The DREADED...."White Out"!!! *insert scary music*

[bobdoering]

It make no sense now on the Pc era.

You would think...but there are still some small companies with limited resources that would find it easier to white out and sketch a small change (along with the appropriate rev/change control), than stop the (yes, 'the') engineer (who has the only seat on the cad system) in the middle of whatever project he is working on to do it. I have witnessed that - even in medical. But, a clean photocopy of the change controlled as the new original should be both legible and suitable. Yes, it's old school, but there are still places out there without unlimited resources.

Seems like there will be more to join them pretty soon...

On the other hand, an example of white out on a print on the shop floor? Especially without initials and date? Now, that would raise some eyebrows.

 

[Caster]

We survived many ISO/QS audits with inspection records recorded in pencil.

Every time it started to come up as an issue, I would say before you dare to accuse us of falsifying records, please do your job and audit to find some objective evidence. Without facts, you have an opinion which is worth exactly nothing to us.

If there was a problem, we would have dealt with it, no auditor ever found a problem.

Now for you folks in Aerospace, Food and Health, a higher standard may be appropriate.

 

[CarolX]

We survived many ISO/QS audits with inspection records recorded in pencil.

Every time it started to come up as an issue, I would say before you dare to accuse us of falsifying records, please do your job and audit to find some objective evidence. Without facts, you have an opinion which is worth exactly nothing to us.

If there was a problem, we would have dealt with it, no auditor ever found a problem.

Now for you folks in Aerospace, Food and Health, a higher standard may be appropriate.

So very right, Caster. Many folks who came up thru the regulated industries will yell foul when they move into unregulated industries and find the use of pencils and white-out to be common place.

To gfreely - to answer your question, I have to ask a question - what is your industry? Is it regulated? If not - the use of white-out may be ok.

 

[Boscoeee]

So very right, Caster. Many folks who came up thru the regulated industries will yell foul when they move into unregulated industries and find the use of pencils and white-out to be common place.

To gfreely - to answer your question, I have to ask a question - what is your industry? Is it regulated? If not - the use of white-out may be ok.

I admit that I come from the Nuclear Powered Submarine Quality Management Systems perspective from the 70 and early 80s. Adding to that many years with the Aerospace world where pencil, red ink, and white out were not allowed in regards to QMS documentation. So I am probably biased from those experiences.

However from a practical standpoint, IMHO I have found over that the use of pencil, red ink, and whiteout actually distracts from the quality appearance of the record. I influence (not a hard and fast rule)our manufacturing team to not use pencil, red ink, or white out to avoid a distracting appearance of the record. Currently we are ISO 9001:2000.

This comes from a long line of second party audits from the Army, Navy, Air Force, and semiconductor Manufacturers where there was not a lot discussion regarding audit findings.

 

[bobdoering]

So very right, Caster. Many folks who came up thru the regulated industries will yell foul when they move into unregulated industries and find the use of pencils and white-out to be common place.

It is important as to whether the issue is a controlled document or if it is data collection. Changing controlled documents with white out - that becomes interesting. Did you change all of the copies? Did it need rev-ed? Some systems allow "temporary" changes as long as they are initialed and dated. Usually that will pass muster (do what you say....). But, if you see a print on the floor with white out and no initials - you have no idea if a person with the appropriate authority made that change. That would not pass.

As far as fixing data collection mistakes, you may pass an audit if you allow white-out in your procedures. Firestone may have not liked to put data on the overhead in court looking like that....but, that is beyond the discussion here.

To gfreely - to answer your question, I have to ask a question - what is your industry? Is it regulated? If not - the use of white-out may be ok.

Nothing is ever illegal until you get caught. Pencil is never a problem until one sheet gets smeared and a customer or third party auditor gives a finding for illegible document, and you need a corrective action. Until then, you are free to use crayons if you wish.

 

[Caster]

1) It is important as to whether the issue is a controlled document or if it is data collection. Changing controlled documents with white out - that becomes interesting.

2) Nothing is ever illegal until you get caught.

Bob, on number one you are right on, I would not use white out to change a print or document without some notation and sign off near it.

One number two I think you might have just failed basic Sunday School, it is always illegal, getting caught has nothing to do with it.

This above is meant in a light hearted way, the written words look mean, when I just re read them, always a problem with e-mail, the tone is missing. You speak a lot of sense here, I value you contributions and have learned much from your posts - thanks!

 

[Wes Bucey]

Bob, on number one you are right on, I would not use white out to change a print or document without some notation and sign off near it.

One number two I think you might have just failed basic Sunday School, it is always illegal, getting caught has nothing to do with it.

This above is meant in a light hearted way, the written words look mean, when I just re read them, always a problem with e-mail, the tone is missing. You speak a lot of sense here, I value you contributions and have learned much from your posts - thanks!

In a persnickety sense, Bob is partly right, Caster is partly wrong:
Getting "caught" doesn't make it illegal - that's only an allegation. Even a "guilty" plea doesn't make it illegal until a court of competent jurisdiction either accepts the guilty plea or finds one guilty.

Caster is partly wrong - it is not ALWAYS illegal, it's only illegal if there is an existing law against it. I just did a quick scan and couldn't find any LAWS (lots of "suggestions" and some regulations, but the regulations merely declare the document invalid, not a charge against an individual (although some civil liability may face the individual who did the white out IF he/she is ever identified. But the whole point against white out is that it is anonymous when it isn't initialed.) Even in a patent case, it's not illegal; it just won't be given the same weight in evidence as a change made in the way laid out earlier in the thread: single line cross out, leaving the original still legible, dating and initialing the change (plus witnesses or approvers.)

To think: I used to spend HOURS every week niggling over minor points like this to assure our contracts and processes were as "bulletproof" as possible to stay out of court.


The one crime it is NOT - forgery. (Forgery has lots of definitions - modified by various courts in various jurisdictions. - The basic essence of forgery is INTENT to defraud. Most of these whiteout situations are without intent to defraud - mostly it is ignorance or laziness.)

Here's an old definition from Black's Law Dictionary:
The making, drawing, or altering a document with the intent to defraud. A signature made without the person knowing of or consenting to it.

 

[prototyper]

I stopped using whiteout to correct mistakes some time ago, I found it hard to get off my PC screen!!!!

 

[zancky]

just a suggestion put the monitor on a photocopier or a scanner to print the it with the whiteout

 

[bobdoering]

One number two I think you might have just failed basic Sunday School, it is always illegal, getting caught has nothing to do with it.

That is just a "bumper sticker" statement. The statement was not a matter of my ethical view, but rather a more "worldly" view that there are people who are willing to do a lot of "illegal" things, and will accept the interim consequences of what people may think of them. They do not really feel any remorse until they are caught and face the more dire consequences. Sometimes, even then they do not feel remorse for their actions - just for the fact they got caught.

You see it in the news - and audits, in a less legal manner - all the time!