Date: Tue, 16 Jan 2007 23:19:05 -0800
Reply-To: Björn Ratjen <Bjorn@IGLIDE.NET>
Sender: Vanagon Mailing List <vanagon@gerry.vanagon.com>
From: Björn Ratjen <Bjorn@IGLIDE.NET>
Subject: Re: Moral question
Content-type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1; format=flowed
That reminds me of a story:
Some time ago there was a big apartment complex
that had some recurring heating problems. The
steam heating system would work for a while and
then stop again. Many technicians were called in
and many parts were replaced however the system
would stall again. At some point it came to a
complete stop. A complete replacement was
discussed as the temperatures dropped, however,
the company who owned the buildings hesitated due
to the anticipated cost. It was clear though that
something needed to be done soon.
One of technicians who had worked on the system
suggested to ask an old and very experienced
installer and technician who had actually years
ago taken him on as an apprentice. It was agreed
that they should contact the old man before
serious replacements of equipment and plumbing
were to take place. The old man came, carefully
listened to the noises in the system and followed
some pipes. Then he took out a small hammer and
tapped a valve. With hissing and groaning the
system began to work again. Everyone was grateful
and full of admiration as the whole procedure had barely taken 15 minutes.
Then the bill came for $310. The manager of the
buildings was not amused as the old gentleman had
only been there for a very short time and asked for an itemized invoice.
It read:
tapping valve $10
knowing where to tap $300
Björn
P.S. Now read this story form a customer or service provider perspective.
At 02:16 PM 16/01/2007, you wrote:
>Ok, in a question with no bearing on the Boston Bob scandal of late, here's
>a situation I've been in many times and have yet to find an answer for.
>
>You hire a tradesperson by the hour to fix a problem. He or she puts in the
>hours, but does not fix the problem. Do you pay?
>
>Sounds simple, but it rarely is. Case #1: I took a '93 Saab to a reputable
>local mech to have the vacuum cruise control fixed, something which I now
>know is by definition impossible. After five hours of labor at something
>like $85 per hour, the mech came back with a kind of sheepish look and said
>he just couldn't figure it out.
>
>He put in the time, so he should be paid. I didn't get the problem fixed, so
>he shouldn't be paid. What's the answer?
>
>Case #2: an HVAC installer put in a $4,500 water heater in one of our
>buildings, but could not get it to start. After countless hours on the phone
>with the manufacturer and other information sources, we had our maintenance
>guy reverse the polarity on the AC supply. Five minutes and it worked fine.
>We paid the installer around $2K for his labor but balked at the second bill
>he sent for his (worthless) hours troubleshooting.
>
>He put in the hours. Should he be paid? Should we, for the damage to our
>company's reputation from irate tenants without hot water? For the hours we
>put in?
>
>I think this happens all the time, especially in diagnostic situations
>involving things like intermittent electrical problems.
>
>In Vanagons.
>
>Any mechanics out there care to comment?
>
>Geza
Björn Ratjen, Ph.D.
Cobble Hill, B.C.
phone/fax (250) 743-7575
| 
