Bruce,
How can this person be doing a perfect job according to proceedure without even reading it or being trained in it?
It seems at the very least there should be a matrix of who has read the procedure, who has been trained in the procedure. Maybe just some kind of sign-off that the procedure was written following his/her actions because they were the correct way to do it?????
Of course Training is an easy way for an auditor to find a problem, but if the job is being performed correctly, there has to be an assumption that the person knows how to do it?
The President of a company has procedures and processes to follow, can the auditor go up to the President and tell him/her that they have not been correctly trained.
The one thing that should be included in the process of deciding compliance in this situation should be PPM or scrap rates. If a person is trained or know what they do will usually have a lower scrap rate than a new hire.
What happens when the General Manager or President come out to the floor to run a machine during a crisis period, do they need a special certificate to put a blank in the back of every machine?
One time as a management rep I was called out to the floor to load machines under such a situation. Did I know how to do it? NO. Did I learn within 5 minutes what to do? YES Was I formally trained to do the job? NO Was the experience succesful? YES
Was I invited back? NO
I truly believe that product quality can be quantified by experience and training, but there are limits and situations. Sometimes a temp is hired because 2 people don't show up for work. Do they go through a two week training program and get a certificate to show an auditor? NOOOO
What happens if an
OK, off the soapbox, just a subject that hits home!
