In my role at work we are tasked to train personnel on how to build certain products by written procedures and processes.
Part of the training includes training checklists that cover the high level information in the procedure as sections to sign of as completed.
During the training we teach, then we watch them perform (while being there for support purposes to help when clarity is needed or techniques and ideas can be discussed). Once we are comfortable with their performance we allow them to build on their own and do 100% inspection of the work when they are done.
To complete training, an employee needs to have assembled 3 lots of work (typical low lot volumes like 10 or 15 parts to build in one lot) which undergoes 100% inspection. To fully sign of the employees they need to go thru this thing called Verification.
The verification of the training is done by someone who is not the trainer but is familiar with the process or is someone who was previously trained and signed off as fully verified.
During the verification that person who verifies the work watches the employee build. The employee has to follow the process with 100% accuracy (with little to zero wiggle room for fuck ups). If they don't follow the process 100% by the book they get dinged on their training checklist and are forced to build jobs until they pass verification at 100%.
My question to you is this. Would you work for a company that has this amount of scrutiny for employees that make about 18-20 bucks an hour? Do you agree or disagree with the verification process of training? There isn't any other department that operates like this. There are engineers and managers who don't have to go thru the verification process after they are onboarded or while they are working on new things and ideas. Seems to me like it's easier to be an engineer than it is to be an $18 an hour operator.
One thing to note is that the verification checks to see if the trainer had trained correctly and that the person receiving the training understood and can perform at the level we expect them to perform at. It also acts as an official sign off that they are responsible for the work they do from this point forward so they can only blame themselves for future fuck ups. They can't point their fingers at the trainer or others, only themselves. So it helps with that kind of accountability. So I can understand the argument in favor of it.
The argument against it is that it causes drama and excess stress for the employees going thru the training. Depending on the person doing the verification they can nit pick for every little problem or they can be laxed and simply sign them off (typically when they are buddy buddy with one another).
Recently there was a case where an employee had to perform another job to be fully verified because they used Fahrenheit on a machine instead of Celsius. The procedure calls out for C but they didn't know how to change from C to F so they just did the conversion for F so used the correct temp. The person doing the verification said they didn't follow the procedure so gave them a mark on their training sheet and forced them to do more work before they were signed of as fully verified and trained. This hit the grapevine real fast and everyone is talking shit about the verifier and how stupid our training system is.
I have my own opinion about this as well but I want to see what you guys think before I let out my own opinion on this matter.