Narrative:

I was assigned aircraft X. The aircraft was scheduled a service check and a tap test which requires an inspector. The inspector was notified of the tap test so I continued with my service check and other scheduled maintenance items.at approx. XA30; the inspector was done with the tap test. He had stamped the job card but not the sign-off card associated with the tap test. I informed him that he's responsible for signing/stamping his work performed. He replied; 'inspectors don't stamp sign off cards'; 'accomplish by blocks'; or 'enter things in [the computer]'. I informed my supervisor of the situation; and he stated I will call the inspection department. I also went into the [procedures manual] for classification. I printed out some information and presented it to my supervisor.a few hours later; the supervisor came to me with feedback from the inspection department; stating 'they don't have to stamp/sign the sign off cards'; we have an internal (local) agreement with the inspectors. I responded the [procedures manual] states 'whoever performed the task must stamp/sign for their work'. He replied; 'well this is how we do it here and it always been that way' and I responded; ' that doesn't make it right' we must follow the [procedures manual]. I was then told to sign the sign off card but I declined. My supervisor stated; 'I'm ordering you to sign it' but once again I declined.later; he approached me with the sign off card and it was stamped by the inspector (accomplished by block); the mechanic (entered in [computer] by block); and the supervisor (work was completed block) which was the way the I interpreted it from the [procedures manual].the event occurred for several reasons but I will address two. There has been a hot topic between mechanics and inspectors signing off the proper blocks on sign off work cards. According to the [procedures manual] it explains how to stamp off blocks and defines who is responsible for the work. I do understand 'accomplished by' vs 'checked by' blocks but this particular sign off card states 'the person who did the inspection' which is a '-8 must stamp accomplished by block'. It also has three different places were 'a person who was associated with the task' has the ability to stamp. Also the [procedures manual] states that inspectors can stamp 'accomplished by' blocks.the other reason is complacency; learned behavior; and lack of recognition towards company policies [procedures manual] is unacceptable. The [procedures manual] is in place for us to follow and get clarification when there's an interpretation concern. We are not to assume and make our own local agreements or deviate from company polices/procedures. The [procedures manual] can became vague in some instances as well. The job cards; sign-off cards; and tally sheets must be consistent or match each other station wide. To avoid multiple recurring issues of this event; I suggest we revisit the [procedures manual] and highlight (red ink) the department (maintenance; inspection; or supervisor) responsible or add a note as a 'remember' who is responsible for what blocks. My suggestion is whomever performs a task must stamp/sign it off completely. This includes job cards; sign off cards; and tally sheets. I would also recommend adding a 'checked by' block for the inspectors to stamp on [computer] sign off cards. This will eliminate the high confusion between the mechanics and inspectors. The inspectors must be held accountable and show consistency on all paperwork. For instance; when an inspector accomplishes an inspection and the job card has 'accomplished by' and 'checked by' blocks for both individuals to stamp; who is solely responsible for the sign off card associated with the job card? This will better assist records and qa audits in my opinion.

Related reports:

Google
 

Original NASA ASRS Text

Title: Maintenance technician reported an inspector refused to sign-off the final document associated with the work per the procedures manual.

Narrative: I was assigned Aircraft X. The aircraft was scheduled a service check and a tap test which requires an inspector. The inspector was notified of the tap test so I continued with my service check and other scheduled maintenance items.At approx. XA30; the inspector was done with the tap test. He had stamped the job card but not the sign-off card associated with the tap test. I informed him that he's responsible for signing/stamping his work performed. He replied; 'Inspectors don't stamp sign off cards'; 'accomplish by blocks'; or 'enter things in [the computer]'. I informed my Supervisor of the situation; and he stated I will call the inspection department. I also went into the [Procedures Manual] for classification. I printed out some information and presented it to my supervisor.A few hours later; the supervisor came to me with feedback from the inspection department; stating 'they don't have to stamp/sign the sign off cards'; we have an internal (local) agreement with the inspectors. I responded the [Procedures Manual] states 'whoever performed the task must stamp/sign for their work'. He replied; 'well this is how we do it here and it always been that way' and I responded; ' that doesn't make it right' we must follow the [Procedures Manual]. I was then told to sign the sign off card but I declined. My supervisor stated; 'I'm ordering you to sign it' but once again I declined.Later; he approached me with the sign off card and it was stamped by the inspector (accomplished by block); the mechanic (entered in [computer] by block); and the supervisor (work was completed block) which was the way the I interpreted it from the [Procedures Manual].The event occurred for several reasons but I will address two. There has been a hot topic between mechanics and inspectors signing off the proper blocks on sign off work cards. According to the [Procedures Manual] it explains how to stamp off blocks and defines who is responsible for the work. I do understand 'accomplished by' vs 'checked by' blocks but this particular sign off card states 'the person who did the inspection' which is a '-8 must stamp accomplished by block'. It also has three different places were 'a person who was associated with the task' has the ability to stamp. Also the [Procedures Manual] states that inspectors can stamp 'accomplished by' blocks.The other reason is complacency; learned behavior; and lack of recognition towards company policies [Procedures Manual] is unacceptable. The [Procedures Manual] is in place for us to follow and get clarification when there's an interpretation concern. We are not to assume and make our own local agreements or deviate from company polices/procedures. The [Procedures Manual] can became vague in some instances as well. The Job cards; sign-off cards; and tally sheets must be consistent or match each other station wide. To avoid multiple recurring issues of this event; I suggest we revisit the [Procedures Manual] and highlight (red ink) the department (maintenance; inspection; or supervisor) responsible or add a note as a 'remember' who is responsible for what blocks. My suggestion is whomever performs a task must stamp/sign it off completely. This includes job cards; sign off cards; and tally sheets. I would also recommend adding a 'checked by' block for the inspectors to stamp on [computer] sign off cards. This will eliminate the high confusion between the mechanics and inspectors. The inspectors must be held accountable and show consistency on all paperwork. For instance; when an inspector accomplishes an inspection and the job card has 'accomplished by' and 'checked by' blocks for both individuals to stamp; who is solely responsible for the sign off card associated with the job card? This will better assist records and QA audits in my opinion.

Data retrieved from NASA's ASRS site and automatically converted to unabbreviated mixed upper/lowercase text. This report is for informational purposes with no guarantee of accuracy. See NASA's ASRS site for official report.