubt there will be anymore updates.

IP: Logged

Christian Lupo
Forum Contributor

Posts: 117
From:Auburn, NY
Registered:

posted 23 June 2000 10:17 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for Christian Lupo   Click Here to Email Christian Lupo     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
I doubt QS-9000 will be revised too, but I would just say:

....our Quality system is based on the most recent edition of ISO-9001:1994 and QS-9000...

IP: Logged

Michel Saad
Forum Contributor

Posts: 18
From:Bromont, Quebec, Canada
Registered: Apr 2000

posted 26 June 2000 08:05 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for Michel Saad     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
My question was larger than just QS9000. The fact that there will not be any more revisions dosen't change the question.

I got a reply from our registrar this morning and he tells me that we HAVE TO state to which revision of the norm we comply.

I would like to know if this is really a requirement or I can state " ...to the latest revision..." like christian stated.

Michel

IP: Logged

Ken K
Forum Contributor

Posts: 44
From:Wisconsin, USA
Registered: Jun 2000

posted 26 June 2000 08:29 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for Ken K     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
I would list any versions/editions which are listed on your registration certificate. If you are not yet registered, always use the latest/greated versions/editions. Just my opinion.

IP: Logged

Marc Smith
Cheech Wizard

Posts: 4119
From:West Chester, OH, USA
Registered:

posted 26 June 2000 08:32 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for Marc Smith   Click Here to Email Marc Smith     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
It a registrar / auditor 'requires' you to state the version (which is quite typical), I wouldn't fight such a small battle - I'd do it and be done with it. So far the time you have put into the issue has been wasted, in my opinion. I personally wouldn't bitch over the 'latest version' words, but many auditors will and with some reason. I would expect the version to be cited if I was auditing you. If you used the 'latest version' wiggle words I'd have a number of related questions to ask prolonging the issue.

Is there some reason you don't want to cite the version?

IP: Logged

Tom Goetzinger
Forum Contributor

Posts: 123
From:Milwaukee, WI USA
Registered: Mar 99

posted 26 June 2000 11:15 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for Tom Goetzinger   Click Here to Email Tom Goetzinger     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
I agree wtih Marc. Its a small issue and probably not worth fighting over; save your competitions for somethin worth winning. Besides that, I think it makes good sense. If you write your policies and procedures to a standard, and that standard changes, how can you say that you meet it without review and change? Including the edition of the standard indicates specifically which document you intended on meeting. Also gives you the out without casting dobt on the whole system when someone finds something you don't meet in the "latest edition".

IP: Logged

Michel Saad
Forum Contributor

Posts: 18
From:Bromont, Quebec, Canada
Registered: Apr 2000

posted 26 June 2000 11:23 AM     Click Here to See the Profile for Michel Saad     Edit/Delete Message   Reply w/Quote
Ok! ok! You guys are right. It is not worth taking more time discussing it. My question came from a willingness to make our quality manual easier to read. That's it!

Thanks for the inputs.

Michel

IP: Logged

All times are Eastern Standard Time (USA)

next newest topic | next oldest topic

Administrative Options: Close Topic | Archive/Move | Delete Topic
Post New Topic  Post A Reply Hop to:

Contact Us | The Elsmar Cove Home Page

Your Input Into These Forums Is Appreciated! Thanks!


Main Site Search
Y'All Come Back Now, Ya Hear?
Powered by FreeBSD!Made With A Mac!Powered by Apache!