Work Environment - Different thoughts on quality manual verbiage

[tomjess]

Hi

Can anyone help me on this procedure? we are at logger heads at my company about what we actually need to say in it. We have different thoughts of what needs to go in it.

Any examples would be great.

Thanks in advance

tomjess,

here are a couple of threads. Maybe they'll help. If not, come on back!

http://Elsmar.com/Forums/showthread....rk+Environment

http://Elsmar.com/Forums/showthread....rk+Environment

[Randy]

What 6.4 boils down to is this ...you have to take into consideration "Human Factors Engineering" principles. You also have to absolutely include your EHS dudes in your QMS.

The problem is, most Quality types have no inkling what "Human Factors Engineering" is. Many Safety gurus don't either.

9004 6.4 does give a good basic list, but unless you are really adept at the tasks described, you may miss the boat. Then again most auditors don't know squat about safety, ergonomics, hygeine and all that stuff either.

Not meaning to ring my own bell, but I've been doing 6.4 stuff for years as an EHS professional. A lot of people need to get real smart, real fast...or get outside help

[Claes Gefvenberg]

I have a feeling that social interaction (Jim mentioned 9004/6.4) is one thing that may be overlooked...

Some of old Demings points are very relevant here: Particularly this one:

8. Drive out fear, so that everyone may work effectively for the company.

Finally: Jim also asked a crucial question: Do you really need a procedure for this?

/Claes

[gpainter]

Remember 6.4 is related to product conformity, so chances are your customer will call out this in their print and of course as an expert in your industry you should know the requirements for the product you produce.

Claes Gefvenberg said:

Finally: Jim also asked a crucial question: Do you really need a procedure for this?

/Claes

From one of your previous posts:

Hi,

The FDIS says: "The organisation shall determine and manage the work environment needed to acieve conformity to product requirements"

Besides, did anyone ever read the last line of 4.9b in the current standard?

"and a suitable working environment."

It's already there. And yes, it would mean that both human and physical factors should be adressed.

An addition to Jims examples: How often do you see a noncom for a dirty or untidy workplace?

/Claes

Claes,

If you ask the question, "why do you need a procedure?", how would tomjess and myself address this section of the standard?
Just asking. All suggestions are welcome.

[Randy]

"Human Factors Engineering" encompases the full spectrum of human and physical factors in any type (not only work) environment.

An addition to Jims examples: How often do you see a noncom for a dirty or untidy workplace?

You'll probaly start seeing N/C's. Here in the states an untidy workplace is citable by OSHA. Work environment (6.4) is pointing at workplace safety and specifically in 9004 states "hygiene, cleanliness, noise, vibration and pollution" as things to take into consideration.

This 9000 stuff is going to start getting real fun

[KenS]

Our manufacturing processes must be performed in a Class 100 clean room. This has led to a wide range of auditable procedures, work instructions etc. Additionally, the use of chlorine, hydrogen and methane has produced safety requirements, calibration requirements, training ....as well as work environment development. And yes, a dirty floor would be considered a non-conformance.