ISO 9001 News ISO 9001:2015 Amendment 1 Published - Determination of Climate Change Relevance * Poll added May 2024

Joe Cruse said:

.....including war, slavery/conflict-area supply chain, famine, earthquakes, tsunamis, volcanoes, asteroid strikes, Thanos Snap, Godzilla, Covid-19 (and any pandemic, including a Zombie outbreak), bridge collapses, dam failures, canal blockages, piracy, AI-deep fakes,.....

Click to expand...

I so wish I read this post before we had our management meeting last week and discussing Addendum 1, I would have loved to officially add the questions "is the Thanos Snap a concern, what about the Zombie outbreak?". I think I would have gotten a good chuckle AND it would be part of the "official record".

Michael_M said:

I so wish I read this post before we had our management meeting last week and discussing Addendum 1, I would have loved to officially add the questions "is the Thanos Snap a concern, what about the Zombie outbreak?". I think I would have gotten a good chuckle AND it would be part of the "official record".

Click to expand...

This leads me to assume your company has already considered the threat from Godzilla and, having seen it as a relevant issue, have performed risk assessment AND already have a plan in place for it. So, can you post this????

Sidney Vianna said:

Remember, ISO does not want anything because ISO is not a sentient being. Someone, in a position of power within the ISO organization committed this amendment in a multitude of management system standards, knowing full well that the net result of this move is inconsequential in terms of mitigating the impact of the anthropogenic component of CC. One can only speculate the real motives behind the decision, but as we know, sycophants are working overtime in a desperate attempt to justify the inane decision. Hopefully, there will be accountability and consequences for the people involved.

Click to expand...

Sidney, I am well aware that ISO is not a sentient being (or, IS it??) and that this is being shoved on the mass of organizations registered to 9001 by the powers-that-be behind the ISO organizational throne, whether it is one powerful individual or a group of individuals in the ISO org hierarchy that are in agreement with this virtue-signaling drive. Either by one or a group, it still means that they have leveraged the ISO org throne to do this, so that the ISO org is virtue-signaling to the world with this new mandate pushed down on the registered organizations that now have to eat this porridge.

Will there be a report at any time to determine if this CC initiative is value added or value detracting? No, of course not. Its the perfect platitude to demonstrate “doing something “ without any actual responsibility

I suspect ISO will be hunting high and low for some “success stories” of organizations, that apparently were totally unaware of CC until the amended Standard was released and, when forced to respond to the revised requirement, devised incredible ways to perform climate adaptation while reaching net zero status in less than a year. The propaganda machine is warming up, I am afraid.

Sid, the magic words in the extract you posted are "should" and "expected", nothing is actually "required" as of yet.

I'm looking for an answer to be "NOT A CONCERN"

Ed Panek said:

"actual experts"

Click to expand...

How would you quantify an "actual expert"?

Randy said:

Sid, the magic words in the extract you posted are "should" and "expected", nothing is actually "required" as of yet.

I'm looking for an answer to be "NOT A CONCERN"

Click to expand...

Ok. So, based on the text


a suitable finding could be an observation that the organization refuses to address CC as part of their QMS nonsensical expectations. And they all lived happily ever after.

Sidney Vianna said:

a suitable finding could be an observation that the organization refuses to address CC as part of their QMS nonsensical expectations. And they all lived happily ever after.

Click to expand...

Yeah we're in agreement here. I've got our weekly internal "group" (9-14-45-RC14001 auditors) meeting in about 2 hours and this will continue to be the hot topic and I'm sure our latest "official" guidance will be included. I'll try use anything not organizationally sensitive and share what I find out.

Someone already posted a letter the API put out last week about their feelings and expectations.

Oh, and by the way, this amendment also applies to organizations currently certified to standards, such as AS91X0, IATF 16949, TL-9000, etc. Any standard that is an augmentation of ISO 9001 has the new requirement as well.