ASA states position on two blend deduction issues

BEDFORD, Texas – The Automotive Service Association (ASA) board of directors has approved two position statements on blending issues – including the use of the term “blending” in regard to labor and material reductions; and also deductions related to a number of specific refinish procedures.

Both positions were presented to the board by the ASA Refinish Subcommittee during the association’s annual convention in Santa Clara, Calif. The subcommittee drafted the text under the direction of Dan Stander, Jerry Stander’s Collision Works, Littleton, Colo., who is chairman of the subcommittee.

First, ASA does not support the use of the term “blending” to describe adjacent panel color matching or to represent labor and material reductions.

ASA supports the industry practice of using adjacent panels for a highly technical refinish process to facilitate color matching. ASA does not recognize the outdated term “blending” for labor and material reductions as listed in the current databases for information providers. Using current paint materials, this process – often referred to as “blending” – requires as many procedures as refinishing a new undamaged panel. ASA believes the additional labor and materials used by collision repairers to facilitate adjacent panel color matching should be acknowledged and approved of by information providers and insurers.

Second, ASA does not support deductions for repaired panel blend refinish, blend within panel, zone refinish, spot base, spot within panel or spot paint with full clear.

ASA does not support the practice by any insurer to arbitrarily reduce refinish times for repaired panels, as published by information providers. This practice does not take into consideration the additional “not included” operations. A base coat deduction or refinish labor deduction will not account for the necessary materials or the additional skilled preparatory and spray labor required to properly restore a repair panel to pre-loss condition.

Additional labor and materials beyond those specifically published by an information provider are necessary to obtain a high-quality and proper repair. The practice of refinish-related deductions falsely assumes fewer procedures, less material, less time and overall fewer steps to refinish a repaired panel compared to a new panel. ASA believes the additional labor and materials used by collision repairers to refinish repaired panels should be acknowledged and approved by information providers and insurers.

“ASA’s Refinish Subcommittee believes it is important to address ongoing refinish issues in regard to blending and deductions, and encourages today’s leading information providers and insurers to recognize the additional labor and materials required for repairers to complete an accurate and high-quality repair,” says Stander. “These position statements were developed following careful examination of numerous paint manufacturer refinish statements and related industry documents.”

ASA says that for 57 years, its Collision Division has sought to elevate the professionalism of the automotive repair industry by providing members and industry partners with information and services that will benefit collision repair professionals and the motoring public. In addition, the Collision Division Operations Committee actively works to address and improve a number of issues directly impacting the daily operations and profitability of independent collision repair facilities. The committee has four subcommittees in addition to the refinish subcommittee – including automobile manufacturer, crash parts, estimating and insurance subcommittees.

For additional information about ASA, including past news releases, go to www.asashop.org, or visit ASA’s legislative Web site at www.TakingTheHill.com.