Their sargent , who had trained them well, yelled: REMOVE BAYONETS. The men who thought they knew better than the Sargent, all grabbed their rifle barrel with their LEFT hand and pulled the bayonet off the rifle with their right hand.
Au contraire......the idea behind "training" Cannon-Fodder, is to remove all initiative and free-thinking.....unthinking compliance is the objective.
(you've only to read about the sacrificial slaughter....sorry, "diversionary landings" on D -Day to realise that)
Had he trained the men under his command PROPERLY, they'd either
do as they were told or
He would have explained WHY a seemingly stupid and irrational action was mandated.
See any parallel with this thread?
Of course you would comply with replacement of components which were mandated, assuming availability. As stated by many here, there are cases when blind obedience has to be subjugated to experience and skill.
How many perfect seals have been wasted in the pursuit of compliance and at what totally disproportionate cost?
The blanket, ass-covering dogma takes no account of the recency of replacement or the availability of a spare.....caution and prudence have their rightful place , but if blind compliance is the order of the day, watch out, you risk being replaced by less-skilled labour who just do exactly as told.....so why pay out for expensive engineers?
Yes, it's been very interesting to observe the answers and rationale behind this simple job-query.