Clarifying the Estimating Process

March Taylor details the issue surrounding what he terms "The Gap," the difference between refinish work on repaired areas and the refinish times in labor guides that are based upon new, undamaged panels.

Russell Thrall III

Jan. 1, 2020

3 min read

Add Us On Google

On page 63 of this month's issue of ABRN, March Taylor details the issue surrounding what he terms "The Gap," the difference between refinish work on repaired areas and the refinish times in labor guides that are based upon new, undamaged panels. This issue, though present since the introduction of the labor guides decades ago, is receiving renewed attention.At issue is the additional labor, split between metal and refinish technicians, that is necessary to bring the repaired area up to a new and undamaged condition. As Taylor explains, repair facilities have typically figured this labor into their"repair" judgment time on the estimate. But depending upon the repair facility, the work may be split far differently between metal and refinish technicians. How do you track this bundled judgment time's division of labor to ensure proper compensation for your technicians? Beyond compensation, accuracy of technician productivity measurement is affected.Taylor's arguments for the establishment of a "prepare for refinish" labor category are convincing. Given that they are judgment times, it does not require labor time providers to perform a massive development effort to determine the proper labor amount. The result would be a more thorough, accurate description of the damage recorded in repair estimates. This should benefit both repairers and insurers who will have a better understanding of the actual labor performed on the vehicle during the repair process. In addition, it can help shops track their body materials, those most commonly consumed during this stage of the repair, and separate them from refinish materials.Hopefully, insurers, shops and estimating system providers will take up Taylor's challenge to improve the accuracy of the estimating process. For the past several years, insurers and shops have been working together to make improvements in the estimating process that more clearly define the repair process and the procedures employed by shops and insurers during that process. Separating metal labor from the steps necessary to prepare the repaired area for refinish is a natural extension of efforts to improve estimating accuracy. Shops and insurers will benefit from the clarity.Prepare for refinish labor is not the only issue Taylor is working on. In our news section, we report on a committee-which Taylor chairs-that was established to solve the information, estimating and supply problems associated with commonly used one-time fasteners that must be replaced during the repair process.Years ago, many automotive OEMs packaged one-time use fasteners with the parts they attach. Today, that situation is not so common. While packaging cost issues drove the decision to eliminate the inclusion of fasteners, this has created a burden on repairers to track, estimate and source these needed parts. Surely, this added work drives many to simply reuse the original fastener, either because they are unaware it needs to be replaced or because of the difficulty in sourcing them.We include a survey on page 8 asking for your thoughts on the fastener issue. For someone who relishes the fact that he's "just a technician," Taylor devotes a considerable amount of his time to solving nagging, day-to-day problems for repairers. He deserves your support and thanks. Please fill out the survey and return it to us with your views. This will assist Taylor and his committee's efforts and will provide the basis for determining both the extent and importance of fastener issues for repairers.

About the Author

Russell Thrall III

Former ABRN Editor-in-Chief Russell Thrall, a second-generation collision repairer, has experienced the shop from the bottom up, starting as a clean up person and working his way to assistant manager by age 17. Thrall joined the staff of Chilton's Automotive Body Repair News in 1991 as technical editor and as senior editor in 1992. From 1993 through 2000, Thrall served as editor of Collision Repair Industry INSIGHT. Thrall returned to the staff of ABRN in June 2000 as editor-in-chief of the industry's largest monthly trade magazine. Thrall was a frequent speaker at industry events including the Collision Industry Conference (CIC), NACE, and numerous other local and regional events. He served as co-chairman of the Collision Industry Conference Electronic Commerce committee and is a member of the Board of Directors of the National Auto Body Council.