At our lab each technician has a rubber stamp with his technician number on it, as well as our QA people. We feel that stamping paperwork and the paper calibration sticker is a waste of time in the days of electronic signatures and forms, and I know that many jokes about poor quality arise from this practice (e.g. "hot-stamping" and "lick & stick" calibrations.) We've even had auditors tell us we should throw our rubber stamps away. Who all out there also has stamps, and what do you use as justification to keep them, or if you've gotten rid of them, what justification did you use?
Calibration Laboratory Technician and QA Rubber Stamps: Pro or con?
- Thread starter ScottBP
- Start date
We don't use stamps.
That said, there may be reason to do so; I would ask customers and stakeholders how much they care about what type of control and why.
For what it's worth, I found the Metrology Handbook Volume 1 (Chapter 17, pg. 121) says "never use rubber stamps."
That said, there may be reason to do so; I would ask customers and stakeholders how much they care about what type of control and why.
For what it's worth, I found the Metrology Handbook Volume 1 (Chapter 17, pg. 121) says "never use rubber stamps."
Thanks a bunch. I actually have that book sitting on my shelf over my computer. Of course, that's for FDA compliant calibrations; we're a third party cal lab that mainly services the petrochemical and pipeline industries, and every thing else from paper mills to power plants, but not too much in the way of biomedical or FDA compliant. But I'm sure if our processes were FDA compliant, we would be compliant to everything else, from nukes to NASA.
D
Duke Okes
Just ask yourself what would happen if you eliminated the stamps.
- would it violate any regulations, standards, contractual requirements, etc.?
- would it remove/reduce traceability?
- etc.
If no, then do it (but of course revise all related procedures & records that currently indicate use of the stamp).
If so, is it something you could negotiate, assuming the benefits outweigh the risks?
- would it violate any regulations, standards, contractual requirements, etc.?
- would it remove/reduce traceability?
- etc.
If no, then do it (but of course revise all related procedures & records that currently indicate use of the stamp).
If so, is it something you could negotiate, assuming the benefits outweigh the risks?
G
George Weiss
I found the Metrology Handbook a wonderful reference for the point of removing rubber stamps, and just about everything Metrology. I have seen them removed in past places of work as processes went electronic. The rubber stamp will likely make it's last holdout in China and Japan, where the red ink marks left are deep in tradition. 
Last edited by a moderator:
George1weiss, thanks for the mention of The Metrology Handbook.
ScottBP, simple fact is this: What is the standard? If FDA as an example says "thou shalt" with respect to stamps, you are painted into a corner.
However, if there is no such directive, then the question becomes: What will at once meet requirements and provide evidence of that?
Answer those questions first and you will have a good idea of what you need, in my opinion.
Hope this helps.
Hershal
ScottBP, simple fact is this: What is the standard? If FDA as an example says "thou shalt" with respect to stamps, you are painted into a corner.
However, if there is no such directive, then the question becomes: What will at once meet requirements and provide evidence of that?
Answer those questions first and you will have a good idea of what you need, in my opinion.
Hope this helps.
Hershal