Worked scenario
Ninety metres went for processing and eighty-six came back
Process loss at a job worker is normal, expected and almost never quantified — which means excessive loss is indistinguishable from ordinary loss.
3 min read
Sending material out for processing is standard in textiles. So is receiving back slightly less than was sent. The industry accepts this, and the acceptance is where the leakage hides.
Expected loss has to be a number
If it is a general understanding, any actual figure can be justified. Agreed per process and per processor, it becomes a benchmark, and consignments outside it become visible.
Rate is not the whole cost
A processor charging less per metre and returning two percent less material may be more expensive than one charging more. Units that compare only on rate are comparing the smaller number.
The challan is the record
The document already exists for compliance. Using it as an operational record — sent, expected, received, by processor — requires no new paperwork, only that the numbers are entered somewhere they can be compared.
What changes
- Quantity sent and received recorded per job-work challan
- Expected loss agreed per process and per processor
- Actual against expected visible per consignment
- Processors comparable on yield, not only on rate
Questions about anything here, or a situation this does not cover? contact@anantatechhub.com