I agree with Graham on this one. If we worked to the letter of the Manufacturers Service Manual we would either never get through the work or employ so many people that we would become totally un-economic. The manufacturers engineers obviously don't work to the manual because they do six machines in a day (arriving at 10.00 and finishing at 3.00) when it would take at least three hours to do one machine if you did every test in the manual !
We've also asked for copies of the engineers work instructions and been refused. Our Supplies Department have asked for details of exactly what is done to the machines which are under contract and been told that the service report tells us - but all that usually says is "carried out service" !
So we know that the company engineers don't work to the service manual - or at least don't carry out all the tests and calibration adjustments detailed in them on a routine visit - and we can't get a copy of the "official" worksheet. We know it's unnecessary to carry out all the tests every time - unless there's a problem with the equipment - so we utilise our own worksheet, based entirely on the manufacturers information (nothing added or tweeked) and then monitor the reliability of the equipment.
Surely all that is part of a good Quality Control system ? If we're registered to ISO9000 - 2000 then our procedures have been inspected and approved. Work Instructions form part of the QC system, so they have to be evaluated and updated as dictated by the feedback from the reliability analysis.
The major difficulty is that I suppose to be REALLY safe, you have to use the official manual as the starting point and then reduce the number of tests on the worksheet and prove that it doesn't have any detrimental effect. There's still the chance that the first time you have a failure (which may then persuade you that you've reduced things too far) may also cause someone injury. Maybe it's a case of deciding what is an acceptable level of risk and then getting it approved - but if that has to be done at Board level, we're going to be kept busy writing and presenting reports to the Trust Board in a way that can be understood by non-technicians.
To sum up ; -
If you've been trained by the manufacturer to service it, then service it - exactly as you've been shown.
If you've got to repair it, then carry out the tests in the manual before putting it back into service. If there isn't a manual (because the machine is too old) then write a test schedule / worksheet, verify it and then stick to it.
If you haven't been trained to service it and you don't have a manual, then don't service it. Get the Trust to pay for a service contract or accept the risk of not servicing it.
We should advise them what course of action is sensible or required, but should we really be accepting the risk of putting those recommendations into practice without approval ? I know I have to make decisions every day which might prove, in the long run, to be wrong and to have put people at risk. That's why I'm manager of the department and not an MTO2 technician ! I have to be prepared to admit when I'm wrong and not be afraid to change things that I've done or put in place.
No one is never wrong ! The people to worry about are the ones who say they aren't !
