Week 9 standard costing solutions(1)

Week 9 standard costing solutions(1) - i Chapter 19 ID...

Info icon This preview shows pages 1–5. Sign up to view the full content.

Image of page 1

Info icon This preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

Image of page 2
Image of page 3

Info icon This preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

Image of page 4
Image of page 5
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

Unformatted text preview: i Chapter 19 ID 24t).ll.-\ JUSJF 1'3 .1 5 (a) \iuti-rizll \itu. l mi» ‘IiillldJl'ti mix llili'i-ri'lltl- Hlirrul‘rr'll \ Mid".- IliIn-x) tiilrn‘ priu :lI- X 984 Hint-10‘}! “ii-IN 2.5“ ‘I w THE} 160%} QHJF ‘~.['ttl m 21ml] Answer : B thl Expected output = 73.8 units t23l4!3f)) Actual output: 72 units. Standard €051 per unit 01' output = £84 Yield variance 2 LS units it £34 : E | 5 ] .2tlA Answer = D w :r 19.1% Budgeted uvcruge price = It£l00 x I00} + (£50 x 1501+ [£35 x 250)]!500 = £52.50 The market share variance is calculated us follUWH‘. {Actqu market share 7 budgeted market share: x (Actual 1ndu.~.try volume x budgeted average yelling price) I49-U'Zhfitl — 50012500) x (2050 x £52A5U‘I = £l89tlA Sales mix variance calculation: i'r'nriin‘l ‘1 “ml mlw \r Ina! min in “lirl‘l'lllll‘ ilmlgi hrl ‘lll'hHN-l‘ 'Imilw budgeted lam [mu ILt -'i R 108 03 S ilflfll 92F lull ‘JIHF 5 E65 HS}. IJU‘l‘l Eh ill: 50 MLIF T .331 ‘47 t) (SU‘H 9.61M 55 U l l |.-\ Answer = E 19.17 (a) Market size variance = (Budgeted market share percentage} x (Actual industry sales v budgeted indunry 53165)): budgeted contribution = t [5 OOOH'S {100) x {10% x 75 000) 7-: £80 = £13tltHllJ:\ Answer = C (h) The market shun: variance is calculated as follows: {Actual market share 7 budgeted market shaver x {Aciqu industry volume 2: budgeted average contribution: [{1} 000M)? 500) 7 0.30] (67 500 x £80) : £40 UlltlA Answer = A £918 ta] Planning variance = [Original standard price] ~tMarke1 price during the periddl x Quantity purchased The difference between the originle standard and the market price is £0.4{lA. M ullipi} ing this. by the actual purehmes or .-.i i. at; 2 t ‘1 2 7700 kg gives £30804 This is not listed in the possible ans“ crs. It is therefore assumed that it is the c\arniner's intention is to define quantity purchased as the standard quantity for actual production (7 kg x 1000: 7000 kg); Using this figure the planning vai‘izmce is £2800Ar Answer 2 B (b) The standard quantity is 7000 kg ( 1000 x 7 kg) and the actual quantity is 7700 kg giving an adverse variance of 700 kg Multiplying this by the t’x-[JUSI standard (market) price of £4.50 gives a usage variance of £3150A. Answer : C 19.19 (a) Material price: (standard price — actual price) x actual quantity (£3 — £4) x 22 000 2 £22 000 A Material usage: (standard qttantity — actual quantity) x standard price ((1400 x 15 = 21 000) — 22 000) X £3 : 3000 A Wage rate: (standard rate — actual rate) x actual hours (£4 — £5) x 6800 : £6800 A Labour efficiency: ((1400 x 5 = 7000) — 6800) x £4 = £800 F Fixed overhead expenditure: (budgeted fixed overheads — actual fixed ' overheads) (1000 x £5 = £5000 — £6000) = £1000 A Volume efficiency: (standard hrs — actual hrs) x FOAR (1400x5=7000~6800)x£1 =200F Volume capacity: (actual hrs — budgeted hrs) x FOAR (6800 — 5000) x £1 = £1800 F Variable overhead efficiency: (standard hrs — actual hrs) x VOAR (7000 — 6800) x £2 : £400 F Variable overhead expenditure: (flexed budgeted variable overheads —» actual variable overheads) (6800 x £2 — £1 1 000) = £2600 F Sales margin price: (actual margin — standard margin) x actual sales volume (£102 7 £80 = £22 — £20) x 1200 = £2400 F Sales margin volume: (actual sales — budgeted sales) x standard margin ( 1200 v 1000) x £20 2 4000 F Reconciliation nfhudgotcd and actual {unlit (t‘t Budgeted profit 20 000 \(Ivet‘sr 10a: utn'ablc t£t It: Sales margin price 2 400 Sales margin volume 4 000 Material price 22 000 Material usage 3 000 Wage rate 6 800 Labour efficiency 3100 Fixed overhead expenditure 1 000 Fixed overhead efficiency 200 Fixed overhead capacity 1 R00 Variable overhead expenditure 2 (700 Variable overhead efficiency 400 gm 12 200 Net adverse variance 20 600 Actual profitflloss) 600) 57:13? 1243 (h) Jr 1 i «.t n v ‘ ('rcdnors (to 000 Wll’ 03 000 Material usage \anance j 000 M M \ ar'iantc itt'v‘tttmt‘ Creditors 22 000 Wages control Stores ledger (labour frilClCllC) I 5‘00 (material usage) 3 000 Fixed overhead l\ olunie) 2 000 Wages control (wage rate) 6 300 Variable mcrltcad Fixed overhead (expenditure) 2 ()1 )0 (eweiidituret l 000 Variablemerhcad tetficrcnc} ,t 40) Casting P +1.2i/cthalancet 17 000 32 800 32 S00 l'mliltg: 1’ «k 1‘ amount Cost of sales 96 000 Sales 122 400 Variance account Loss for period 600 (net variances) 27 000 Vt 11‘ control account Stores ledger 63 000 Finished goods >100lv' l 12 000 Wages control 28 000 Fixed factory overhead 7 000 Variable factory overhead I4 000 w 1 12 000 \V'auev t'trtlll’ul account Wages accrued account 34 000 WlP 28 000 Labour efficiency variance 800 Wage rate \ariance 6 800 34 800 34 800 l‘in‘d factory overhead avcunut Expense creditors 6 000 W]? 7 000 Volume variance 2 000 Expenditure variance 1 000 8 8 000 Variable factor} oivrltcad an‘mtnt Expense creditors l l 000 WIP [4 000 Expenditure variance 2 600 Efficiency variance 400 14 000 m Finished grinds \llk’lx WIP 1 12 000 Cost of sales 90 000 Closing stock c/fwd 16 000 112 000 l 12 000 (‘09! ttf\11lt‘§ account Finished goods stock 96 000 Cost P + 1. ale 96 000 19.20 (a) (1‘) (tit (i) Actual quantity at actual prim (given) 17 328 (ii) Actual quantity in actual mix a! standard pricer F 1680 x £4 6720 G 1650 x £3 4950 H 870 x £6 Q to 890 (iii) At'nml quantity in standard mix at rlandnrzl pnt't'r F (4200 x 15/35 = 1800) >< £4 7200 (1(4200x 12/35 =1440)x £3 4320 11(4200x 8/35 = 960) x £6 m 17 2th Material price variance = (Standard price — Actual price) Actual quantity = (Actual quantity x Standard price) — Actual cost = (in — 0) Mix variance = (iii) — (ii) 438A 3901: Yield variance = (Actual yield — Standard yield for actual input) x standard cost per unit of output 1244 {ANSWERS TO REVEEW PROBLEMS i i = rib-Iii 7 tiztttwfi x 32 = 3.340“ 3: £450 _4 tic. rtittrzt rift-IA 3 Material its;th \‘ttrinttcc = Mitt \1tt'i:ntce(£3‘JIIF)+ "t'icld E variance tfllh-IAJ 474:\ or Standard cost for actual output (3648 >< £4.50 : i: I6 416) — Actual quantity at itandartl price»; (£16 390) = £47-IA tbi Mir l’flf‘ldllt‘l’j luttti I” l i ll Standard nnx Milli) I-l-ltl ‘lbIJ Actual usage w M Q Difference I lit 2 El] 'Jtt .Stztndard price £4 £3 {n Variance 1901: £480F £63014 15h IF Prtr'r 'I'rll'lflm‘i'.‘ Standard price If] 4.00 1.00 hill Actual price If) «1.25 2.80 thI Actual quantity used 5630 I650 h?” Variance “SA 410A JEOF LISA (C) Labour r‘n‘s‘l t‘rrr‘t'mlr‘r’ tSlarttlard cost for actual production) — (Actual cnstl Department P 1'] 30 batches x £40 = £4 800 7 £03.60} {150% DepanmentQt_lZl}x£l2=£l44tl—£I5]2t {TIA Labour {flir'imtrjv mrt‘anr‘r’ [Stander hours for actual production 7 Actual hours-I x Standard title Department P [ llfl hate her x 4 hours : 480 hours — 600 huul’SI x £ It) I t 2tttJ.-'\ Department Q t l 30 x 2 hours = 2-10 hours 7 270 hoursl x if: EISUA Labnttt‘ rate variance [Standard rate 3Arlual me] a Actual hnun Department P (£10 — [10.60] x 600 Elf-DA DcpartntetttQ (£6 - £51301): 270 EIUBF (Cl) Total sales margin variance (Actual margin) — (Budgeted margin] 13643 kg at {Elf-.15 — £6.125‘Ji — [4096 kg at {Etta—EfiIESJt t Ith Sate: volume variance tActuaI sales volume — Budgeted sales volume) it Standard margin t'3MS-JD%IatI£]h-—£6.l25t E442~IA Sule'x margin prir‘f' variance I'Actual margin - Standard margin! x Actual sales tolume itilb7ii£fi.l25t7(£1fi7£6.125nx36-13 3736f Nate ‘lhe standard cost per ltg sold is [l96t'32 kg : Ht 125 let The answer should indicate that a different mitt of the materials from the standard mix was used, Less of materials F and H and more of the lower cost material C were used compared with the standard mix. This may explain the adverse yield variance. Also the purchase price for material G was less than standard which may indicate the purchase of poorer quality materials which may have had an adverse impact on the yield. 19.21 (at Superb I—Arellettt timid Inn! I. Budget sales tunttst .10 000 fill {100 10 mt) Itltttltlti 3. Acrual sales (untrsl 28 800 48 000 i9 200 Qtt I100 in std PTOPOI‘IIUI‘I“ 3. Actual salestunits] 36030 42000 15W ‘JttOt'lU Standard unit valttatinrtS' 4 Sellingpricetfl IOU 80 70 5. Contributiontil: 60 55 48 (a. Profitif} 35 30 23 Sales volume variance 0n turnover basis t3—llx-I (.Ej WHJOIKF] MlliltIIItA) HililtlfltA] Iillltltltltr’tt (.ln contribution hash t3—l'ix5 tit SMOOOtFl 4-I-t1000t'A} 96mm] I"ful|t|ttt_—\I Onprofit basi: tl-leé tf._t ZIOOOOIFJ 240011)?!) 4500mm T’htmtm Note: Fixed cost pct unit: £2 500 Witt!) 000 units : £25 tht The attm'cr Nlitttlltl: Ill Explain the limitations at until“ hillt" revenues to value the Sitlt‘n \ tll’ltlt'lt‘t‘s tst‘c ‘fittlea \ttriant‘ux' in Chapter IN]. (ii) Point out the limitations 01' Using :t net pmtit margin derived from ttnitizing fixed crusts-t FIVL‘LI costs remain unchanged itt the z.hnrt term with variations in sales volumes. 'I‘heret‘orc total profit}. will change by the sales \olutnes multiplied by the contribution per unit sold and not the net profit per unit H‘Old. tiiit Argue in l;l\'t‘tul' nt'using contribution margins based on the point made in (it: above. Contribution most closely represents. the Changes in cash firm 5. Alw contribution dues not ilIHllVL’ arbitrary apportirnuncttls of fixed overheads and thus at Ultlh the Tt‘ptll’lll'lg of misleading sales variances. tc] Sales mix I‘tIl‘liUIt‘t" -\t'ttt;a| \(llldi MIN ‘Ulllilll itt IltIIrt't'ttu- ~ale~ litttint‘tttlpr-Ittm'tittnx .‘tttttttlat'tl \ttIt-ntttatgin L'lllill'llitllit'll tun unintui- tttittntt- Illflt'L'ilt tt'l ‘1': Superb 3mm :h‘ Rilltitr‘h 3'20“ at i 432 mu Excellent 43 000 415 009 titlf’rt +£10th 35 "3.10 titltl (imd l8 out I‘J III! E Itr‘n +1200 4h J? EB +44 Jill}: Sales quantiti- L'Ltt‘tttrtce rtt‘tuul sale \ ltllllllt‘ in Httdut-tt-{I I'liIi'crt-ntt- Ittttlut-trt! propurl'tnnx \‘dll‘i htantlatt'd ‘tlii‘hll'ml'fl'll'l t'rtnit'ilturintt t||l.tttlil\ Iltl'zlltliit' tiltlt‘gttt If! \utrittllcr If! Superb Ell ROI} HUSH 3t] Iltlll 7 i 200 60 77?, IIIIO Excellent 43000 {50‘}: Stlfltlfl film 55 7 | ID “(KI Good I‘} 300 t 305:4 20 000 -300 43 3% 4m M tdt See ‘Criticisms ofsztles margin variances‘ in Chapter I9 for the answer to this question tel ti) Original t-lttnflstt'd Ruier thlttt'lfll‘t'l \t'tttttl Ill tit t{t Selling price I00 04,00 91! Variable ettsl fl w 3 “till contribution fl Egg) 3 Reconciliatith qfrtt'tttai tt'r'rlr. original budget ( Est-past urtrr'artr'c ttttrtlitrfx) t: Ungtnal budget [ll] 000 x fwt I Still 000 Planning tarianccs: Sales price (‘tlllllll x £6} 130 000A Vanahlc cmt t $0000 x {I 20) 3h DOOF Hi [100A Retry-ed cit-past budgeted contribution I bit] (tilt Operatinnal variances Sales volume tum I £55.30] 331 300E Sales price 136 000 x £4) I44 000A Variable CtMl :16 Um 1 fl] RUt 33 SWF llh Ill IUF Actual contribution (It: {MU x £52} I £71001] (e) (iii For the answer to this question see ‘Erpos't variance analysis' in Chapter I9, ; i i g i l L l l l i i l 19.22 tall The traditional \‘tiriancc analysis is as follows: gdlt’K margin \ilhime \ .irtnrit e till his luai with \uiunie = budgeted Mllt“ \itlunu'l balcx' margin price variance lut'ttldl UI'III margin 7 stander unit margini x at'lUdl salcx mlunic iiil‘l — {Zhiit |tl0ll ‘4. on Q :- :1. Q x *1- Material pl‘ite [\lillldunl price 7 actual pricel at actual quantity tlS—L‘lix mum «llIL‘IIA Material Usage. tetanddrd quantity — actual quantity i it standard price iltl lltiti -ltl llt’itli x [5 J 000: l7 lt'ttl-‘l \‘i'age rate. Nari dard rate — actual rate) x actual hours {Li 7 l£34 lillli‘tillOOlj I Still” || HltlA Labour efficiency ‘ [standard hours — actual hours] a: standard rate lillltllen:60tI}l—5lllll]x£4 tillt) ltltltlUA Total variances m' Reconciliation. Budgeted contribution t ltltltl :1 HM 2b [300 Add adverse cost variances 58 [3th Lest. favourable Kale; varitlm‘es 15$ 0001 Actual contribution 2b 000 {hi I \t llll tt'i {lriflnal plan RU iml tot-post plan Actual re-iults 1 t: I till it.‘ i SalestlDOOxElOOJ=lEDO0J thlllxflfiijJ =165000 tltXKIxt'lSSl:lSROUO LaMurtélXflxlI-li = 24000 {Whitfit = 37500 {SSOOKIZM = 34500 Materials: Bee Ayeilllmtl K [St = 50000 tllllltl'l \t £3.50! = $5000 illlRtlUxE‘Jl = 97' 300 llUUlll] x {7) : if] 000 tL'i l Jut'onirolfnhi'e planning trimmer (A - Bi Sales price (15 (llltlF Wage rate Ll 500A Material pnceJ I50 flD—Tflufill 30033.4 Substitution ot'matenals variance [85 £00 - 7i) um; 15 A In 500F tiprrnimriul itrrinnrrr Sales price ll? 7 Ci 7 000A Wage rate ISEID a £0.35! 1 45W Labour efflch (200 hrs at £6.25: 1 250F Malenal price I if} 800 x £0.50] 5- 403A Material usage t 800 x £3.50} M m Total variances In Not? 11f the purchasing officer is committed to buying Aye and it is not possible to change to Bee in the short term then the £15 000 substitution variances is an uncontrollable price variance. and the total planning. variancc Will be 1' 15 mt] for mated-alt. However. if the purchastng officer can respond to changes in the relative prices then the {IS (I!) should he added to the operational price variance. Corrimt’m on operational variant-es The operational variances are calculated on the basis of the revised ex-pon plan. The ex post plan represents what the target would have been. given the benefit of hindsight. This represents a more realistic target than the original plan. For example. given the conditions i or the period. the target sales should have been {[65 000. Actual sales were £158 tltitl. Therefore the operational sales variance is £7000 adverse. An explanation of planning and operational variances is presented in 'EJ post variance analysis‘ in Chapter 1‘). IthlS'vt-ER'S TO REVIEW l‘r'vlt‘lBtEfl'lS 1245 lL'l .‘ltl’l'tllllflkt‘l' ii I The traditional price \ ni‘iuncc includes tiituioidable." uncontrollable clcrncnh diic In cliuiipc in L'll\ ll't‘llt'llt‘til iit' £2ti titltl or £35 lltltl. The rct iscd analysis is more indicative of current purchasing cl'l'iciciict'. Ilil Traditional approach iitcurrcctlt \ztiiics de\ intiuns lrom budgeted et’ficicncy in calculating usage or efficiency variances. A better indication is provided by attributing the current standard cost per unit to the tlc‘Vlzlllon‘i tu Variance of £6800 is a better indication ol'tlie excess usupe ot'the materials than the [-4000 under the traditional method]. Disinirnitmgc.i tit Classification into planning (uncontrollable) and avoidttblc may he difficult tug. substitution variance] and arbitrary. tiil An); error in producing man standards will cause a corresponding error in the clttSsitication of the variances (for example. we could have used a £9 tax pot-r standard for materials. thus affecting both the planning and operational variance). (iii) Excessive casts compared with benefits derived. (iv) Who sets the if." part standard? If the purchasing officer sets the standard then there is a danger that the stnndnrd may be biased to avoid unfavourable operational variances. 19.23 (at Standard cost of materials per kg of output ((1115 kg x £4! +1103 kg at £6] + (0.2 kg x £2.50) = £4.90 Slnndnrd overhead rule : £ 1 2 (KillfBudgetcd standard quantity of ingredient F HOOD x 0.65] : £4.615-i- per kg of ingredient F Standard overhead rate per kg of output of FDN = (1.65 kg x £4.6I54 : £3 it‘i Standard cost of actual output: Materials (4200 x £4.90] 30 580 Overheads (4200 x £3) '3 l J 34 180 Actrrm’ rust qf‘ottfpiit Materials 30 380 Dt‘erlieads {£7800 + £4800) I2 600 32 980 Wit-inner calculations Material price variance 2 {Standard price 7 Actual pricelActuat quantity = [Standard price x Actual quantity] — Actual cost = [£4 x 2840) + (£6 x 1210) + {£2.50 x 860} : £31770 — £20 38d 390A Material yield variance = (Actual yield 7 Standard yield] at Standard material cost per unit of output : {4300 — 49H} materials used“ .15] x 114.90 341A Material mix variance [Actual quantity in actual mix at standard pricesl 7 [Actual quantity in standard mix at standard prices) 3 F t4Ul(lle.65Il.li=2775—28=l(]]x£4 2012M D t4‘lltlxtI301'l.li-_-|Itil—lllfl'txft‘l 4IhF N i49|tlxll20£ll§=8547Rflltx25tt ISA l5”: 1246 (hi Uterltentl et'l'it tenet \ariance : | Standard tttiuntiI} tll' ingredient F 7 Actual qttnntltvt x standard overhead late per kg tal ingredient l— = t-thJtl x [Hui = :7 ltl — EH40: x Hot 5-1 SUI-LA Overhead capacity variance : I Budgeted input of ingredient t? — Aeiuzil innutt x standard overhead rate per kg tit ingredient F = t-llltll] x tirifi = lotto — ltt—ttlt x £4.0l S-t llttHA Overhead expenditure = Budgeted cunt till lliltll — Actual coxt [£13 titltll titltlA Rm'onrii’tnriun rtt'smttdurd um cmd in'lmn' rm: ot'outpitt t I i t \e' . Standard cont ot actual production 3.1 lh‘tl Material \’.'ll'l'dltt_‘L‘\ Material price variance 390i: Material )icld \nriattcc 344A Mtttet'ittl n]i\ variance Elltlli Overhead variancm: Overhead et'tieienev itlSA Overhead Cd]‘tzlL'11}' ] [08A ('Jverhend expenditure, £91m Nil Actual cost 31 980 Standard number of tlclinl'l‘ifis t-thJU x t.t5 ten-4.50 kg 10 Standard co‘xt per supplier delivery t£4tltitlfltll {4th Standard nuttther ol‘ desptttchcs to customers t4nn0rtntn 40 Standard cost per eumomer ileapateh (:ESOtlt’lf-lm £200 Actual output exceeds budgeted output by 59"} t4 3t lOf-itlmi‘i 3'.(‘Itl’li‘r\'*tlltr.\(’d t'mtinls; rt‘t‘mtt'fltutimt .vrrti‘etttt'nt Standard cuxt for actual output. Ileltveriex'tl [ii a llldellu-rie; =l115x E—ltlt] perdeliter}! 42H} [Jexptltrltex I | US x 40 devpttches = 42 5: [ItJtlper deqlatultt m 13M” .\L‘[l\'ll_\ usage variance le’ll\tJ[iL’\ | [Eli — II: 1 [Jim htltldt Despatches t-ll — tilt x L‘lfltl flfi It! lF Activity expenditure varitint‘ex Delhctievtllxi-lvtltl=£43t)U—L-liltlh Nil Devputt‘hes t In x L‘tlt] : tmxt- itstmt ltltJA ltlttl. Actual overheath l: bl)” l9 34 la} {'tHlv = SJf‘L' lm esttgattnn undertaken Note that the expenditure variance has been flexed, An altentative presentation would be to work in whole ntll‘l'lhEN only cince 10.5 deliveries is not feasible. See ‘Destgmng ABC systems” in Chapter 10 for the answer to this question. In pfllTlC'Llltll'. the answer should HITC'GS the need to interview the employees engaged on the activities to ascertain what causes the activities. ti] Det'ixr‘rm “Tl” ifmt investigatitm is t‘rrrrt'cd UH! Not Wufllt nn Uhllgdllng further Fttult elittttttnled Worth investigating and correctne action taken tLSSllt Fault not eliminated .a ll. .\'t- itttt'kligalinn 1925 it I\ mounted that the .L'Sfitl correction cth altpltev to all \ill'lilliL‘v'N that the initial tinextigntiott llkllt'ille are worth} ot't'ttrthei'imestigation The cvpectedcmt ll the ill\ t'aligttttint h curried out la: USU i—t]. if“ l5qu leorreclive :ietiont +tl.,‘\ft><tl.3x [2476" tt‘tnttinttittg \aiinntei : Nuti' --£2~17hic|trevent.\ the P\' ot £525 to: 5 ttiotitlis at 3"; H525 x 4.?l ‘15l Ior variances [hut are not L'llllllllillt'll. titl Ht t‘t'vt'rm H'r‘r' if im itii'mtigutirin iv nut t mill-(foul urllti-i .\ot \httlh ll'IVL‘kllgdllnE \‘mrth investigating but not alone. so \Lnutm-t' \‘tllllllllll‘N [ll lot The expected cost it no Investigation is undertaken is: (Urix £52§X41135 - :2qu t. by Applying the expected value dCL‘lNilII'I rule. the euntpnn} tCJ tdl l‘dl Should lollow a policy of investigating \‘ill'idltv‘L‘H as ;t matter ot‘ routine. The expected cost ol'imevtigntion is £8 1 :1. compared with an expected cost it" no investigation i.~. undertaken ot L'S‘JI , On average. the hettelit.» 1't'ont invextigntton are {$75 per vurtanee. Examples; ol category 1 \arimtt'cs include: lit The \‘1lt'ltlttt‘t‘l‘s due to random unetnttrollahle factors and in under control. tSee ‘Rattdom uncontrolltthle taetttrR' itt Chapter 1‘! for an explanattonj [it] Where the cause ix uhvioua‘ reg :1 machine littlltl and future action ha; been taken to rented} the sttttttlinn, Evntnplm tllrentegm‘} 2 vztritilttrek include? ti) Exceuxive 1I\ngv‘ ol' muterinlx' and laht-tt r due possibly to wrong working practices on a repetitiu‘ operation which i-. llle'l)‘ to continue it not t'ttrreeted. Ill] Where the \Ell'lltnL'L‘ is .viuttil'it'unl and emceele tt specified percentage ttl' standard image. The above ttl]:ll_\'\l.‘i :tfitillll'lL’h that...
View Full Document

  • Spring '14

{[ snackBarMessage ]}

What students are saying

  • Left Quote Icon

    As a current student on this bumpy collegiate pathway, I stumbled upon Course Hero, where I can find study resources for nearly all my courses, get online help from tutors 24/7, and even share my old projects, papers, and lecture notes with other students.

    Student Picture

    Kiran Temple University Fox School of Business ‘17, Course Hero Intern

  • Left Quote Icon

    I cannot even describe how much Course Hero helped me this summer. It’s truly become something I can always rely on and help me. In the end, I was not only able to survive summer classes, but I was able to thrive thanks to Course Hero.

    Student Picture

    Dana University of Pennsylvania ‘17, Course Hero Intern

  • Left Quote Icon

    The ability to access any university’s resources through Course Hero proved invaluable in my case. I was behind on Tulane coursework and actually used UCLA’s materials to help me move forward and get everything together on time.

    Student Picture

    Jill Tulane University ‘16, Course Hero Intern