[labnetwork] damage by users

[Tobi Beetz]

Hi Sean – Thanks for the info! This is very helpful!

I just browsed through your website and really like how you have organized the various policy sections. There is a lot of great information there.

Cheers,

Tobi

Tobi Beetz, Ph.D.
Associate Director, Stanford Nano Shared Facilities, Stanford University, http://snsf.stanford.edu

From: Sean M. Langelier <sean.langelier at nanomelbourne.com>
Sent: Wednesday, May 15, 2024 2:17 PM
To: Tobi Beetz <tobi at stanford.edu>
Cc: labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu
Subject: Re: [labnetwork] damage by users

Hi Tobi-

We've certainly dealt with these issues in the past. One major instance was the crashing of a sample into the SEM pole piece by a user who wasn't following protocol. All of our SOPs and training assessments are clear in stating that damage as a result of not following proper procedure is the responsibility of the user/supervisor to rectify. Still though it's hard to get traction sometimes especially where the breach to procedure is not clear and easy to prove.

In the SEM pole piece example though, we were able to recover the ~$50k AUD (can't remember the exact figure) form the University... didn't end up coming out of the PIs pocket. So it can be done. :-)

That said, we've a number of other instances where we were unable to definitively prove misuse. In these cases, all you can do is try to refine procedures to better protect the instruments.

My two cents...

Best,
Sean
---------------------------------------------------------
SEAN LANGELIER PhD / He, Him
General Manager
ANFF Victoria &
Melbourne Centre for Nanofabrication
151 Wellington Road
Clayton, VIC 3168 Australia

Ph:  +61 (3) 9902 4100
W:   http://nanomelbourne.com
W:   http://www.anff.org.au
E:    sean.langelier at nanomelbourne.com<mailto:sean.langelier at nanomelbourne.com>

---------------------------------------------------------










On Wed, 15 May 2024 at 21:50, Tobi Beetz <tobi at stanford.edu<mailto:tobi at stanford.edu>> wrote:
Hi All – we’ve had some recent incidents that has led me to reflect on policies in regard to paying for costs associated with misuse of equipment/procedures. For example, a Stanford student mishandled a TEM holder, causing about $5k in damage. We had a difficult time getting the PI agree to pay for the repair.  Another example is an external industry user who incorrectly disposed a chemical down the drain. We are still waiting to see if the city imposes an administrative fine of up to $25k per day of violation.

Getting access to our center includes that every user agrees to the SNSF Code of Conduct<https://snsf.stanford.edu/labmembers/policies> where list the following: We reserve the right to charge repair costs, equipment and staff time resulting from damage caused by users to the PI.

On the external user side our agreement has an indemnification section which includes: … obligation to make Center whole for any and all damage to Center, its facilities, and equipment to the extent arising out of the negligent actions or use by User or User Personnel.

While this all seems reasonable, I am wondering if you have dealt with this type of issue in a better way. Our approach seems a bit of a patchwork. On the accountability side for local students/postdocs, I am also wondering if other labs have focused on contract language with PIs instead of just getting users to acknowledge policies and an administrator/PI provide the charge account.

Thanks,

Tobi

Tobi Beetz, Ph.D.
Associate Director, Stanford Nano Shared Facilities, Stanford University, http://snsf.stanford.edu

_______________________________________________
labnetwork mailing list
labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu<mailto:labnetwork at mtl.mit.edu>
https://mtl.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo.cgi/labnetwork
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://mtl.mit.edu/pipermail/labnetwork/attachments/20240516/5ebc5971/attachment.html>