Discussing the pros and cons of shop and technician licensing is necessary as the industry explores this topic. What are your thoughts? There are many questions to be answered before a general agreement about the need for shop and technician licensing can be obtained.
Kudos to Mike Lambert, president of the Automotive Distribution Network (Parts Plus), for addressing the technician licensing issue in ADN's Network Magazine (Summer 2009 edition).
Lambert thoughtfully lists the potential benefits and negatives in his article, "Licensing agreement ... or disagreement?"
Lambert's quote, "I realize this subject is controversial and elicits different opinions," is a classic understatement at its best, but Parts Plus is to be applauded for encouraging its members to submit their thoughts in a "Letters to the Editor" format. If you are a Parts Plus shop customer, you should take advantage of the opportunity to weigh in.
ASA has a somewhat different stance on the subject because over time, our members have recognized that licensing should apply to the shop first and foremost, and secondarily to the employees, which includes the technicians who work there.
I agree with the statement in the article that is attributed to Gil Gunn, Parts Plus vice president of marketing: "the problem with ASE [voluntary technician certification] is that only the good shops participate, leaving countless shops unqualified to repair vehicles in some cases, which can give the entire industry a bad reputation." Amen!
There is an increasing recognition that good shops will be under more pressure to differentiate themselves from the "pack" in the minds of value-conscious consumers. How does a consumer know that a shop is capable of providing safe, reliable repairs at a fair cost? We constantly encourage ASA member shops to promote the association's Code of Ethics and invest in their ability to competently address the increasingly complex repair requirements of modern vehicles. We also vigorously promote the importance of employing ASE-certified technicians and service writers. But can we do more?
There will be opportunities for independent shops to grow their businesses in the next few years by capturing some of the displaced customers who would have traditionally been served by franchised vehicle dealerships. However, any success that independents might enjoy will be dependent on demonstrating technical competence and excellent customer service skills, in my opinion.
Will a formalized set of minimum requirements and standards be helpful? Do we need government entities to establish the criteria for us? I suspect that our industry is already on many politicians' radar as a possible source of new revenue. But would licensing create a better industry or merely a morass of red tape?
These and many more questions related to this issue will have to be answered before there is any general agreement about the need for shop and technician licensing. The good news is that credible organizations such as ASA, ASE and the Automotive Distribution Network are willing to engage in a healthy discussion of the pros and cons. Join in the mix, and let us know what you think.
 | LIST OF COMMENTS |
1/5. President
Written by Guest - Tuesday, September 15 2009 |
I have been a lisenced technician in Michigan since 1982. Eight or ten years after the state of Michigan introduce the B.A.R and lisencing requirements. I started as a young apprentice in highschool, now I own my shop. We have had to do business honestly by law! How amazing that laws had to be passed to get shops to provide estimates and fair practices. It has never been overbearing. It is only the kind of laws that you want other businesses to follow when dealing with you. Common courtesy laws. I had a customer recently rake me over the coals and then have another shop write a bogus letter to the credit card company for a charge back. The other guy has an expired lisence... Law throws it out. He may even get fines from the State.
Lisencing cleans up the pond.
Mikail |
2/5. President
Written by Kent Davis - Tuesday, September 15 2009 |
People in auto repair have no idea how good they have it, being in a relatively lightly regulated industry.
Before getting into auto repair, I was a homebuilder. I got out because homebuilding is more about pleasing layers of government bureaucrats and politicians than it is about building houses that people want.
Once the government is licensing your shop, you will be working for them....
Sure, there are good shops and bad shops. That is why we market. That is why we treat customers right. That is why we participate in ASA. That is healthy competition.
Trying to eliminate your competition by legislating them out of business is wrong, but it also will backfire. Who is going to determine who is "bad" and what the standards are? It will not be ASA, frankly. It will be those who have the time, money, and inclination to get in the political trenches.
I have 10 bays in each of my shops, so if there is to be licensing, I want to get rid of anybody with less than 10 bays (obviously unqualified). The dealers will have similar ideas. That kind of political nonsense is the last thing this industry needs.
We all need to focus on educating and marketing our positives, and not get into a mud-slinging contest about getting rid of the "Bad" shops. Boy, that will be good for our industry, sharing stories with the press about how awful our competitors are. Jeez.
|
3/5. Shop licensing? Sign me up
Written by Guest - Tuesday, September 29 2009 |
As shop owners,we are all faced with the challenge of retaining our existing customers and attracting new ones, in an economic environment where the cost of the repair is of more concern than the quality to more and more customers.
I just looked at the manifest of my Worldpac delivery driver, and at least one third of his stops were to "home" shops, where un- and underemployed former dealership technicians are offering their services on Craigslist for $50 an hour. They are in direct competition with me. I see shop licensing requirements as a tool to level the playing field a bit.
I'm just as leery of government intrusion as the next fellow, but if it helpsto weed out the marginal players who are unwilling to bear the costs of operating a proper business, then sign me up! |
4/5. Perhaps a different perspective might help?
Written by Bob Chabot - Monday, October 05 2009 |
Perhaps a different perspective might help?
I spent a prior part of my life in the investment and insurance industry, in both the U.S. and Canada. Anyone wanting to sell investment and insurance products is required by regulators to first pass licensing exams to establish bonafide proficiency and ethics. Regulators also require that any firm that hires a licensed representative to hold that rep's license, transfer it to another firm if a rep moves, or turn it into the regulator if the rep leaves the industry. It's important to note that the regulators were self regulating -- that is, the industry regulated itself. Exambles of these self-regulating organizations include the New York Sock Exchange (NYSE) and the National Association of Securities Dealers (NASD).
The system has worked well for the most part, for consumers and ethical reps, and certainly better than an unreglated scenario would have allowed. It's weeded out crooks and idiots, forced continuing education requirements to integrate emerging trends.
Just my two cents worth ... |
5/5. WHY SHOP LICENSING
Written by Guest Bob Wills - Thursday, October 08 2009 |
Shop licensing tied with technition certifications is the only way to move forward, the key is to be involved in the process, a level playing field is the best place to be, But regulation comes with cost, if you create a plan with enforcrment you will get your earn back. I believe the consumerd has the right to nothing but the fair and honest service thay are expected to pay for, so why wouldn't you want to clean up our industry? |
Add Comments |
