L
lostmanager
What am I required to do with employees personal precision measuring tools? I have created a log with each of their personal tools, do I need to in house calibrate them or just put reference only stickers on it?
Mikishots
Trusted Information Resource
Re: Employee Personal Tools
Depends on what those tools are being used for, and what your company policy is.
As an example, if they are being used as part of acceptance or rejection criteria, critical component inspection or anything that has an identified required measurement within tolerance, then yes, they need to be calibrated.
Where I work, we simply don't allow them. That's our choice.
Depends on what those tools are being used for, and what your company policy is.
As an example, if they are being used as part of acceptance or rejection criteria, critical component inspection or anything that has an identified required measurement within tolerance, then yes, they need to be calibrated.
Where I work, we simply don't allow them. That's our choice.
Re: Employee Personal Tools
Howdy,
It depends on what the personal tools are being used for. Are they being used for product acceptance? Are Go/No-Go decisions being made based on the measurements?
They have the same requirements as company owned tools...the products and customers don't care who owns them.
For acceptance testing, they must be calibrated. Who pays for the calibration is a discussion between the tool owner and the company.
While ownership is usually the main discussion topic, use and reliance on the data output from the tool is the real point. Can you trust what the tool says? Do you need to be able to trust it?
{If you don't need to trust it, why are you bothering to measure?}
Howdy,
It depends on what the personal tools are being used for. Are they being used for product acceptance? Are Go/No-Go decisions being made based on the measurements?
They have the same requirements as company owned tools...the products and customers don't care who owns them.
For acceptance testing, they must be calibrated. Who pays for the calibration is a discussion between the tool owner and the company.
While ownership is usually the main discussion topic, use and reliance on the data output from the tool is the real point. Can you trust what the tool says? Do you need to be able to trust it?
{If you don't need to trust it, why are you bothering to measure?}
Just to add to the above posts: I personally have never seen a company which allowed personal measurement equipment for any measurements taken for "quality" or acceptance of product, or anything like that. Typically in scenarios such as die repair in a metal stamping company, some setup scenarios, etc. I have seen a lot of personal measurement equipment. It depends upon the industry, the processes, etc.
Since the late 1990's I have seen few companies which did allow personal measurement equipment but did not control them by having them in their internal system. ISO 9001 pretty much made that a necessity, and these days ISO 9001 registration is very common (particularly in manufacturing and service industries). I dealt with this a lot when I was doing ISO 9001 implementations some years back.
My bet is the company you work for is going through implementing ISO 9001 or one of the other similar ISO standards, which is why the question came up. Am I right?
Also see: Calibration of employee owned measurement equipment and gages
Since the late 1990's I have seen few companies which did allow personal measurement equipment but did not control them by having them in their internal system. ISO 9001 pretty much made that a necessity, and these days ISO 9001 registration is very common (particularly in manufacturing and service industries). I dealt with this a lot when I was doing ISO 9001 implementations some years back.
My bet is the company you work for is going through implementing ISO 9001 or one of the other similar ISO standards, which is why the question came up. Am I right?
Also see: Calibration of employee owned measurement equipment and gages
Re: Employee Personal Tools
We have both company owned tools and personal owned tools. For tools such as micrometers, calipers, and tools that measure acceptance, we require the tool to be calibrated before using. A record of calibration is kept and there have been several tools that I 'sent' home as they could not pass calibration. We calibrate the tools in house.
We have both company owned tools and personal owned tools. For tools such as micrometers, calipers, and tools that measure acceptance, we require the tool to be calibrated before using. A record of calibration is kept and there have been several tools that I 'sent' home as they could not pass calibration. We calibrate the tools in house.
L
lostmanager
Re: Employee Personal Tools
Thanks for the input guys. What will it take to calibrate the tools in house. I will see if the employees have enough tools on the floor before even thinking about doing calibration, but how can I start to do in house calibration? And what tools require the reference only sticker?
Thanks for the input guys. What will it take to calibrate the tools in house. I will see if the employees have enough tools on the floor before even thinking about doing calibration, but how can I start to do in house calibration? And what tools require the reference only sticker?
Last edited by a moderator:
Re: Employee Personal Tools
It depends on what type of tools you are talking about. I will attach my companies 'personal tool calibration' record I use as this is a generic form that I use for most/all hand held tools.
This looks exactly like our Company owned tool calibration form except the form number and the form name.
For what it will take; time mostly. If you do find a tool out of calibration, it must be rejected or fixed (if fixed, be sure to re-check calibration). If rejected, it must not be used. This is the harder interpersonal task, you telling them their instrument cannot be used. Some people get upset, others will say 'oh, ok', while some might (might) say 'oh, ok' but continue to use it anyway.
What tools can have 'reference only' will depend on your company procedures. I have reference only on very few instruments (a pair of 24" calipers used to measure chuck jaw diameter as an example). Usually reference only is for devices that do not quality a part as good or bad.
It depends on what type of tools you are talking about. I will attach my companies 'personal tool calibration' record I use as this is a generic form that I use for most/all hand held tools.
This looks exactly like our Company owned tool calibration form except the form number and the form name.
For what it will take; time mostly. If you do find a tool out of calibration, it must be rejected or fixed (if fixed, be sure to re-check calibration). If rejected, it must not be used. This is the harder interpersonal task, you telling them their instrument cannot be used. Some people get upset, others will say 'oh, ok', while some might (might) say 'oh, ok' but continue to use it anyway.
What tools can have 'reference only' will depend on your company procedures. I have reference only on very few instruments (a pair of 24" calipers used to measure chuck jaw diameter as an example). Usually reference only is for devices that do not quality a part as good or bad.
Last edited:
Re: Employee Personal Tools
Michael M is spot on here.
Step back and look at the NEED...(the need is data you can trust).
You posted the question, which tends to mean that you didn't recognize the need in the first place.
The guys' tools are their own property...it can be taken as insulting to say "Your tool is no good" whatever words you use to communicate it.
They don't recognize the NEED either, otherwise you wouldn't have an issue in the first place. Communicate the NEED. The need is not about the tools or who owns them, it is whether you can trust the data.
While you go after tools and stickers, spend a fair amount of time communicating why it is important.
Spend more time communicating why it is important than you do hunting down the tools. No one likes rules they don't understand...most people like being on a team accomplishing a common goal.
When you are done, if you did it very well, the guys who own the tools will be calling fouls on themselves and each other (I've been in machine shops and fab plants...I know this is a bit idealistic).
If a mic reads 0.562 when the distance is actually 0.568, you can't trust the data (making assumptions here about your accuracy needs).
If Joe is going to use his mic anyway even after finding that it reads wrong, Steve should rag on him...not you.
Train up the culture, the tools will fall into line more easily and your "fix" will be more sustainable in the long run.
Michael M is spot on here.
Step back and look at the NEED...(the need is data you can trust).
You posted the question, which tends to mean that you didn't recognize the need in the first place.
The guys' tools are their own property...it can be taken as insulting to say "Your tool is no good" whatever words you use to communicate it.
They don't recognize the NEED either, otherwise you wouldn't have an issue in the first place. Communicate the NEED. The need is not about the tools or who owns them, it is whether you can trust the data.
While you go after tools and stickers, spend a fair amount of time communicating why it is important.
Spend more time communicating why it is important than you do hunting down the tools. No one likes rules they don't understand...most people like being on a team accomplishing a common goal.
When you are done, if you did it very well, the guys who own the tools will be calling fouls on themselves and each other (I've been in machine shops and fab plants...I know this is a bit idealistic).
If a mic reads 0.562 when the distance is actually 0.568, you can't trust the data (making assumptions here about your accuracy needs).
If Joe is going to use his mic anyway even after finding that it reads wrong, Steve should rag on him...not you.
Train up the culture, the tools will fall into line more easily and your "fix" will be more sustainable in the long run.
L
lostmanager
Re: Employee Personal Tools
Thanks for the replies! I am going to step back and make sure everyone knows our calibration policy so they can understand why it is important to only be using calibrated tools for acceptance of product.
Thanks for the replies! I am going to step back and make sure everyone knows our calibration policy so they can understand why it is important to only be using calibrated tools for acceptance of product.
Wes Bucey
Prophet of Profit
FWIW:
I owned a precision machining company in the 90s. We told ALL our employees to leave their tools home and we supplied everything - which we kept checked and calibrated.
In my opinion, asking an employee to supply his own tools is destructive of any "plan" toward uniformity of process or quality.
I am at a complete loss that "most" car dealers and repair shops require their mechanics to provide their own tools. I live fairly close to an "automobile dealer row" with a dozen or more dealers within a one mile stretch of road and rarely do I drive past without seeing either a Snap On or Matco truck parked at one of the dealers, with mechanics gathered round like an ice cream truck.
Having an employee provide tools seems contrary to ISO 9001 clause 6.3 Infrastructure, especially (b) process equipment (both hardware and software)
Seems like exploiting an employee to provide capital investment to the business without just compensation.
I owned a precision machining company in the 90s. We told ALL our employees to leave their tools home and we supplied everything - which we kept checked and calibrated.
In my opinion, asking an employee to supply his own tools is destructive of any "plan" toward uniformity of process or quality.
I am at a complete loss that "most" car dealers and repair shops require their mechanics to provide their own tools. I live fairly close to an "automobile dealer row" with a dozen or more dealers within a one mile stretch of road and rarely do I drive past without seeing either a Snap On or Matco truck parked at one of the dealers, with mechanics gathered round like an ice cream truck.
Having an employee provide tools seems contrary to ISO 9001 clause 6.3 Infrastructure, especially (b) process equipment (both hardware and software)
Seems like exploiting an employee to provide capital investment to the business without just compensation.