🚀 go-pugleaf

Josh Turner wrote in message <35AD6739.420@umich.edu>...
>
This is called a mistake.

>Yeah, but what happens when your boss gives you a task that "should"
>take 4 hours, but in fact takes 8?
>
I have worked on Navy fighter aircraft, motorcycles and cars. I have
modified both motorcycles and cars. I have never performed any maintenance
that took as long as the average repair time. I have never met a real auto
technician who does not make repairs in less than the charged time. In my
opinion, anyone who needs to take the entire charged time to make the repair
should find another line of work. The only exception is when the what seem
like an ordinary repair turns out to be an extrodinary difficult one. This
is where the estimate comes in. If we are given an estimate of 3 hours of
labor and it only took 2 hours then we should be charged only for 2 hours. I
have not heard of anyone being only charged for the estimated labor if the
estimate was short. We always pay for all actual labor time if the job
exceeds the estimate.

>But why would the auto repair industry underestimate the time it takes
>to do a job? Take warranty repairs, where the payor (the auto company)
>determines how much work it will take for the payee (the repairer) to do
>the work...
>
Many auto technicians are not on salary here in So Ca. They are paid a
percentage of the repair costs. The more repairs they make the more money
they make. Auto mfr includes a certain $ amount for warranty repairs for
each car the dealer sells. The dealer does not send the mfr a bill for the
warranty work. This is why some dealers will fight you on the expensive
warranty repair.

>Flat rate can certainly cut both ways; there's nothing about it that
>logically demands it benefits only the person doing the repair. To come
>to a conclusion about whether flat rate is really worse for the customer
>or the repairer, we'd have to conduct empirical studies, I think.