Date: Wed, 17 Jan 2007 11:11:18 -0600
Reply-To: John Rodgers <inua@CHARTER.NET>
Sender: Vanagon Mailing List <vanagon@gerry.vanagon.com>
From: John Rodgers <inua@CHARTER.NET>
Subject: Re: Moral question
In-Reply-To: <011501c73a4c$96187820$0301a8c0@beast>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Jim,
Very Enlightening. Glad you posted this.
I have been around long enough and done enough mechanical work myself to
have a pretty good handle on time to do work. The next best thing for
me, is to really understand my machinery to such an extent that when I
talk to a mechanic or shop manager I know pretty much in a few moments
whether or not they know what the hell they are doing, and whether I am
going to get a good job done. On the other side of the coin, they in
turn understand clearly they are not going to be able to jerk me around
because of any lack of knowledge on my part. - should they be so minded.
As I have gotten older I have had fewer and fewer bad incidents over
maintenance. Perhaps it is becasue of my own increasing knowledge and
understanding and my willingness to clearly express my points of view
regarding the work to be done, when it goes into a shop.I have been
known to simply tell a shop manager "You guys don't know what you are
doing and I won't be doing business here." and get in my vehicle and
drive off. I have little patience for someone trying to blow smoke up my
butt.
When I have a problem, I break out the old Bentley's, the Haynes, and
the ETKA, and spend quite a bit of time with them. Then I look at the
list archives, and ask questions on the list. All that gives me what I
need to work with any mechanic I decide to use. I tend to pick small
shops where I can have some report with the mechanic or owner, and
provide some input to help. Most all have been appreciative of the
relationship, as it tends to ehance their ability in getting the job
done right the first time and they don't have to futz with having to
deal with a disgruntled customer coming back over and over. When other
customers sitting in the waiting area see a customer coming in with
complaints of work not having been done right, that sets a very bad
precedent and good shops are astute enough to know this. They want it
done right the first time as much as I do. I know this and I try and do
as much as I can to grease the tracks. I don't want to have to come back.
I have paid dearly for my "education" about all this. And now I get the
best from my education. I'm not saying I won't ever get burned. Like all
of us, it has happened before, and may happen again, but I have learned
every time, and that education has reduced the incidents to virtually
zero at this point. But in any case, I recommend all to educate
themselves in detail about their vehicles, and use shops where they can
have a highly interactive relationship with the mechanic. Do your part,
and that helps him do his part. Know when to step in and provide input
to the job, and know when to stay the heck out of the way. Let the man
do his job. Mechanics appreciate that.
Regarding dealerships - I simply don't go there. In my view, they are
systems designed to milk you for all they can.
Regards,
John Rdogers
88 GL Driver
Bostig Eng wrote:
> I've worked as a tech in dealerships and independent shops, as well as my
> own. It isn't a moral question so much as a game strategy question. The
> others in these situations are generally not asking themselves the moral
> question, and as such if you do you will likely lose most of the time(maybe
> you did the right thing, but got screwed while trying to do it), so you have
> to ask also "should I even ask the moral question, or does simply playing
> their own game make it fair enough?"
>
> Case #1: He should not be paid. If he does not have the skill needed to
> either complete the job, or doesn't know enough to turn down the job because
> he knows it can't be done, no money. The customer should never be paying for
> a shop/tech learning curve UNLESS they know that is happening up front and
> are ok with that. That's really the only reason "book" numbers like alldata,
> mitchell, etc are useful to everyone. You have some number in mind ahead of
> time as to what is acceptable(sometimes it's not a good number at all,
> either too long, or too short but at least there is a number). He put in
> the time yes, but failed at his own job for any number of reasons. No
> payment.
>
> Case #2: Again, failed at his own job. Should not be paid. If he is a
> "professional" which is modern parlance for "incapable of performing another
> job" he should at least know how to do his own job, even if it throws him a
> nasty curve out of his control.
>
> It's tough because these things need to be evaluated case by case with full
> information, but it is usually the case that there is a gap in the
> information understood by each party. In such an instance, it is very
> possible and quite likely the party with the information will take advantage
> of the party lacking the information. I've seen it done in my time while
> working as a tech in stealerships, and in my time working as a software
> engineer. It is a universal problem, but the auto repair industry has been
> screwing people for much longer, and on a wide wider scale. Stealership
> service departments are architected for one purpose. To extract as much
> money from both the customer and the OEM as quickly as possible, period.
> Techs are shielded by service managers, service managers are protected by
> the lack of information the customer usually has, as well as the brand
> itself. A dealership can lose a customer as the brand and dealership status
> are what bring in new customers, not a good individual reputation which
> small shops must build(unless they are getting by on location alone). They
> extract money from the OEMs doing unneeded warranty work, sometimes without
> the customer knowing, or in fact not doing the actual warranty work and just
> charging for it. The OEMs have to pay because they need to sell new cars,
> and as long as the dealership takes the rap for screwing the customer if it
> ever comes to that, they don't care. What should happen is that all repair
> and warranty work should be taken away from dealers, and given to
> independent shops that can prove themselves worthy and then be linked to the
> OEM. That way small shops could specialize and get guaranteed work without
> having the issues of interest as the dealer. But it won't happen soon
> because there is too much money being made, and no way to make it happen as
> the single customer doesn't have enough clout.
>
> The only real way to combat this situation from the customer side is to
> either close the information gap and either learn enough to have an idea
> what is really going on, or to have someone that knows do it for you. Even
> then there is no guarantee because you actually have to know enough in each
> new situation, not just have a well rounded knowledge as to what is going
> on, although that can help(or hurt, a little knowledge is a dangerous
> thing).. But it IS important to go in with a very cautious attitude, and
> ALWAYS play like your wallet is glued shut. It also works to take extra time
> to play the dealers and shops off each other(this would be playing the game
> by their rules). You can setup an information gap of your own by not giving
> the shop much info, just enough to do their jobs. If you walk in and say
> "here's my car, something is wrong with it, it makes this noise... I just
> took it to XYZ shop but I forgot what they said in their estimate.. Get me a
> written estimate with a best and worst case scenario as soon as you can...
> Thanks"... The shop says "can we see a copy of their estimate" and you say
> "no, my buddy has it in his glove box, and his car is at the airport until
> next week". Now the shop knows they can't flex much, because they don't
> know what you know, but they *do* know you know something. Awful isn't it? I
> don't play that game with my customers, but am still forced to play in other
> interactions all the time.
>
> Jim
>
> ________________________________________
> Bostig Engineering
> Engine Systems Voodoo
> http://www.bostig.com/
> 617.272.3800
>
>
> 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
>
>
>
| 
