Improvements for Final Release of Product

Hello All, 

I am looking for some advice on how to improve our final release of product. We recently had two high value orders be rejected because of missing PLU stickers on the apples, lost a major sale there. I do have in mind trying to make the case that we will need to have a different person complete the final inspections, currently the ops manager loads the trucks and "does" it (if he actually completes it I have no Idea). I was also thinking because everything is staged beforehand we could have a QC check that would include a sticker and initials of those that QCed them and/or even having the person take pictures of the checked product before they shipped to have evidence of our product is in specifications of the order. We did have issues with product that had Lenticel Breakdown being sent out too earlier in the year, but that was also dealing with end of season apples so it is more common (but should have been caught before it was sent)

Just was wondering if you agree with my train of thought or had any advice on how to proceed. I would like to try to mitigate the issue without adding too much extra work. (as it is difficult for ops and other management to understand that having these extra steps helps us in the long run) 

thank you,

Seathalos

A QC release program is probably the easiest and most efficient process to prevent these issues from happening

You'll need (if you don't have already) a spec by customer/type/size etc for QC to sign off on, and QC stickers are a simple way for the folks loading to know if a pallet can or cannot be loaded

I think a product release program is mandatory in most GFSI schemes.  Whatever yours is should be evaluated to include checking for these stickers before giving affirmation that product can be shipped.  Last time I helped a company with one, we required the batch record with all of the CCP checks be reviewed and verified by QA, that copies of all labels had been affixed to cases and samples of the labels be affixed to the batch record, plus a couple of other checks.  The checks were all documented on a form that would get stapled to the batch record with a go/no go option to be circled by the QA Manager or designee.  This was for a spice plant with a very manual paper-based record system, and it worked well for them.

In one of the USDA inspected meat plants I work with now, they're pretty high tech with using scanners to perform all actions.  We had IT use the "hold" function within their system to create a category that all finished product goes into automatically, which leaves the finished goods unavailable for moving to the shipping department.  SOP now states the QC dept gets a notification when finished product is in that state, allowing them to perform all final checks before releasing the product to the shipping department.

There's 1,000 ways to release product for shipment.  Letting the ops manager load trucks is probably up there with the scarier options imo...  There should be a final check of records, and maybe product, leading to some positive affirmation to him that he is now permitted to load that order.

I think a product release program is mandatory in most GFSI schemes.  Whatever yours is should be evaluated to include checking for these stickers before giving affirmation that product can be shipped.  Last time I helped a company with one, we required the batch record with all of the CCP checks be reviewed and verified by QA, that copies of all labels had been affixed to cases and samples of the labels be affixed to the batch record, plus a couple of other checks.  The checks were all documented on a form that would get stapled to the batch record with a go/no go option to be circled by the QA Manager or designee.  This was for a spice plant with a very manual paper-based record system, and it worked well for them.

 

In one of the USDA inspected meat plants I work with now, they're pretty high tech with using scanners to perform all actions.  We had IT use the "hold" function within their system to create a category that all finished product goes into automatically, which leaves the finished goods unavailable for moving to the shipping department.  SOP now states the QC dept gets a notification when finished product is in that state, allowing them to perform all final checks before releasing the product to the shipping department.

 

There's 1,000 ways to release product for shipment.  Letting the ops manager load trucks is probably up there with the scarier options imo...  There should be a final check of records, and maybe product, leading to some positive affirmation to him that he is now permitted to load that order.

We do have a release program in place, though with most things that have to do with quality and food safety I am highly skeptical that the ops manager follows them. (We had multiple arguments on food safety, including making sure that the PPM for the free chlorine is in the minimum requirements for our flume system) From what I have heard from the situation is that he potentially even knew that the apples weren't keeping the PLU stickers because of the wax not fully drying before reaching the sorting line the day of packing them. (IMHO it is more to do with the apples being ran too fast and leaving the drier far to early). Which is why I want us to limit their involvement in the release of the product. 

This is the current specifications listed in our training for final release:

• All Cartons must be labeled as containing Apples with the following information:  Variety, Style (Bag, Mesh, Tray), Size, Grade, County of Origin, Distribution by, GTIN with Bar Code, Lot Number, Notice of Coating
• All Bags (Mesh & Poly) must labeled with the following information: Lot Numbers (Poly Bags on Quick Lock, Mesh Bags on Film Tag), Size of Apples (i.e. 2 ½”), and Weight of Bags.
• All Pallets must be labeled with the following information:  Weight of Bags if Poly or Mesh Bags (i.e. 6# bags), Count per Carton if Trays (i.e. 88ct), Pack Date, Lot Numbers, and Quantity of Cartons on Pallet.
• Apples packed in cartons match all labeling (i.e. do apples in cartons actually match the products listed on cartons, bags, pallets)
• Stickers on Apples if Customer Requested
• Condition of Apples; No Rot Present, No Excess Bruising Present, No External Defects, No Internal Defects (Random Sampling from Line), Color % Within Limits set by Customer
• Pallets must be in good condition and the type required by customer (Chep or standard)
• Cartons strapped and secured with shipping tape.
• No cartons with crushed sides.
• Use of carton edge protectors if required by customer

And we do have a log for saying if the product was "good" I have it attached. But I agree that having the Ops manager being the one to release the product is not the option I want to have. Especially when they are notorious for cutting corners, fudging testing and overall only caring about getting the product out the door at the expense of the company and our workers. Though with how things are going I wouldn't be surprised if some major changes come up from the parent company 

A QC release program is probably the easiest and most efficient process to prevent these issues from happening

 

You'll need (if you don't have already) a spec by customer/type/size etc for QC to sign off on, and QC stickers are a simple way for the folks loading to know if a pallet can or cannot be loaded

I am glad that I have the right train of thought currently. Thank you for the advice

@Seathalos, those bullets from your training SOP would make a perfect base to create a form for positive release.  Have someone responsible to verify each item is good to go, require a QA signature in addition to Ops signature to verify each other, and call it good to go.  If you need some gusto to push through such a chance, look through your customer rejections over the past 12 months to see how many rejections were due to issues that could've been caught had these items been caught at your dock vs the customers.  Add up the lost revenue and associated freight costs and show it as potential savings.  "Team, had this form been in place to catch issues, we would've saved $xxx,xxx in lost revenue over the past 12 months."  That gets people's attention.