Paperwork, Arrrrrrgh

[Max Reheat]

Perhaps MP's for everything are the way ahead, pre-printed and each stage of the job with a seperate entry. It takes hours writing out everything for a prop or engine change on a Herc.

 

[Rigga]

I seem to remember that multiple personnel always used to sign for a single task (such as Jacking) e.g. one card entry and several signatures and "labour" signatures were accounted for as separate manhours even then (1999)

What you are saying here is that the requirement is for each Jack to have an entry and each person to sign against that Jack/Position?

This sort of requirement can only get more and more specific, requiring the settings and adjustments for each jack to be recorded next and further signatures for each stage of raising and lowering too! A bit like signing for each and every Rivet by NSN, Pt No, Batch No, Rivet Gun, Block and Hammers used, Stock location and delivery drivers name.

I feel the RAF legislature is doing what it normally does - taking things to the letter of the rule instead of the intention of the rule.

The intention of the rule being that you should sign for and document the salient details of each and every task that you do.
The letter of the rule being that you WILL sign for each and every task you do and record every detail.

Once more; Data rich, Information poor.

Result = the standard RAF answer to everything - more checking and documentation - an administrative fcuk-up - completely ignoring Human Factors teachings with regard to increasing documentation and creating maximum confusion at the workplace, for little gain.

This reaction shows how Haddon-Cave has wound-up the Anti-Litigation mob in the big houses.

 

[Captain Slog]

What this thread needs is the arrival of Capt Slog:.


Just got back off holiday and found this wonderful thread, brings back many memories Tb. The following list should be adhered to when compiling the “Work Done” block on the rear of the MOD Form 707B(IS):

• A full detailed description of the work carried out by the principal tradesman, plus that of any trade or labour assistance, is to be recorded. The description of work should include the following (where appropriate):
• Authority reference for the work carried out.
• Reference to any Air Publication (AP) or Maintenance Procedure (MP) that was referenced to aid the task (including the amendment state of the publication).
• Serial number and life recording data of any item / component removed as part of that task.
• The batch number of engineering consumables (i.e. non-lifed nuts, bolts, “o” ring seals, etc, that are known as “C” class stores) used as part of the item / component refit or reconnection.
• The serial number of any test / measuring equipment (TME) used to confirm the serviceability of an aircraft system.
• When more than one tradesman is detailed to work on the task, each tradesman is to identify and sign for the work he actually completes within that task. Multiple signatures on one work entry are not permitted.

JAP 100A-02, Chap 4.2 also gives guidance.

 

[Little Tronk]

PSBM - maybe this is part of the perennial communication issue. Trainees are taught how to do things by the book (and an up-to-date book at that).

They then leave Cosford and enter a bright new world, full of new knowledge, ready to take on all sorts of new challenges. Unfortunately when they arrive at a unit, they find the tired old arguments of "Well, we've always done it this way", or "What do those tossers know back at Cosford" plus a whole raft of more choice comments.

Most new guys probably have a good stab at pointing out that maybe things have changed, orders amended, etc but eventually get ground down by the Jurassic views they encounter.

Yes, they should have more guts/stamina, but everyone has a limit to how far they're willing to push their supervisors/bosses, after all they know their careers depend on solid appraisals.
DT_Xtremez_06:

The same can happen to newly promoted Cpls and Sgts, although they have no excuses (in my humble opinion), as they should already have the qualities needed and courage to stand ready to challenge archaic attitudes.
DT_Xtremez_42:

On the other hand, in an operational environment, other priorioties tend to get in the way, as Stevienics eloquently put on another thread:



DT_Xtremez_42:

I was going to qoute that but didn't know how! But exactly, rip it apart quick worry about paperwork later or deny it whilst waiting for AL state...........I know what I'd do and Fcuk the JAP!

 

[propersplitbrainme]

What you are saying here is that the requirement is for each Jack to have an entry and each person to sign against that Jack/Position?

No, the requirement is for each tradesman to identify the work they have done......

When more than one tradesman is detailed to work on the task, each tradesman is to identify and sign for the work he actually completes within that task. Multiple signatures on one work entry are not permitted.

I used the jacking operation as an example of how a task can actually be broken down to identify the piece of the operation each individual actually did. I'm sure others could suggest other ways of going about it that fulfills the basic requirement of identifying what each person did and avoiding multiple sigs on one entry.

 

[MrMasher]

I was going to qoute that but didn't know how! But exactly, rip it apart quick worry about paperwork later or deny it whilst waiting for AL state...........I know what I'd do and Fcuk the JAP!

For which you would be authorised to do by the relevant boss.

 

[Ex-Splitter and Proud]

Just got back off holiday and found this wonderful thread...

Finally!

Cap'n - you're LATE!
DT_Xtremez_30:

(Have a nice holiday then?)

 

[Captain Slog]

Finally!
Cap'n - you're LATE!
(Have a nice holiday then?)

Yes at Keswick, unfortunately it rained every feckin' day.