Seconding Andy (though I was never a machine operator)...
Functional: Any person competent to train can be a trainer.
For the QMS documentation...you have a choice: keep a running list of who is formally determined as "competent trainer" and use them to train or...formally allow anyone who is trained to the document to act as trainer.
You also get to determine if formal, specific training record is needed at all or if you meet the requirement some other way (blanket "machinists know how to machine stuff, that's why we hired them").
We did the latter...anyone trained to a document could act as trainer for the document, as long as the training date for the trainer preceded them signing off on training someone else.
That worked for the auditor...but didn't work perfectly in real life (poor training as a result, not everyone is a great teacher).
We ended up leaving the "if you are trained, you may be trainer", but then had a separate, informal list of "preferred trainers".
If I had it to do over again, I would likely do the same thing.
Establishing a list of "competent trainers" also establishes a list of "incompetent to train" by omission...and we ended up with disgruntled employees and angst. It was far easier to manage when it was 'known but undocumented'.
When I gave a new employee a list of processes/tests/WI to be trained to, I also wrote next to each one the initials of who I would allow to be the trainer. It worked well without causing significant angst...and met the requirement both functionally and to the letter.
HTH
Functional: Any person competent to train can be a trainer.
For the QMS documentation...you have a choice: keep a running list of who is formally determined as "competent trainer" and use them to train or...formally allow anyone who is trained to the document to act as trainer.
You also get to determine if formal, specific training record is needed at all or if you meet the requirement some other way (blanket "machinists know how to machine stuff, that's why we hired them").
We did the latter...anyone trained to a document could act as trainer for the document, as long as the training date for the trainer preceded them signing off on training someone else.
That worked for the auditor...but didn't work perfectly in real life (poor training as a result, not everyone is a great teacher).
We ended up leaving the "if you are trained, you may be trainer", but then had a separate, informal list of "preferred trainers".
If I had it to do over again, I would likely do the same thing.
Establishing a list of "competent trainers" also establishes a list of "incompetent to train" by omission...and we ended up with disgruntled employees and angst. It was far easier to manage when it was 'known but undocumented'.
When I gave a new employee a list of processes/tests/WI to be trained to, I also wrote next to each one the initials of who I would allow to be the trainer. It worked well without causing significant angst...and met the requirement both functionally and to the letter.
HTH