NDT Ethics: Production, Management, and QA—NDT Viewed as a Cost Burden
)
Tuesday, November 29, 2022
Editor’s note: This NDT Ethics case study is published in conjunction with the December 2022 issue of Materials Evaluation. Published quarterly, each NDT Ethics column will present a case study and invite readers to respond here on ASNT Pulse with their comments. Readers are also invited to email column editor Toni Bailey with their own ethical scenarios, which may be featured in future columns.
Welcome to a new installment of NDT Ethics. In this month’s column we will discuss ethics in scenarios regarding production, management, and quality assurance’s (QA’s) approach to NDT, and the effects those behaviors could have on NDT. In my experience, in years past management would often use the word “teamwork” to encourage a cohesive relationship between management, quality (NDT included), and production.
Today, the relationship between NDT, quality, and management has changed significantly. There seems to be an increasingly dividing line between these three teams, who all have completely opposite goals. Let us take a look at a couple scenarios in which the reader can determine if each scenario is ethical or unethical.
—Toni Bailey, NDT Ethics Editor
___
Scenario #1:
The director of quality ignores NDT audit findings in favor of production needs.
An aerospace company had a Level III on staff who was a 30-year employee, and over the years management continually ignored his authority. QA performed all of his duties, with exception to his signature on documents. Eventually, the responsible Level III passed away. Within weeks of his passing, the company hired a new responsible Level III, who was an outside agency.
The new Level III conducted an initial audit and found multiple violations to National Aerospace Standard (NAS) 410, ASTM, and customer quality control requirements. The new Level III documented the findings and asked the director of quality to input the findings into the corrective action system. The director of quality and entire QA department agreed, but never acted on their promises to cooperate or assist in correcting the audit findings.
One year later, the company was on the verge of a major compliance audit but still had open NDT audit findings because management did not want to spend the money to fix them. The director of quality then fired the Level III and hired a new, underqualified Level III as a way to “pencil whip” compliance.
___
Scenario #2:
Due to the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic, management (engineering, production, and QA) considers NDT as a cost burden and would not support NDT training and correct certification.
In this scenario, the company had initially suffered financially from impacts during the COVID-19 pandemic, but then rebounded financially and attained new contracts that required full compliance to Recommended Practice No. SNT-TC-1A. In the past, the company allowed their inspectors to attend in-person instructor-led classroom training, where the inspector could learn the theory and receive hands-on applications training taught by qualified and certified instructors.
Now the inspectors only attend online classroom training classes and receive no hands-on training after the online training. This hands-on training is needed to ensure that the student understands and can apply the theory and acquire practical knowledge. The company claims that losing the inspector for one full week to attend “in-person training” has an impact on production needs. They only allow the inspectors to periodically attend the online training for a few hours per day over months so they can utilize them for production at the company’s leisure.
The QA manager has been keeping data on inspector knowledge, inspection results, and the impact on the product’s quality. The QA manager has noticed a decline in all areas of NDT and has data showing an increase in flawed parts going undetected and customer complaints about non-conforming products. When she (the QA manager) presented the data to the engineers and management, the data was dismissed as unrelated to NDT technical skills and knowledge, so no corrective actions were taken.
___
We now ask you, the reader, to think about the two scenarios above and determine if each scenario violates the general code of ethics. Is there a divide between NDT, management, and QA? Are NDT personnel asked to compromise their ethics for the sake of increased production or unethical management practices?
We would like to hear from the NDT community. Please comment here.
Toni Bailey
_______
Editor
Antionette (Toni) Bailey: ASNT NDT Level III/NAS 410 Level 3 (MT, PT, RT, UT, and ET), IRRSP; TB3 NDT Consulting LLC, Manorville, NY; toni@tb3ndt.com
