We have all heard about the Consumer Product Safety Improvement Act (CPSIA). And up to now, as distributors, we have been relatively insulated to the developing changes that suppliers have had to follow closely and adapt to be compliant.
That is all ending now.
Recently, an account executive in our company placed an order for imprinted key tags. The order arrived, but along with the client’s logo and website there were a series of numbers printed under where the imprint was located. They didn’t know what these numbers were. Upon checking with the supplier, it was discovered that this is part of their CPSIA labeling effort. These numbers are a tracking number that is now printed on products that are considered for use by children.
A tracking number will now be imprinted on about 475 of this supplier’s products. And at the moment you may not know where the numbers are being printed as it depends on which product you buy. Apparently they are working on a system to give this information to distributors via their website or in future catalogs.
To me this is problematic. If a client’s imprint is going to be changed to include these numbers, notification on the website and in a catalog is not going to cut it. I want a phone call before the order is printed at all. And what are the consequences of placing the numbers next to the client’s imprint? I’m guessing a canceled order in many cases.
In this case the client was not very happy. Can you blame them? The tracking number was printed right next to their website and it looked terrible. This tracking information has nothing to do with California Prop 65 (a separate issue) but is a number that needs to be included on products that could be used by children. The supplier appears to be following CPSIA federal guidelines by including it.
How many other manufacturers may be doing this? If these numbers are placed with the client’s logo, without clear notification, how many orders will be rejected?
I would have to assume that any proofs to be approved prior to production would need to show these numbers. At that point, what happens when the client says “no” to their imprint being changed?
Vendors who start arbitrarily putting these CPSIA numbers on products will run into problems. Most clients are not going to appreciate their brand image being compromised with these numbers.
Below is the response from the supplier:
“In response to your inquiry regarding our compliance labeling efforts and I would like to address some of your questions. I’d like to apologize for any unexpected results our customer encountered as a result of out labeling efforts and completely understand your desire for more information regarding this matter. I have included our summary statement, which gives an overview of our position as well as a list of items that ‘our company’ has included in our CPSIA labeling effort.
“Basically, we need to include tracking information on all products that could be considered a children’s product under the CPSIA mandate. We include that info on approximately 475 products, many of which lend themselves to being labeled less obtrusively than the item that you ordered for your customer (bags have stitched in labels for instance). There are a handful of products that require some fine tuning with regard to the placement of the tracking info—the key tag you ordered being one of them. Keep in mind that we had to institute this pretty rapidly which deprived us of the ability to fine tune the placement on each item—we are in the process of doing so and expect the tracking to become somewhat less obtrusive with each iteration.
“We are currently working towards more conveying the presence of tracking data to our customers via web, catalog, etc. so that you can advise your customers upfront. We firmly believe that the tracking data serves as an indicator of safety compliance and, placement on a very few products aside, should act as a selling point to the end user.
“Thank you for your feedback on this important effort. Our customer’s suggestions will be taken into advisement as the process matures and evolves. Please let me know if you have additional suggestions or comments.”
Well there you have it. The CPSIA changes have trickled down far enough that they are affecting distributors now. How will we respond? How will our clients respond? Our industry is facing many challenges, but this is going to be a big one. What perils lie ahead with CPSIA compliance? For me, I’m a bit stunned and frankly at a loss for words. And those who know me personally understand that I’m rarely at a loss for words.
PPAI Law has been working diligently on these issues, but now we are seeing the tangible impact of these legislated regulations. Feel free to comment below.
Your opinion is requested! Product safety is an important topic and your friends at FreePromoTips will continue to cover it … and we will do what we can to make our point. When we addressed product safety some time ago, we used an image that a few found offensive. Your opinion is important to us. Click here for the image and comments from others. If we were out of line, feel free to tell us. We really want to know. Thanks!
The FreePromoTips.com website is packed with all kinds of beneficial information and exclusive FREE offers from a few forward-thinking supplier companies. Don’t miss out on what’s happening! Opt in to receive their e-newsletters, “Like” their page on Facebook and follow them on Twitter.
product safety is very important, especially for our children that might touch or taste the promo items we sell. For years the safety testing has been minimal and only in the past decade, we have been hearing of toy and promo recalls because they contained higher concentrations of lead that was unsafe. In my opinion the CPSIA legislation is good for everyone, for decades a lot of suppliers have been importing trash that is poor in quality and unsafe for use. Now we finally have law that will prevent them from doing this, and my clients will also be pleased that they are not harming the recipients of their give-aways. As mentioned by the supplier above, they will find a better place to print these numbers, and with proper communication with our clients, we can overcome this obstacle. Also to note Prop 65 requires suppliers to print a warning label, which has a lot more characters that just numbers.
What is the best scenario: client logo located close to CPSIA #s vs. Client/Dist/Supplier being sued for millions because the product you have been selling were unsafe for use?
product safety is very important, especially for our children that might touch or taste the promo items we sell. For years the safety testing has been minimal and only in the past decade, we have been hearing of toy and promo recalls because they contained higher concentrations of lead that was unsafe. In my opinion the CPSIA legislation is good for everyone, for decades a lot of suppliers have been importing trash that is poor in quality and unsafe for use. Now we finally have law that will prevent them from doing this, and my clients will also be pleased that they are not harming the recipients of their give-aways. As mentioned by the supplier above, they will find a better place to print these numbers, and with proper communication with our clients, we can overcome this obstacle. Also to note Prop 65 requires suppliers to print a warning label, which has a lot more characters that just numbers.
What is the best scenario: client logo located close to CPSIA #s vs. Client/Dist/Supplier being sued for millions because the product you have been selling were unsafe for use?
CPSIA should only apply to imported products!
CPSIA should only apply to imported products!
The CPSIA requires permanent tracking labels on children’s products with specific information. I’m not sure if the imprint number you describe even comply. The permanent tracking label requirement is supposed to give the ultimate consumer sufficient information to be able to track the product back to the manufacturer/private labeler/importer. So, the information is to include: manufacturer or private labeler, the location and date of production of the product and cohort information. It doesn’t seem like all of that information is included . . . but perhaps I don’t completely understand how the products are being labeled.
Jennifer Taggart
http://www.thesmartmama.com
The CPSIA requires permanent tracking labels on children’s products with specific information. I’m not sure if the imprint number you describe even comply. The permanent tracking label requirement is supposed to give the ultimate consumer sufficient information to be able to track the product back to the manufacturer/private labeler/importer. So, the information is to include: manufacturer or private labeler, the location and date of production of the product and cohort information. It doesn’t seem like all of that information is included . . . but perhaps I don’t completely understand how the products are being labeled.
Jennifer Taggart
http://www.thesmartmama.com
Please note that the 2009 CPSC “Statement of Policy” may allow, under certain circumstances, a web site url or possibly even a toll-free phone number to be placed on a children’s product (and possibly the product’s packaging) in lieu of the requisite information can reasonably be retrieved by the consumer and the manufacture identifying the specific product.
Also, I would be curious as to why this company chose to classify a “key tag” as a “children’s product,” since keys (and therefore key accessories) would normally be classified as “general use,” and not “children’s” products.
The CPSC “Statement of Policy” can be found at: http://www.cpsc.gov/about/cpsia/sect103policy.pdf
Quin Dodd, Esq.
Mintz Levin, P.C.
[email protected]
Please note that the 2009 CPSC “Statement of Policy” may allow, under certain circumstances, a web site url or possibly even a toll-free phone number to be placed on a children’s product (and possibly the product’s packaging) in lieu of the requisite information can reasonably be retrieved by the consumer and the manufacture identifying the specific product.
Also, I would be curious as to why this company chose to classify a “key tag” as a “children’s product,” since keys (and therefore key accessories) would normally be classified as “general use,” and not “children’s” products.
The CPSC “Statement of Policy” can be found at: http://www.cpsc.gov/about/cpsia/sect103policy.pdf
Quin Dodd, Esq.
Mintz Levin, P.C.
[email protected]
I also question why ‘key tags’ have been classified as ‘children’s products’. An item that may be attractive to a child is not necessarily a children’s product. Determining factors include design intent, advertising, promotion, package graphics, store/internet/catalog display, location of retail sale and whether the product is commonly recognized as consumers to be a children’s product vs a general use product that children may use…… Guidelines allow the printing of a code ‘where practicable’ from which the importer or mfrr can ‘ascertain’ the date and location of mfr – as long as such mfg info can be provided to the CPSC, other authorized agencies and a consumer, upon request.
Let’s not forget that the purpose of the tracking mark is to facilitate recalls if necessary, not for consumers to be able to know the name of the town or even the name of the factory where the product was made – and consumers certainly will not have any use for ‘batch’ or ‘lot’ code info.
In it’s simplest form a tracking mark can be a single number or letter on a product as long as the info required can be ‘ascertained’ by the importer or domestic mfrr.
Fred Mills-Winkler
Technical Director, Toys
SGS NA, Consumer Testing Services
I also question why ‘key tags’ have been classified as ‘children’s products’. An item that may be attractive to a child is not necessarily a children’s product. Determining factors include design intent, advertising, promotion, package graphics, store/internet/catalog display, location of retail sale and whether the product is commonly recognized as consumers to be a children’s product vs a general use product that children may use…… Guidelines allow the printing of a code ‘where practicable’ from which the importer or mfrr can ‘ascertain’ the date and location of mfr – as long as such mfg info can be provided to the CPSC, other authorized agencies and a consumer, upon request.
Let’s not forget that the purpose of the tracking mark is to facilitate recalls if necessary, not for consumers to be able to know the name of the town or even the name of the factory where the product was made – and consumers certainly will not have any use for ‘batch’ or ‘lot’ code info.
In it’s simplest form a tracking mark can be a single number or letter on a product as long as the info required can be ‘ascertained’ by the importer or domestic mfrr.
Fred Mills-Winkler
Technical Director, Toys
SGS NA, Consumer Testing Services
Fred Mills-Winkler’s earlier comments are clearly on-point. The CPSIA, in Rule 103(a), requires manufacturers to have a tracking label or other distinguishing permanent mark on any consumer product primarily intended for children twelve and younger. The key words here are “primarily intended”. These two words help us to distinguish a “general use” product from a “children’s product”, which is one of the points raised by Quin Dodd. Again, only consumer products that can be defined as “children’s products” need the permanent Tracking Labels. Generally speaking, a key tag is not considered to be a children’s product unless it was designed and manufactured with kids in mind (i.e., cartoon characters; toy-like or play value attributes; or to be attached to a child’s lunch box or backpack, etc.). A key tag that is a “general use” item does not require a CPSIA Tracking Label.
Clearly, the supplier involved in this situation had its heart in the right place and was working to do the right thing to protect itself, its customers and consumers. However, the customer objected to having the Tracking Label applied directly adjacent to the company’s web address. The location of the tracking code caused some branding issues that are perfectly understandable from the customer’s perspective. The location of the Tracking Label is not an extremely critical aspect in meeting the requirements of Rule 103(a). So long as the label (provided that it meets the tracking information requirements) is clearly visible to the consumer, is permanent, and is applied to the product and the packaging, it can be placed anywhere, such as on the back or bottom of the item and packaging. Stickers are not permitted, unless the sticker is permanent and cannot be removed without also damaging the underlying substrate or surface coatings of the product. For the purposes of readily identifying recalled products while they are still in warehouses or distribution centers, I recommend that the Tracking Label information should also be printed on the outer master cartons. This prevents the potential return of similar, but not-recalled, products that may be commingled with other shipments or batches of the same/similar style. Applying batch or lot codes to all products, even non-children’s products, will aid in distinguishing recalled items from non-recalled items, thereby saving lots of time, chargebacks, freight costs and disposition of mistakenly returned “good products” that are typical of all safety recalls.
Molding in or engraving tracking codes into products is terribly expensive, and with open-sourced items, it is not feasible. The most effective and least-expensive method I have found so far for applying Tracking Labels and batch codes is the use of a high resolution inkjet coding machine. These printers are small in size and are highly adaptable for use with all types of non-porous surfaces and materials. You can use them on glass, plastics and most fabrics such as sewn-in-labels on apparel and plush toys. Most of these systems cost approximately $3500 delivered, including the hardware, software, manuals, stand and starter kit. Cheaper units may be purchased from Asia, but getting adequate and timely customer support, parts and repairs can be a nightmare. Only ink cartridges need to be purchased from time-to-time, much like what we all must do with our desktop printers. Using a 1/8 in. code with 16 characters, the estimated ink cost per coded message is $0.00004, not including the initial equipment investment. Your mileage may differ, but I am providing this information with the hope of helping others in our industry “de-code” the confusion created by the CPSIA.
Leeton Lee
VP, Reg. Compliance
and General Counsel
ETS Express, Inc.
[email protected]
Fred Mills-Winkler’s earlier comments are clearly on-point. The CPSIA, in Rule 103(a), requires manufacturers to have a tracking label or other distinguishing permanent mark on any consumer product primarily intended for children twelve and younger. The key words here are “primarily intended”. These two words help us to distinguish a “general use” product from a “children’s product”, which is one of the points raised by Quin Dodd. Again, only consumer products that can be defined as “children’s products” need the permanent Tracking Labels. Generally speaking, a key tag is not considered to be a children’s product unless it was designed and manufactured with kids in mind (i.e., cartoon characters; toy-like or play value attributes; or to be attached to a child’s lunch box or backpack, etc.). A key tag that is a “general use” item does not require a CPSIA Tracking Label.
Clearly, the supplier involved in this situation had its heart in the right place and was working to do the right thing to protect itself, its customers and consumers. However, the customer objected to having the Tracking Label applied directly adjacent to the company’s web address. The location of the tracking code caused some branding issues that are perfectly understandable from the customer’s perspective. The location of the Tracking Label is not an extremely critical aspect in meeting the requirements of Rule 103(a). So long as the label (provided that it meets the tracking information requirements) is clearly visible to the consumer, is permanent, and is applied to the product and the packaging, it can be placed anywhere, such as on the back or bottom of the item and packaging. Stickers are not permitted, unless the sticker is permanent and cannot be removed without also damaging the underlying substrate or surface coatings of the product. For the purposes of readily identifying recalled products while they are still in warehouses or distribution centers, I recommend that the Tracking Label information should also be printed on the outer master cartons. This prevents the potential return of similar, but not-recalled, products that may be commingled with other shipments or batches of the same/similar style. Applying batch or lot codes to all products, even non-children’s products, will aid in distinguishing recalled items from non-recalled items, thereby saving lots of time, chargebacks, freight costs and disposition of mistakenly returned “good products” that are typical of all safety recalls.
Molding in or engraving tracking codes into products is terribly expensive, and with open-sourced items, it is not feasible. The most effective and least-expensive method I have found so far for applying Tracking Labels and batch codes is the use of a high resolution inkjet coding machine. These printers are small in size and are highly adaptable for use with all types of non-porous surfaces and materials. You can use them on glass, plastics and most fabrics such as sewn-in-labels on apparel and plush toys. Most of these systems cost approximately $3500 delivered, including the hardware, software, manuals, stand and starter kit. Cheaper units may be purchased from Asia, but getting adequate and timely customer support, parts and repairs can be a nightmare. Only ink cartridges need to be purchased from time-to-time, much like what we all must do with our desktop printers. Using a 1/8 in. code with 16 characters, the estimated ink cost per coded message is $0.00004, not including the initial equipment investment. Your mileage may differ, but I am providing this information with the hope of helping others in our industry “de-code” the confusion created by the CPSIA.
Leeton Lee
VP, Reg. Compliance
and General Counsel
ETS Express, Inc.
[email protected]
Sounds like labeling is generally good for the consumer and good business. What is the problem with it for responsible, safety conscious sellers?
Sounds like labeling is generally good for the consumer and good business. What is the problem with it for responsible, safety conscious sellers?