Lubrication – Whose Job is it Anyway?

By: Mark Barnes, Noria Corporation

In the last five to ten years, there’s been a fundamental shift in how service with first choice in new roles, the misperception that lubrication
companies staff their lubrication programs. Driven in part by the is an “easy” job often accompanied by a lack of accountability found
retirement of the baby-boomer generation, companies are starting to within many lube departments means that the “classic” lube
examine how they can effectively staff their lubrication department to department has become a repository for the unskilled or unmotivated.
achieve lubrication best practice. From the classic “lube tech” or “oiler” Done properly, lubrication is a fast-paced, skill-rich activity, which -
to autonomous maintenance and operation-based lubrication, we will though perhaps not on par with higher-skilled maintenance tasks such
examine those critical success factors required to establish a world as rebuilding machines or performing vibration analysis - requires an
class lubrication process. individual with certain hard and soft skills coupled with a desire and
motivation to serve the plant through lubrication best practices. I have
Introduction met many lube techs who fit into this category in my career, and they
The question of who in an organization should be responsible for day- deserve respect and support for fighting for what they know and believe
to-day machinery lubrication tasks is common. With companies down- to be right. Unfortunately, I have also met many who are simply biding
sizing or right-sizing, all of the time preparing for the staffing crunch time until retirement, punching the clock, or who are flat-out lazy - none
expected or being experienced due to the retirement of the Baby of which help in the "classic" lube tech model.
Boomer generation, many maintenance organizations are in a state of
flux as they try to seek the most effective and efficient structure to meet The Multi-craft model
the organization's needs and objectives. The result of this attempt to Some companies choose to deploy maintenance mechanics to
rationalize headcount and costs is to significantly and dramatically alter perform lubrication as part of a multi-craft trade workforce. Faced with
the way that many companies maintain their assets: particularly as it increasing staffing costs, the belief is that more efficient use can be
relates to routine lubrication related activities. made of the maintenance team if they are able to perform in all major
While there are many variants on how plants staff their lubrication areas of maintenance, lubrication being just one discipline. Again, there
departments, most can be boiled own to three basic models, the “classic” is no reason why this approach can't work. Most mechanics have a
model, the “multi-craft” model and the “operator assisted” model. significant level of experience with different types of machinery. They
typically have more training and knowledge than most lube techs and
The “classic” lube tech model possess the ability to not only perform the required lubrication tasks but
Historically, many companies have chosen to staff their lubrication to complete other tasks at the same time. Multi-craft trades certainly
program using what I have come to refer to as the “classic” lubricant can make for more efficient work planning and execution and done
department model. In this model, one or more full-time, dedicated properly, can lead to significant wrench time improvements.
employees often referred to as “oilers,” “greasers” or “lubrication Again, the downside to this approach comes not from the philosophy,
technicians” are responsible for lubricating some or all of the plant’s but from the execution. In many plants where this model has been
assets, reporting either to a lubrication or maintenance supervisor or adopted, mechanics sometimes place a bigger emphasis on seemingly
reliability engineer. In this role, the lube tech has sole responsibility to more important maintenance tasks (rebuilding equipment, replacing
insure proper lubrication for either the whole plant or typically a bearings, etc.) than lubrication tasks, even though some of the non-
geographic area of the plant. lubrication tasks are necessary due to poor day-to-day lubrication
There are some real benefits to this type of approach, not the least of practices! This pressure to de-prioritize sometimes comes from
which include the ability to build, train and develop a team exclusively managers or supervisors. But more often than not, it comes from a
dedicated to the task of lubrication. With the right choice of individual - misguided belief that lubrication requires less skill and is, hence, less
someone who is properly trained and motivated - there is no reason why important than other tasks that are perhaps more interesting and
this approach can't work today, as witnessed by many companies who enjoyable to a skilled millwright or machinist. Just like the "classic"
are succeeding with a classic approach to lubrication staffing. However, model, provided that the organization takes a properly balanced
history has proven many downsides to this approach. approach to lubrication and its role as part of other precision
For example, many companies continue to under-value the maintenance tasks, there is no reason why this multi-craft skill
contribution the classic lube tech plays in helping maintain the plant’s approach can't be successful.
assets. Faced with the old thinking that "if you know your way around
the plant and can find where the grease guns are kept, you can The operator-assisted lubrication model
lubricate," many companies insist on making the "lube crew" a home for With as many as 43 percent of U.S. companies adopting some form
unmotivated workers - those who are either incapable of functioning in of lean manufacturing, companies are increasingly entrusting some or
other trades at a high enough level, are close to retirement and "opt" for all of their maintenance tasks to operators, including lubrication. Just
the lubricator job based on a perception that the job is easy, or are on like the classic and multi-craft models, there's no reason why
medical disability from other more strenuous jobs. autonomous maintenance, operator-assisted maintenance or Total
This problem is often exacerbated by union contracts which allow Productive Maintenance - whatever you choose to call it - can't work for
those with seniority to bid on what are traditionally seen as “cushy” lubrication. Where companies go wrong is in expecting operators to
jobs. While there’s nothing wrong with rewarding those with years of function at the same level as a lubrication technician or maintenance

438 2008 Conference Proceedings

 / Lubricants and Lubrication

mechanic without providing the training, knowledge and process to course the job plan is followed to the letter. Just like asking five different
allow operators to function at that same level. Done properly, TPM and people to prepare identical pizzas without detailed instructions,
all of its embodiments can and does work – Toyota is living proof of that. performing a lubrication task without a job plan is a “recipe” for disaster.
But when operators are simply given a grease gun or oil can and told to Lubrication PM optimization and rationalization are key to designing an
"go lubricate," TPM will always stand for Typically Poor Maintenance. effective “system” (Figure 1).
The other aspect of operator-assisted lubrication which can also play a
role is the people themselves. While maintenance people are nearly
always mechanically inclined, perhaps committed to a career “fixing
things” right from their first childhood construction toy, others who are less
hands-on couldn’t be trusted to hang a picture straight, let alone maintain
a multi-million dollar asset! Under theses circumstances a “system” that
provides operators a “paint-by-the-numbers” approach to lubrication is
required to allow them to succeed in what is an unfamiliar role.

Building a “system” that works

Whether you subscribe to the “classic model,” the “multi-craft
model,” the “operator-assisted lubrication model,” or a combination of
all three, one thing is clear: success cannot be achieved without an
appropriate “system.” By system, I mean those items that a lube tech,
mechanic or operator require to be in place in order for them to be able
to perform at an optimum level. Figure 1: Rationalizing and optimizing lubrication PM is an important part
For example, most people including those charged with lubricating of building a successful and sustainable “system”
the plant are aware of the importance of good storage, handling and
dispensing practices, at least at a basic level. But unless an investment The last area of “system” development is that of machine design and
has been made in providing the right real estate (lube room) in the plant, configuration. The act of designing lubrication best practice is relatively
equipping that space with appropriate storage and handling tools, and simple as is training those required to perform these tasks. However,
providing appropriate tools for dispensing lubricants in the field, even the ability of the lubricator to deploy best practice could be limited by
the most highly motivated lubricator will fail in their job, because they issues around machine accessibility (can the lube point actually be
do not have the power or authority to influence what “tools” are reached during normal operation?) or by the lack of proper machine
available to do the job. configuration such as properly installed oil sample ports, appropriately
The same logic applies to designing lubrication tasks. More often selected breathers and filters, or visual level check devices. While our
than not, the way in which each lubrication task is performed is left to lubricators can certainly assist in providing feedback and suggestions,
the best guess of the individual performing the task. This becomes few are empowered to make the necessary changes to achieve what is
particularly problematic the more people or steps involved in the often referred to as the optimum “design of maintainability”.
process or the less mechanically inclined people are. While the In summary, success can only truly be achieved when a well
“classic” lube tech model may only have a few people who are easily developed “system” is combined with a well-trained, motivated group
trained, the multi-craft and particularly the operator-assisted models of of employees (Figure 2).
lubrication could have tens or even hundreds of people, each of which
can influence the ultimate outcome. No matter which model you
subscribe to, each task has to be carefully designed and documented to
maximize the likelihood of success.
To illustrate this point, imagine asking five different people to prepare a
pizza. Without providing a recipe which includes both an ingredients list
(parts list), the required quantity of each ingredient and step-by-step
instructions, it’s unlikely each “chef” would end up with exactly the same
end result. The same holds true for lubrication. Consider the simple task of
greasing a pillow block bearing. With nothing more than a task description
(grease the bearing), the end result will always vary. Lubrication tasks need
to include the same level of detail as the recipe analogy: a list of
“ingredients” (tools, lubricant type, etc.) and a step-by-step “how-to” guide
which includes specific details (quantity, frequency, etc.).
When developing task specific “recipes,” the details need to be
decided upfront by someone qualified to do so. It is unrealistic, for Figure 2: The importance of “the system” in achieving best practices
example, to expect a lubricator standing in the front of the machine to
know how much grease to put in the bearing. The engineering
calculations and decision around lubricant selection, re-lubrication Introducing “accountability” to the Lube Team
volumes, task frequencies, etc. need to be made up front and delivered One of the major areas of weakness with many lube programs is the
to the lubricator in the form of a standard operating procedure (SOP) or lack of accountability. While we should at minimum have people in
job plan. Having a detailed and specific job plan is really the only way place that we can “trust” to do a good job, trust alone does not cut it
to insure that each task is being performed identically, provided of when it comes to best practice. Once each lubrication task has been

2008 Conference Proceedings 439

defined at a task specific level (the system we talked about above), them feel like their work is unimportant and they will likely treat it as such.
each task and its execution needs to be checked off and time stamped The second element to training is skills-based training. Skills-based
so that we can track what is often referred to as lubrication PM training provides the how component. How do I safely use a grease
compliance. PM compliance metrics are often viewed with a degree of gun? What’s the right way to take an oil sample? Skills-based training
suspicion by trades people, the thought being that “big brother” is curricula should be constructed of the specific tasks the lubricator will
checking up on me every minute of the day. be expected to perform and are equally important but often overlooked.
However, lube PM compliance should actually be a friend to the
lubricator, not a foe. Used properly, PM compliance can and should be Summary
used as a check and balance on staffing level. All too often, I hear Building a successful lubrication program and motivated team of
complaints from lubricators that there aren’t enough people assigned to lubricators is a painstaking process. Simply hiring the right people is only
lubrication to complete all the work. With a properly documented part of the puzzle. Success can only be achieved when good (motivated
lubrication PM compliance metric, it should become immediately and well trained) people are placed in a system that’s conducive to their
apparent when there’s too much work to do, and too few people to success. Putting good people in a bad system does not work – it simply
complete the work on time, allowing maintenance managers to make leads to frustration and strife, while putting bad (unskilled and/or
the right data-driven decision. With a casual approach to lubrication unmotivated people) in a poor system is a recipe for disaster.
where nobody knows how many exact full time equivalent people are
assigned to do the work, and no check and balance from PM 1
Troyer, Drew “OLE! Rallying for a New Lubrication Performance
compliance metrics, strife will always occur between trades people Metric” Machinery Lubrication Magazine, July 2002.
who are being asked to work beyond their means, and management 2
who are always trying to eliminate costs. Barnes, Mark “Using Oil Analysis to Drive Key Lubrication
Aside from PM compliance, other metrics are the key to sustainable Performance Indicators” Practicing Oil Analysis Magazine, March 2003
success. Just like safety notices and production quotas create
awareness of the importance of safety and hitting production numbers,
lubrication metrics such as conformance with fluid cleanliness targets,

Figure 3: Tracking PM compliance and OLE insures

lubricators have accountability
and fluid quality targets are important alongside PM compliance. These
should be combined into one overriding “lubrication success” metric
OLE (Overall Lubrication Effectiveness).1,2

Training for success

The final step is to train those individuals who will be lubricating.
Training needs two components: knowledge-based training and skills-
based training. Knowledge training provides the “why” component: why
does new oil need to be pre-filtered? Why is over-greasing an electric
motor bearing wrong? Knowing why is an important element of building a
motivated team of lubricators. Few people - myself included - like to be
told what to do without someone taking the time to explain why the task
should be done a specific way. Lubricators are no different. Help then
understand why their role is important and they will likely succeed. Make

440 2008 Conference Proceedings