At NACE 2009, an estimating class showed me the value of capturing “not included” items. I refined my shop’s checklist with good financial results, but a couple procedures still escape measure. What can be done?
Corrosion protection immediately came to mind as a good example of this.
Any information provider will tell you that their system is an estimating guide for clean, undamaged parts. Upon reviewing their “not Included” operations you will see that does not include time for access via damaged parts, because the time will vary depending on the severity. An item like corrosion protection does not fit in this category, however, as OEMs define when corrosion protection is necessary.
I believe the repair industry and the insurance industry can rightfully expect proper labor time and paint material assessment from the information providers for corrosion protection. Here are two frequently asked questions regarding this issue:
Q: Why do you feel that labor time and paint materials can be assessed appropriately?
A: When welding two pieces of metal together, corrosion protection must be restored. Because your guide provides for clean, undamaged parts, a time study should be possible. Just like any “repair option” a repaired panel would be adjusted on an individual basis. The proper procedure information is available from the vehicle manufacturers.
Q: Why is corrosion protection defined as a refinish procedure, rather than an individual choice?
A: Under the Clean Air Act, the Federal EPA implemented the NESHAP Rule, which went into effect Jan. 11. The rule explicitly defines “refinishing,” and provides guidelines that a repair facility must abide by when applying coatings to a motor vehicle.
Ray Fisher is the president of ASA-Michigan. This article represents his opinion and does not reflect the views of ASA-Michigan.
