Stupid Responses to CARs - Long Term Corrections or Root Causes

[Rob Nix]

I am hoping I'm not repeating any previous thread here (I tried to search and find something similar and could not).

Over the years I have witnessed some of the stupidest responses to CARs regarding root causes and long term corrections, like {long term correction: I told the operator again not to miss the hole check}, or {root cause: the supervisor was undecided about the inspection interval}.

What kind of silly responses have you had???

 

[howste]

"We fired the operator" - response received from a supplier. They weren't too happy when I rejected their response and asked what they would change in their system to make sure the next operator wouldn't get fired also.

 

[little__cee]

Hair color?

I had a supervisor write that one of his employees was having a "blonde moment" and that was the reason for the error.

 

[Rob Nix]

"We fired the operator", "blond moment"

These are a great start. I'm making a list for a problem solving class coming up in late September.

Keep 'em coming...

 

[RoxaneB]

Speaking of hair.....

"The product was found to be 0.0001 mm out of spec which is less than the thickness of a human hair. Upon further investigation, it was discovered that there was a piece of hair between the product and micrometer and that it was specifically Hair#3642 belonging to XXX. The hair has been returned to the owner and the product is, in fact, within tolerance."

Off course, this response was modified shortly thereafter.

 

[CarolX]

"We fired the operator" - response received from a supplier.

I use to work for a man that used that response (more than once...LOL).

 

[AllanJ]

Of the most tedious, for me, is "it was a computer error", or some incarnation of that phrase.

 

[C Emmons]

I was auditing a company not too long ago and actually read this one:

Instructed employee that if he choose to pee in the parking lot again, make sure no one was looking!

What do you do with that one!

 

[C Emmons]

"We fired the operator" - response received from a supplier. They weren't too happy when I rejected their response and asked what they would change in their system to make sure the next operator wouldn't get fired also.

In defense of this response (because I did use it on rate occasion). If the process is in place, an associate is not performing, he has been trained, retrained, (training program is effective because the other 100 people are doing it as prescribed, you counsel him, etc. What else do you do? I used it in this case!

 

[Al Rosen]

In defense of this response (because I did use it on rate occasion). If the process is in place, an associate is not performing, he has been trained, retrained, (training program is effective because the other 100 people are doing it as prescribed, you counsel him, etc. What else do you do? I used it in this case!

Poke Yoke!