Last week, while finishing up an install, I received a call from a CSR representing an insurer glass network. A dealer client of mine had given my name to them and this person had an insured on their back line that needed a windshield replacement. “No problem,” I said. “I can handle it.”
That started a 45-minute 4-way conversation among the CSR, the insured, a translator and myself. It seems that my newly found client could only speak Japanese and it became a tedious procedure of speaking in short sentences to determine what had to be done, where it was to be done at and why I had to do it.
One thing I had to clarify was whether the customer expected an OE windshield. He did and the insurance company would not pay for it, despite the fact that the age of the vehicle was two model years old. That conversation alone took between five to ten minutes and I was not privy to the three of them discussed. The customer agreed to accept an aftermarket windshield, which resolved the matter. Date and location was determined and I finally was released from the call.
The install appointment was set as the first appointment of the week and on my way over to the job, I picked up an OE moulding from the dealer.
My customer owned a Toyota Sienna. As I walked over to inspect the van, I could not first find an apparent reason for the replacement. I looked along the frit area, by the wipers and up in the shade band and still found no visible crack. When I started to re-inspect the glass again, my customer (I think sensing my curiosity), pointed to the low center of the windshield. There, as plain as day, was a small combination stone break that was no larger than a dime.
I am an old Novus guy who sold his franchises to a long-time employee of mine more than 15 years ago. I saw immediately that the break was extremely repairable and it was in the best interest of the customer to repair, not replace, the windshield. The problem was, I was going to be out of the picture since I would be subletting the repair to my friend. I would be forgoing a fairly profitable job and receive zero compensation for “doing the right thing,” despite spending a significant amount of time arranging and getting to the job. I had the glass, the moulding and, most of all, the time to replace his windshield. My question, in these tough economic times, was what does one do?
Without hesitation, it was to call and arrange for my friend to drive over that same day and repair the Sienna windshield. Since the claim was assigned to me, I’ll bill the repair as a favor for my buddy. The “allowable” charge is the same as he charges. My cut? It was zip, zero and zilch. Everyone benefited from this transaction except for my company. The happy and very surprised customer paid nothing and a windshield was fixed. The insurer’s loss was cut by a few hundred dollars. The repair service was fairly compensated.
Am I frustrated? Do I regret my actions, and would I repeat doing the same thing again under similar circumstances?
The answer is yes to all three. The last thing I want is to sound pious and saintly, but what concerns me the most is my affirmative answer to the first two questions. I have tried never to look at a customer as a dollar sign, but, I’ll admit, it hurt to lose this customer. Yet it doesn’t change the fact that I can look at myself in the mirror and know I did the “right thing” for that person.
I can’t explain how I became imbued with the spirit of the “do no harm” phrase that is contained in the Hippocratic Oath that a doctor takes. Perhaps I watched too many TV medical series growing up. When I see a rusted pinchweld, an obviously wrong moulding installed or glued on, a cowl with visible cured urethane, I see a maimed customer and an obvious complication to whatever I need to do. I have remained in business for almost 30 years with trying to take the long-term view of trying to make a customer mine for life with good service and honest work. My basic concept is to treat people the same way I want to be treated and even as I am struggling to deal with a soft economy, I have to live with myself first and be true to my basic credo. To those people who opine that I should have done the repair myself, I gave my word 15 years ago to my friend/buyer that I would not do repairs in our area. We trade referrals all the time but, most of all, giving my word still means something to me.
This isn’t a perfect world nor will it ever be. Yet how we conduct ourselves as businessmen and craftsmen can change attitudes, reputations and expectations. As independents, how do we perceive our customers and does that attitude reflect personal values? I will always believe that a smaller operation has a much easier time retaining its humanity than a large one.
What is the point of this blog? I hope it shows that the war within never stops with time. I suppose the word “conscience” also should be brought up. A business needs to have one. If Wall Street and other world financial centers had actually applied that word to its normal everyday actions, words like “recession,” “bailouts” and “layoffs” would not be used on an hourly basis. In short, the Golden Rule should not have a price tag on it.
Wednesday, November 18, 2009
Thursday, November 12, 2009
Dirty Deeds Done Dirt Cheap
Ask an auto glazier to name one skill set that they hate to employ on a daily basis and I believe that doing removals and reinstalls (R&Is) for body shops would score high on many lists. The job is a thankless one and as time goes by, like many things in this industry, is becoming less and less profitable while the risks spirals higher.
Today’s auto designs incorporate encapsulated glass parts along with an increasing trend of flush mount raw-edge quarter glasses and backlites which can make removals both arduous and many times problematical. Both insurance adjustors and body shop managers tend to disregard the level of difficulty and liability by making payment for these operations a subject of debate.
Removing undamaged glass by its very nature is a collision cost-saving function, yet why are glass shops asked to bear all sorts of liabilities without any commensurate remuneration? Why do glass shops even consider doing such work without considering the total cost and actual liability that could occur by doing R&Is?
Let’s face it; doing removals is by nature neither fast nor easy. Over time I have used every tool except inductors to remove glass awaiting body repair. No doubt air tools certainly have changed the equation regarding time spent in doing removals for the better. With that said, it has perhaps the greatest potential to inflict collateral damage both on the part being removed and to the surrounding body area. How many techs actually change blades as the situation demand to minimize harm? When my air tool had to be replaced, the decision was made not to and I returned to doing it “old school” with cold knives, wire and a cordless removal tool. It is slower and more physically demanding but liability issues have almost evaporated.
Some have stated (accurately) that under present circumstances, doing R&Is is hardly financially viable. In my area, adjustors often cite R&I prices provided by their glass claims administrators. Other adjusters quote Mitchell operation hours that often include glass removal in quarter-panel and roof replacements. In this way, body and glass shops frequently are set against each other to retain profit. This has had the side effect of causing a political division between the two principal crafts within the collision industry and probably does not displease the casualty insurers.
How have glass shops allowed this operation to become a subject of downward spiraling rates? The degree of difficulty has increased. The cost of labor and travel has increased along with materials such as adhesives. Adjustors and body shops expect miracles having immaculate detachments with encapsulated parts while paying with chainsaw quality rates. In this case, glass shops have no one else to blame but themselves as some rush to fill the vacuum as others refuse to play this ridiculous version of the glazing Limbo game of ”How Low Can You Go?”
The liability for collateral damage to glass and to surrounding body areas should be a non-issue. That subject should be the first topic discussed and agreed upon between glass and body shops and it should not be fluid pact. Glass can and will break. Mouldings and encapsulations are not indestructible. Adhesives are not always readily accessible. Nearby paint and sheet metal may not always be resistant to contact. If a glass shop takes on a collision repair center, it has to spell out beforehand who is responsible for what. Auto glaziers are neither magicians nor mentalists. R&Is are a contact event and from my biased viewpoint, glaziers should bear very little liability, if any, for breakage or collateral damage unless the tech is grossly negligent.
Returning the removed part back to the repaired vehicle has issues all of its own. It is my understanding that the Auto Glass Replacement Safety Standard (AGRSS) frowns on re-installing used glass since there is always a question of non-compatible adhesive systems. Trying to explain that concept to an insurance adjustor or collision repair owner/manager has more drama than any Jerry Springer show could conjure up. Urethane compatibility or at least proper surface preparations are two topics of which every tech should be aware. In theory, we, the glazing techs, are supposed to be the authority on these topics. In the real world, sadly that isn’t the case. Too many times, I have observed situations where pinchwelds lacked any sort of surface prep and had suffered adhesion failures or corrosion. Ignorance on proper procedure is one reason that comes to mind for these mistakes and I surmise that the reason for these actions starts with cutting steps out to save time therefore money. It’s proof again that this industry suffers from a lack of professionalism due to the fact that many who call themselves glass techs have no concept of what this craft demands from either the technical and business side and sad to say, too many have neither.
R&Is are here to stay. They are a fact of life and will be for some time to come. As long as catastrophic hailstorms occur or as people drive cars, the need to repair auto body damage will not cease. Removing glass parts to allow that to take place will not stop as well. We in the auto glass industry need to restore respect and financial sanity to that operation. It can be inherently difficult, physically demanding and be legally obligating with long-term liability issues. If we don’t take steps to halt this rush and acceptance of declining payment rates, we are dooming ourselves into oblivion. Too many of us are concentrating on the carrot of today that is being dangled in front of us by others. If we want a future, we need to be far more mindful of what constitutes sound business practices and financial return. Without that, we are just foolish dogs chasing our own tails.
Today’s auto designs incorporate encapsulated glass parts along with an increasing trend of flush mount raw-edge quarter glasses and backlites which can make removals both arduous and many times problematical. Both insurance adjustors and body shop managers tend to disregard the level of difficulty and liability by making payment for these operations a subject of debate.
Removing undamaged glass by its very nature is a collision cost-saving function, yet why are glass shops asked to bear all sorts of liabilities without any commensurate remuneration? Why do glass shops even consider doing such work without considering the total cost and actual liability that could occur by doing R&Is?
Let’s face it; doing removals is by nature neither fast nor easy. Over time I have used every tool except inductors to remove glass awaiting body repair. No doubt air tools certainly have changed the equation regarding time spent in doing removals for the better. With that said, it has perhaps the greatest potential to inflict collateral damage both on the part being removed and to the surrounding body area. How many techs actually change blades as the situation demand to minimize harm? When my air tool had to be replaced, the decision was made not to and I returned to doing it “old school” with cold knives, wire and a cordless removal tool. It is slower and more physically demanding but liability issues have almost evaporated.
Some have stated (accurately) that under present circumstances, doing R&Is is hardly financially viable. In my area, adjustors often cite R&I prices provided by their glass claims administrators. Other adjusters quote Mitchell operation hours that often include glass removal in quarter-panel and roof replacements. In this way, body and glass shops frequently are set against each other to retain profit. This has had the side effect of causing a political division between the two principal crafts within the collision industry and probably does not displease the casualty insurers.
How have glass shops allowed this operation to become a subject of downward spiraling rates? The degree of difficulty has increased. The cost of labor and travel has increased along with materials such as adhesives. Adjustors and body shops expect miracles having immaculate detachments with encapsulated parts while paying with chainsaw quality rates. In this case, glass shops have no one else to blame but themselves as some rush to fill the vacuum as others refuse to play this ridiculous version of the glazing Limbo game of ”How Low Can You Go?”
The liability for collateral damage to glass and to surrounding body areas should be a non-issue. That subject should be the first topic discussed and agreed upon between glass and body shops and it should not be fluid pact. Glass can and will break. Mouldings and encapsulations are not indestructible. Adhesives are not always readily accessible. Nearby paint and sheet metal may not always be resistant to contact. If a glass shop takes on a collision repair center, it has to spell out beforehand who is responsible for what. Auto glaziers are neither magicians nor mentalists. R&Is are a contact event and from my biased viewpoint, glaziers should bear very little liability, if any, for breakage or collateral damage unless the tech is grossly negligent.
Returning the removed part back to the repaired vehicle has issues all of its own. It is my understanding that the Auto Glass Replacement Safety Standard (AGRSS) frowns on re-installing used glass since there is always a question of non-compatible adhesive systems. Trying to explain that concept to an insurance adjustor or collision repair owner/manager has more drama than any Jerry Springer show could conjure up. Urethane compatibility or at least proper surface preparations are two topics of which every tech should be aware. In theory, we, the glazing techs, are supposed to be the authority on these topics. In the real world, sadly that isn’t the case. Too many times, I have observed situations where pinchwelds lacked any sort of surface prep and had suffered adhesion failures or corrosion. Ignorance on proper procedure is one reason that comes to mind for these mistakes and I surmise that the reason for these actions starts with cutting steps out to save time therefore money. It’s proof again that this industry suffers from a lack of professionalism due to the fact that many who call themselves glass techs have no concept of what this craft demands from either the technical and business side and sad to say, too many have neither.
R&Is are here to stay. They are a fact of life and will be for some time to come. As long as catastrophic hailstorms occur or as people drive cars, the need to repair auto body damage will not cease. Removing glass parts to allow that to take place will not stop as well. We in the auto glass industry need to restore respect and financial sanity to that operation. It can be inherently difficult, physically demanding and be legally obligating with long-term liability issues. If we don’t take steps to halt this rush and acceptance of declining payment rates, we are dooming ourselves into oblivion. Too many of us are concentrating on the carrot of today that is being dangled in front of us by others. If we want a future, we need to be far more mindful of what constitutes sound business practices and financial return. Without that, we are just foolish dogs chasing our own tails.
Wednesday, October 28, 2009
Hackers Are Not Us
I don’t know anything more distasteful about my job than when I come in contact with an installation that represents the worst sort of practices that can be associated with my trade. On message boards or in talking with other auto glaziers, the term “hack” is spat out in the lowest sort of derisive tone and terms when speaking of a person or company whose glazing practices reflect the worst possible kind, making it difficult to raise consumer confidence in our industry.
What are “hacks?” Are they made or are they abominations that occur naturally? Do people who are actually paid to install auto glass parts take shortcuts on purpose or are they merely following orders?
I suppose that trying to define a hack is somewhat like trying to identify obscenity. The definition changes for every person, but you know it when you see it. The big question for me is why do people hack and how can they keep doing it on purpose?
Installing auto glass is not brain surgery. If you use commonsense and some intelligence, have some physical strength, proper tools and can learn the underlying principles of the trade, such as glazing techniques, removals and corrosion prevention, it is not that hard of a trade to master. Why then are we seeing more and more installation disasters than ever before?
This is an industry-wide problem. In some cases it is fostered by greed, individual or corporate. Pay for performance or piecework certainly (and implicitly) rewards speed over all else. While some companies penalize technicians for comebacks, a duality exists. There is an expectation that an installer can perform a certain number of glass operations on a daily basis. That performance level is set by an owner or manager whose own income is influenced by the output of those they employ. Fail to meet those standards on a regular basis and your future with that concern very well may come into question.
So are poor and dangerous practices entirely the fault of individual installers or do they represent an entire company culture? Simply put, it is both. Send a mobile technician out with eight jobs and 150 miles to cover in a day, and you are asking for trouble.
Employing an assembly line process in your shop in which a customer can drive in, have a windshield installed and have his/her car released back within an hour also may be an indicator.
What other indicators are there that may suggest a hack exists? Jump cowels? No use of primers? Slashed dashboard? What about scratched and unprimed pinchwelds? Broken and un-replaced clips are either ignored or just glued down? Re-uses mouldings? Cuts the top from a wraparound moulding and glues it back in? Uses any sort of generic moulding as a substitute moulding? What if an installer leaves broken glass inside a door panel? Better yet, stuffs paper or adhesive inside to quiet the rattle of the un-removed glass? The sad part is that almost every “sinful” activity named above is usually hidden or covered over, making the consumer ignorant of what has just occurred.
The fault easily can lie with either owners or installers. That alone is a major problem. Asking certain owners or managers for clips or an OE moulding can incur their wrath upon the tech. One trait I have observed over the years is that the student usually is never as good as the teacher and the teacher can very well be just another hack. Abhorrent installation practices are handed down from one tech to another, solidifying the fact of keeping the concept and reality of being a hack alive.
Large corporate companies employ the concept of “deniability:” make the tech responsible for his or her work despite the fact that his or her workload is managed solely by someone else. A manager may set the performance bar so high that an installer feels pressured into taking shortcuts, and over time those shortcuts may define the quality of workmanship.
Let’s use the auto auction contract as an example. Normally large glass installation companies win these contracts due to low pricing and high volume along with high labor demand. The outcome of these installations somewhat reflects the state of our industry. Simply put, when a team of installers swarms over a large number of cars needing windshields installed in a very short time, the outcome does not favor glass integrity. It is where some of the worst installation sins can be inflicted upon a car since there is virtually no traceable repercussion to shoddy workmanship.
However, being a hack just isn’t about being big. Perhaps the greatest number of people who should be banned from ever practicing auto glazing own or operate their very small businesses. Who needs liability coverage when all they own is a 10-year-old Toyota pick-up? These are people that may very well have been fired for incompetence or drug use from somewhere else. Worse yet, many are self-taught. I see car detailers every year quit and go into the glass business after watching other installers work on their lots. I often have observed guys getting on their cell phones and calling someone for help as they try to remove a moulding, a mirror bracket or loosen a cowl and can’t.
These problems all boil down to the “easy entry” and lack of accountability and of all of the problems that face this industry, these two perhaps are the most serious and have the least chance of being solved. If laws are enacted so that one has to prove competency to buy products and have traceable parts to prove liability, that is a beginning to a solution to those two plagues. However, there are too many forces both inside and outside the auto glass sector that have an economic benefit from non-regulation. If the government can acknowledge that fraud in the Medicare system is costing them $60 billion a year and they don’t increase controls measurably, how can one expect any sort of reform in our industry?
All we can hope for is if Congress awards the contract for windshield replacement for their fleet of vehicles to the lowest and unlicensed bidder. Perhaps then and only then when their SUVs and limos rust out or become aquariums on wheels will hope for any sort of positive change come. I am sure some industry insiders are hoping that oversight is transferred to the Department of the Interior. In that case, we may very well see the opportunity of having our herds of installers thinned.
What are “hacks?” Are they made or are they abominations that occur naturally? Do people who are actually paid to install auto glass parts take shortcuts on purpose or are they merely following orders?
I suppose that trying to define a hack is somewhat like trying to identify obscenity. The definition changes for every person, but you know it when you see it. The big question for me is why do people hack and how can they keep doing it on purpose?
Installing auto glass is not brain surgery. If you use commonsense and some intelligence, have some physical strength, proper tools and can learn the underlying principles of the trade, such as glazing techniques, removals and corrosion prevention, it is not that hard of a trade to master. Why then are we seeing more and more installation disasters than ever before?
This is an industry-wide problem. In some cases it is fostered by greed, individual or corporate. Pay for performance or piecework certainly (and implicitly) rewards speed over all else. While some companies penalize technicians for comebacks, a duality exists. There is an expectation that an installer can perform a certain number of glass operations on a daily basis. That performance level is set by an owner or manager whose own income is influenced by the output of those they employ. Fail to meet those standards on a regular basis and your future with that concern very well may come into question.
So are poor and dangerous practices entirely the fault of individual installers or do they represent an entire company culture? Simply put, it is both. Send a mobile technician out with eight jobs and 150 miles to cover in a day, and you are asking for trouble.
Employing an assembly line process in your shop in which a customer can drive in, have a windshield installed and have his/her car released back within an hour also may be an indicator.
What other indicators are there that may suggest a hack exists? Jump cowels? No use of primers? Slashed dashboard? What about scratched and unprimed pinchwelds? Broken and un-replaced clips are either ignored or just glued down? Re-uses mouldings? Cuts the top from a wraparound moulding and glues it back in? Uses any sort of generic moulding as a substitute moulding? What if an installer leaves broken glass inside a door panel? Better yet, stuffs paper or adhesive inside to quiet the rattle of the un-removed glass? The sad part is that almost every “sinful” activity named above is usually hidden or covered over, making the consumer ignorant of what has just occurred.
The fault easily can lie with either owners or installers. That alone is a major problem. Asking certain owners or managers for clips or an OE moulding can incur their wrath upon the tech. One trait I have observed over the years is that the student usually is never as good as the teacher and the teacher can very well be just another hack. Abhorrent installation practices are handed down from one tech to another, solidifying the fact of keeping the concept and reality of being a hack alive.
Large corporate companies employ the concept of “deniability:” make the tech responsible for his or her work despite the fact that his or her workload is managed solely by someone else. A manager may set the performance bar so high that an installer feels pressured into taking shortcuts, and over time those shortcuts may define the quality of workmanship.
Let’s use the auto auction contract as an example. Normally large glass installation companies win these contracts due to low pricing and high volume along with high labor demand. The outcome of these installations somewhat reflects the state of our industry. Simply put, when a team of installers swarms over a large number of cars needing windshields installed in a very short time, the outcome does not favor glass integrity. It is where some of the worst installation sins can be inflicted upon a car since there is virtually no traceable repercussion to shoddy workmanship.
However, being a hack just isn’t about being big. Perhaps the greatest number of people who should be banned from ever practicing auto glazing own or operate their very small businesses. Who needs liability coverage when all they own is a 10-year-old Toyota pick-up? These are people that may very well have been fired for incompetence or drug use from somewhere else. Worse yet, many are self-taught. I see car detailers every year quit and go into the glass business after watching other installers work on their lots. I often have observed guys getting on their cell phones and calling someone for help as they try to remove a moulding, a mirror bracket or loosen a cowl and can’t.
These problems all boil down to the “easy entry” and lack of accountability and of all of the problems that face this industry, these two perhaps are the most serious and have the least chance of being solved. If laws are enacted so that one has to prove competency to buy products and have traceable parts to prove liability, that is a beginning to a solution to those two plagues. However, there are too many forces both inside and outside the auto glass sector that have an economic benefit from non-regulation. If the government can acknowledge that fraud in the Medicare system is costing them $60 billion a year and they don’t increase controls measurably, how can one expect any sort of reform in our industry?
All we can hope for is if Congress awards the contract for windshield replacement for their fleet of vehicles to the lowest and unlicensed bidder. Perhaps then and only then when their SUVs and limos rust out or become aquariums on wheels will hope for any sort of positive change come. I am sure some industry insiders are hoping that oversight is transferred to the Department of the Interior. In that case, we may very well see the opportunity of having our herds of installers thinned.
Monday, October 19, 2009
Rain Is My Friend
The big banks may have their bailouts and states may receive their stimulus funding. However, most small businesses (especially auto glass shops) realize that there is little help out there designed to treat our economic ailments. Still whenever I hear that there are rain clouds on the horizon, it usually means that Mother Nature has her own recovery package in store at least for me, as it was the case this week.
Rain is not a very common event in my part of California. For one thing, it is seasonal. Very often, a person living in Central or Southern California will not see any precipitation from April to October. Annual averages for many large cities are rarely 20 inches a year and the further south in the state one goes those numbers shrink even lower. It’s a great climate in many ways but it does very little to promote any sort of checks and balances when it comes to structural or moisture integrity in auto glass installation. In other words, many sins lie undetected until the first hard and steady rain soaks the state. When that event does occur, like it did last week, the phones start ringing off the hook with lots of new business.
The new work basically breaks down into two or three areas. There are a fair number of people who won’t replace their broken door glasses until the first rain. Most of these cars are bone fide “clunkers” that are more than seven years old and many of their owners have economic reasons to put off replacement until they absolutely need to. Motivation oftentimes is increased exponentially due to the realization that unless something is done, the car in question may be transformed into a mobile aquarium. Working on these “classics” can oftentimes be a challenge simply in trim panel or mechanical integrity. Ancient Egyptian mummies can withstand more handling in many circumstances and more times than not share similar status in conditions. Still many older techs appreciate the opportunity to stroll down Memory Lane and have some working room for both our hands and vacuums that we lack in most of the cars of today.
I still have a fair number of new car dealerships that get calls for water leaks that fall under warranty claims. About half of my service appointments last week came under this category. There is nothing that says “it’s your day” when after a 20-minute search within a Service Department parking lot, you finally locate the object of your work order—a pick-up truck with a leaky rear slider that has a hard cover installed over the bed.
I got off easy on that one. Thankfully, I had a factory urethane release situation on a Tacoma, which allowed me minimal removal of inside trim and physical effort in excision. Most times, however, on new cars, I am faced with all sorts of factory flubs that require a diligent and patient approach to first detect and then repair water leaks. To complicate matters more, new designs incorporate bonded encapsulation or under-lip mouldings that interfere with removal or repair. As many glass techs know, just because water may appear near a glass part, there is no sure thing when it comes to determining cause. All too many service mechanics instantly blame glass seals if they find water within an arm’s length of a window. Roof and moulding seams along with missed welds can factor in all too often. The last thing I want to have happen is to be called back and be informed that the original R&I that I performed was not the solution to the original problem. For instance, when the Dodge Dakota first came out with an extra cab, I had several dealers that had complaints about leaky windshields. It seemed that the conditions had to be either during or after a long steady rain, water would drip down the windshield when owners would make turns while driving. Once the glass was removed there was no physical detectable reason for the windshield to be leaking. My first few attempts at a simple R&R returned under the same circumstances so chagrined and embarrassed, it got very personal with me to fix this water leak. Logically it had to be coming through the pinchweld and after almost a half day of searching and testing, the leak was traced to the bolts that secured a trim cover above the quarter glass. One month later the dealership receives a factory technical service bulletin outlining the source and repair procedure. I could have used it much sooner.
With the above already stated, previously replaced auto glass is both the boon and bane of my existence during the California rainy season. As the years have passed and the number of glass “installers” has seemingly mushroomed, water leak repair is my most profitable yet seasonal income source. It seems that due to cowl jumping and other speed factors that create large gaps I have needed to R&R more and more windshields rather than just using additional sealant to spot stop a leak. It is time-consuming, stressful but profitable. In one day this week, I ran the gamut of poor installs in two instances.
This past Thursday I received a call from a dealer to fix a water leak in an ‘05 Acura RL. (FW2522) The car had been passed from the service department to their body shop and then to me. When I arrived I found a windshield that had been replaced using factory glass. Every clip under the post mouldings had been broken and urethaned down to hold them in place. The two-part cowl had fasteners missing and cowl clips mangled. I was informed that water entry appeared to be coming from the top left corner. All I did was to push up on the inside of the windshield and caused it to partially release. In fact the glass was so loose across the top and partially down the sides, I can’t believe the car’s owner didn’t notice any unusual sounds or moisture when he washed the car. Once the glass was removed it was fairly obvious that installer error or negligence had occurred with the latter being the more likely due to adhesive application or the lack of the use of a glass primer.
That afternoon, another service dept client called me to repair a water leak in an ‘07 Toyota RAV4, which was sold under their Certified Used Car program. This vehicle was certifiably a wading pool with about a gallon of water ponding in the passenger front floor well due to the effects of a jumped cowl install. Since I have lost this dealership’s used car glass account to the worst kind of hacks that infest this industry, I have no problem having them pay me dearly for a proper re-install, perhaps even more than they paid for the original replacement. What irritates me the most is that I have to work twice as hard in removing and trying to save a cheap Chinese windshield that is far easier to crack than most. In this case I had to use Squire wire for the most part in order to remove the old glass, which we all know takes far more time than any other removal process.
People refuse to think about outcomes. The less you pay in glass in this country, the more chances you will pay later on repairing damage inflicted upon one’s vehicle.
It is indeed a myth that “it never rains in California.”After enduring one of the slowest Septembers in my company’s history, Mother Nature has done a far better job in stimulating this particular owner than any bailout could do. However it has not stopped me from considering changing my company’s name to “Goldman “Sax” Auto Glass” to see what collateral government aid I could procure.
Rain is not a very common event in my part of California. For one thing, it is seasonal. Very often, a person living in Central or Southern California will not see any precipitation from April to October. Annual averages for many large cities are rarely 20 inches a year and the further south in the state one goes those numbers shrink even lower. It’s a great climate in many ways but it does very little to promote any sort of checks and balances when it comes to structural or moisture integrity in auto glass installation. In other words, many sins lie undetected until the first hard and steady rain soaks the state. When that event does occur, like it did last week, the phones start ringing off the hook with lots of new business.
The new work basically breaks down into two or three areas. There are a fair number of people who won’t replace their broken door glasses until the first rain. Most of these cars are bone fide “clunkers” that are more than seven years old and many of their owners have economic reasons to put off replacement until they absolutely need to. Motivation oftentimes is increased exponentially due to the realization that unless something is done, the car in question may be transformed into a mobile aquarium. Working on these “classics” can oftentimes be a challenge simply in trim panel or mechanical integrity. Ancient Egyptian mummies can withstand more handling in many circumstances and more times than not share similar status in conditions. Still many older techs appreciate the opportunity to stroll down Memory Lane and have some working room for both our hands and vacuums that we lack in most of the cars of today.
I still have a fair number of new car dealerships that get calls for water leaks that fall under warranty claims. About half of my service appointments last week came under this category. There is nothing that says “it’s your day” when after a 20-minute search within a Service Department parking lot, you finally locate the object of your work order—a pick-up truck with a leaky rear slider that has a hard cover installed over the bed.
I got off easy on that one. Thankfully, I had a factory urethane release situation on a Tacoma, which allowed me minimal removal of inside trim and physical effort in excision. Most times, however, on new cars, I am faced with all sorts of factory flubs that require a diligent and patient approach to first detect and then repair water leaks. To complicate matters more, new designs incorporate bonded encapsulation or under-lip mouldings that interfere with removal or repair. As many glass techs know, just because water may appear near a glass part, there is no sure thing when it comes to determining cause. All too many service mechanics instantly blame glass seals if they find water within an arm’s length of a window. Roof and moulding seams along with missed welds can factor in all too often. The last thing I want to have happen is to be called back and be informed that the original R&I that I performed was not the solution to the original problem. For instance, when the Dodge Dakota first came out with an extra cab, I had several dealers that had complaints about leaky windshields. It seemed that the conditions had to be either during or after a long steady rain, water would drip down the windshield when owners would make turns while driving. Once the glass was removed there was no physical detectable reason for the windshield to be leaking. My first few attempts at a simple R&R returned under the same circumstances so chagrined and embarrassed, it got very personal with me to fix this water leak. Logically it had to be coming through the pinchweld and after almost a half day of searching and testing, the leak was traced to the bolts that secured a trim cover above the quarter glass. One month later the dealership receives a factory technical service bulletin outlining the source and repair procedure. I could have used it much sooner.
With the above already stated, previously replaced auto glass is both the boon and bane of my existence during the California rainy season. As the years have passed and the number of glass “installers” has seemingly mushroomed, water leak repair is my most profitable yet seasonal income source. It seems that due to cowl jumping and other speed factors that create large gaps I have needed to R&R more and more windshields rather than just using additional sealant to spot stop a leak. It is time-consuming, stressful but profitable. In one day this week, I ran the gamut of poor installs in two instances.
This past Thursday I received a call from a dealer to fix a water leak in an ‘05 Acura RL. (FW2522) The car had been passed from the service department to their body shop and then to me. When I arrived I found a windshield that had been replaced using factory glass. Every clip under the post mouldings had been broken and urethaned down to hold them in place. The two-part cowl had fasteners missing and cowl clips mangled. I was informed that water entry appeared to be coming from the top left corner. All I did was to push up on the inside of the windshield and caused it to partially release. In fact the glass was so loose across the top and partially down the sides, I can’t believe the car’s owner didn’t notice any unusual sounds or moisture when he washed the car. Once the glass was removed it was fairly obvious that installer error or negligence had occurred with the latter being the more likely due to adhesive application or the lack of the use of a glass primer.
That afternoon, another service dept client called me to repair a water leak in an ‘07 Toyota RAV4, which was sold under their Certified Used Car program. This vehicle was certifiably a wading pool with about a gallon of water ponding in the passenger front floor well due to the effects of a jumped cowl install. Since I have lost this dealership’s used car glass account to the worst kind of hacks that infest this industry, I have no problem having them pay me dearly for a proper re-install, perhaps even more than they paid for the original replacement. What irritates me the most is that I have to work twice as hard in removing and trying to save a cheap Chinese windshield that is far easier to crack than most. In this case I had to use Squire wire for the most part in order to remove the old glass, which we all know takes far more time than any other removal process.
People refuse to think about outcomes. The less you pay in glass in this country, the more chances you will pay later on repairing damage inflicted upon one’s vehicle.
It is indeed a myth that “it never rains in California.”After enduring one of the slowest Septembers in my company’s history, Mother Nature has done a far better job in stimulating this particular owner than any bailout could do. However it has not stopped me from considering changing my company’s name to “Goldman “Sax” Auto Glass” to see what collateral government aid I could procure.
Wednesday, October 14, 2009
In Praise of a Small Tool
During these trying times, many of us may very well have the habit of overlooking some of the smaller items that can influence our lives. I, for one have made a vow this week to make up for a serious oversight and have promised to take my most used tools—my set of cold knives—to lunch this week.
First of all, it is about time these hard working guys get some serious recognition. I just don’t have just one cable cold knife; I keep five of these babies handy, each with different length blades inside my top tray. Some techs might think that number is overkill. It’s my opinion that the number is just right.
The reality is I’m not quite sure if I could actually complete very many removals without using cable knives, rendering them perhaps the most used and needed tool in my collection. In fact, a few years ago, in the haste to get to an install, I left my entire set inside a car I was removing a quarter glass for a body shop. I truly felt my age when I had to excuse myself to the customer and scoot backwards 10 miles and retrieve those needed implements
One would think that using this very basic removal tool would be superseded by technology by now. In truth I believe I use these guys more than ever. One can make the case that as auto designers come up with more flush mount glazing with raw edge surfaces, the glass techs, especially mobile ones, have fallen back to use fewer mechanical solutions when the situation arises to remove these tight fitting windows.
In no way am I diminishing the need for owning a power removal tool. I personally would not be caught dead without one. It is just that in many cases, a tech doesn’t need to use an air- or battery-powered tool to cut the major part of most urethane seals that surround glass.
Over time, there have been a few, very appreciated improvements to the cold knife design. The lever release to affect a quick blade exchange is not only useful in time savings but the location of the cable pull handle has been moved away from the head of the blade. This design change removed the need for a securing nut and bolt, giving the tech more tool clearance from possible paint and body contact. In the past few years, blades have had Teflon or other coatings applied that offer some protective qualities in the hope to minimize surface damage as well.
I mentioned that I use five different sizes of blades. I have a cold knife that not only uses the four most common lengths of blades (¾-, 1-, 1 ¼- and 1 ½-inch ) but I have found that using a “stubby” blade made from an old ¾-inch has become one of my most used knives.
Here is how it helps. It makes that first cut far easier on your body for one thing. For example, many of the older techs had to deal with early Escorts. This was one situation in which Ford was rarely generous with urethane application. Since this was well before the invention of thin, coined cut-out blades so one solution was to grind down blades to make short cuts with, almost like a scoring pass to make the way easier for something longer. Maybe I am just getting weaker, but I’m finding many removals less trouble by starting out with a stubby first. It takes just a little more time but less of a toll on the arms and back.
When I am dealing with these under-lip molding designs like the new Toyotas, I always first use a stubby to cut and leave the molding in place. Then I run the upper perimeter using the next two larger blades to finish cutting the urethane. The moulding usually stays in place to act as an additional barrier against accidental contact with paint. For R& R’s when one has flush mounted glass that uses a dam and has clearance for an outer removal, I use a Stubby to cut the dam and by doing so, lessen the chance for any longer blade to catch and twist when pulling. On Jeep Wranglers, the stubby can get inside and make a cut in some cases. It also allows you to measure what areas you may be able to cut with a cold knife before you use other methods.
I am hardly the first (nor will I be the last) installer who modifies his cold knife. Blades are ground down to maximum thinness and honed to extreme sharpness by many who practice our trade. I do get a laugh from the occasional body man or rank amateur who show me a cold knife that they have purchased and have complained loudly of their inability to cut a glass out with a fat dull blade.
I applaud those techs who can use an air or electric removal tool and cut the entire windshield or tempered part out without wreaking massive damage to the surrounding areas. As the famous philosopher/detective Harry Callahan once uttered, “A man has got to know his limitations.” I tend to know mine by now and I certainly lack that total skill (despite owning an Equalizer product of some kind for at least 20 years).
I don’t embrace technology effortlessly. I usually am not the first one on my block with a new invention or appliance. The one real exception to that rule would have been an immediate purchase of a large-screen HD video monitor had glass profits not tanked. I still find comfort and confidence pulling a cable knife around as much of a windshield’s perimeter as possible. I simply want to feel I possess as much control of the operation as possible.
Not sure where I’m going to take the boys to eat this week. Most likely it will be take-out, probably Subway with its $5 foot-long deals. I’m fairly sure my dear wife won’t understand that Mr. Stubby was the one wanting Hooters’ hot wings for his meal.
First of all, it is about time these hard working guys get some serious recognition. I just don’t have just one cable cold knife; I keep five of these babies handy, each with different length blades inside my top tray. Some techs might think that number is overkill. It’s my opinion that the number is just right.
The reality is I’m not quite sure if I could actually complete very many removals without using cable knives, rendering them perhaps the most used and needed tool in my collection. In fact, a few years ago, in the haste to get to an install, I left my entire set inside a car I was removing a quarter glass for a body shop. I truly felt my age when I had to excuse myself to the customer and scoot backwards 10 miles and retrieve those needed implements
One would think that using this very basic removal tool would be superseded by technology by now. In truth I believe I use these guys more than ever. One can make the case that as auto designers come up with more flush mount glazing with raw edge surfaces, the glass techs, especially mobile ones, have fallen back to use fewer mechanical solutions when the situation arises to remove these tight fitting windows.
In no way am I diminishing the need for owning a power removal tool. I personally would not be caught dead without one. It is just that in many cases, a tech doesn’t need to use an air- or battery-powered tool to cut the major part of most urethane seals that surround glass.
Over time, there have been a few, very appreciated improvements to the cold knife design. The lever release to affect a quick blade exchange is not only useful in time savings but the location of the cable pull handle has been moved away from the head of the blade. This design change removed the need for a securing nut and bolt, giving the tech more tool clearance from possible paint and body contact. In the past few years, blades have had Teflon or other coatings applied that offer some protective qualities in the hope to minimize surface damage as well.
I mentioned that I use five different sizes of blades. I have a cold knife that not only uses the four most common lengths of blades (¾-, 1-, 1 ¼- and 1 ½-inch ) but I have found that using a “stubby” blade made from an old ¾-inch has become one of my most used knives.
Here is how it helps. It makes that first cut far easier on your body for one thing. For example, many of the older techs had to deal with early Escorts. This was one situation in which Ford was rarely generous with urethane application. Since this was well before the invention of thin, coined cut-out blades so one solution was to grind down blades to make short cuts with, almost like a scoring pass to make the way easier for something longer. Maybe I am just getting weaker, but I’m finding many removals less trouble by starting out with a stubby first. It takes just a little more time but less of a toll on the arms and back.
When I am dealing with these under-lip molding designs like the new Toyotas, I always first use a stubby to cut and leave the molding in place. Then I run the upper perimeter using the next two larger blades to finish cutting the urethane. The moulding usually stays in place to act as an additional barrier against accidental contact with paint. For R& R’s when one has flush mounted glass that uses a dam and has clearance for an outer removal, I use a Stubby to cut the dam and by doing so, lessen the chance for any longer blade to catch and twist when pulling. On Jeep Wranglers, the stubby can get inside and make a cut in some cases. It also allows you to measure what areas you may be able to cut with a cold knife before you use other methods.
I am hardly the first (nor will I be the last) installer who modifies his cold knife. Blades are ground down to maximum thinness and honed to extreme sharpness by many who practice our trade. I do get a laugh from the occasional body man or rank amateur who show me a cold knife that they have purchased and have complained loudly of their inability to cut a glass out with a fat dull blade.
I applaud those techs who can use an air or electric removal tool and cut the entire windshield or tempered part out without wreaking massive damage to the surrounding areas. As the famous philosopher/detective Harry Callahan once uttered, “A man has got to know his limitations.” I tend to know mine by now and I certainly lack that total skill (despite owning an Equalizer product of some kind for at least 20 years).
I don’t embrace technology effortlessly. I usually am not the first one on my block with a new invention or appliance. The one real exception to that rule would have been an immediate purchase of a large-screen HD video monitor had glass profits not tanked. I still find comfort and confidence pulling a cable knife around as much of a windshield’s perimeter as possible. I simply want to feel I possess as much control of the operation as possible.
Not sure where I’m going to take the boys to eat this week. Most likely it will be take-out, probably Subway with its $5 foot-long deals. I’m fairly sure my dear wife won’t understand that Mr. Stubby was the one wanting Hooters’ hot wings for his meal.
Tuesday, October 6, 2009
Will It “Ad” Up?
Due to an injured back, I have had the unexpected chance to become a TV media critic as I spent all of the past weekend lying in front of a lit screen. Not only did I get the chance to view sports and PBS specials on the National Parks system, I also had the ability to both view and critique the rollout of Belron’s broadcast repair ads that hit the cable networks this month.
Ironically I saw my first Safelite commercial just after a CNN story on functional illiteracy that stated one out of seven Americans can’t adequately read. That bit of information made my curiosity pique even more because far too many folks in this country are barely aware of windshield repair and I was very interested in how Belron would shape their message to them.
I wasn’t disappointed, because it seemed to me that, like most ads, Safelite seemed to pander to the lowest common denominator; in other words, the KISS theory of keeping it simple to the viewers.
Before I state my personal opinion on the ads, I would like to note that these ads benefit the independents that offer repair services. Any sort of advertising makes the public aware that a small windshield crack can be safely repaired at a cost lower than replacement. I would certainly hope that many shops take the opportunity to piggyback their own promotions atop these commercials to take advantage of Mother Belron’s attempt to raise their own name recognition. You can certainly benefit from their efforts.
I came away with mixed feelings after viewing the new commercials. I suppose what annoyed me the most were statements or images of a technical nature that an insider would know but not the general public. For one, the size of the break seemed to change from arrival, to “What if” and then during repair. Then one would probably realize that there was no actual combo but a digitally introduced one. Whatever happened to the driver’s wiper area being off-limits to repair? If this “break” wasn’t in it, it was darn close. An install van was used as a prop as opposed to the repair trucks or cars. I confess all of the above items are petty.
I will admit to nearly gagging with apoplexy when the issue of payment and the cost of repair over replacement came up in the ad. There is a voiceover as the tech shrugs off the customer’s attempt to pay him. The voice intones many insurers will pay the cost of a repair and that a repair will save him up to four times the cost of a new windshield. In my area, Safelite’s quoted cash prices for windshields are nowhere near the four times the cost of the repair the insurance company will be billed by Belron. I must have missed the part of the ad where Safelite declares what it does charge for a repair.
In short, as in the radio ads, it tries to entice the target audience to call to receive a “free” service although someone does ultimately pay for that high-priced repair. More importantly, it opens the door for contact with an interested party that may have a need that Belron can fill or motivate the caller to act upon.
The ad still is good marketing. It may contain half-truths and overstatements but most commercials of any kind do. It does the job of raising awareness to the general public and while independents will benefit as tag-a-longs, brand recognition is slowly being built. Belron is not afraid to spend money and time will tell if America will buy the effort that Safelite is making to become the de facto leader in auto glass in the States.
One brief addendum. Last week the topic of this column was the poor quality of auto glass that we the retailers and techs have to deal with on an every day basis. This past Friday, my last job was to install a front door glass on a 04 Nissan X-Terra. My first call to a distributor revealed that they only carried a brand in which I have little or no confidence. I called my alternate distributor and ordered what I thought would be their in-house brand of glass and had it delivered. When I drove back to my shop to pick up the door glass I found out that also was the same DOT I had tried to avoid. It was too late in the day to even try to find another source so I took it to the jobsite. As soon as I dropped the glass inside the door and lined up the threaded tabs I was in trouble since I could not get both tabs to line up exactly with the bolt holes on the regulator. Once I resolved that problem, I became even more angry and disgusted with the fact that the inside tab would not accept the factory 10-mm bolt. I actually had to re-thread the tab to get the bolt to go in it. In short, I spent about 45 extra minutes trying to resolve basic manufacturing shortcomings and assuming potential warranty problems that I never should have had. Let’s say that incident hardened my opinion on this particular brand.
Ironically I saw my first Safelite commercial just after a CNN story on functional illiteracy that stated one out of seven Americans can’t adequately read. That bit of information made my curiosity pique even more because far too many folks in this country are barely aware of windshield repair and I was very interested in how Belron would shape their message to them.
I wasn’t disappointed, because it seemed to me that, like most ads, Safelite seemed to pander to the lowest common denominator; in other words, the KISS theory of keeping it simple to the viewers.
Before I state my personal opinion on the ads, I would like to note that these ads benefit the independents that offer repair services. Any sort of advertising makes the public aware that a small windshield crack can be safely repaired at a cost lower than replacement. I would certainly hope that many shops take the opportunity to piggyback their own promotions atop these commercials to take advantage of Mother Belron’s attempt to raise their own name recognition. You can certainly benefit from their efforts.
I came away with mixed feelings after viewing the new commercials. I suppose what annoyed me the most were statements or images of a technical nature that an insider would know but not the general public. For one, the size of the break seemed to change from arrival, to “What if” and then during repair. Then one would probably realize that there was no actual combo but a digitally introduced one. Whatever happened to the driver’s wiper area being off-limits to repair? If this “break” wasn’t in it, it was darn close. An install van was used as a prop as opposed to the repair trucks or cars. I confess all of the above items are petty.
I will admit to nearly gagging with apoplexy when the issue of payment and the cost of repair over replacement came up in the ad. There is a voiceover as the tech shrugs off the customer’s attempt to pay him. The voice intones many insurers will pay the cost of a repair and that a repair will save him up to four times the cost of a new windshield. In my area, Safelite’s quoted cash prices for windshields are nowhere near the four times the cost of the repair the insurance company will be billed by Belron. I must have missed the part of the ad where Safelite declares what it does charge for a repair.
In short, as in the radio ads, it tries to entice the target audience to call to receive a “free” service although someone does ultimately pay for that high-priced repair. More importantly, it opens the door for contact with an interested party that may have a need that Belron can fill or motivate the caller to act upon.
The ad still is good marketing. It may contain half-truths and overstatements but most commercials of any kind do. It does the job of raising awareness to the general public and while independents will benefit as tag-a-longs, brand recognition is slowly being built. Belron is not afraid to spend money and time will tell if America will buy the effort that Safelite is making to become the de facto leader in auto glass in the States.
One brief addendum. Last week the topic of this column was the poor quality of auto glass that we the retailers and techs have to deal with on an every day basis. This past Friday, my last job was to install a front door glass on a 04 Nissan X-Terra. My first call to a distributor revealed that they only carried a brand in which I have little or no confidence. I called my alternate distributor and ordered what I thought would be their in-house brand of glass and had it delivered. When I drove back to my shop to pick up the door glass I found out that also was the same DOT I had tried to avoid. It was too late in the day to even try to find another source so I took it to the jobsite. As soon as I dropped the glass inside the door and lined up the threaded tabs I was in trouble since I could not get both tabs to line up exactly with the bolt holes on the regulator. Once I resolved that problem, I became even more angry and disgusted with the fact that the inside tab would not accept the factory 10-mm bolt. I actually had to re-thread the tab to get the bolt to go in it. In short, I spent about 45 extra minutes trying to resolve basic manufacturing shortcomings and assuming potential warranty problems that I never should have had. Let’s say that incident hardened my opinion on this particular brand.
Tuesday, September 29, 2009
Product Liabilities
Among the myriad number of everyday concerns, an installer or owner is coming more in contacts more and more is the issue of poor- fitting, low-quality auto glass. This begs a simple question: why do we put up with such nonsense? Are we creating a new standard of garbage in, garbage out?
I have been trying to rack my tired, aged brain to find the number of retail sectors that oftentimes sell and replace a new product to the consumer that may not represent an equal trade—other than the fact that it is in one piece. Take toilet paper—a shopper can make a decision if they want to pay and enjoy the benefits of single-, two-ply or plush paper. With auto glass, it is becoming more obvious that we offer only one choice and more times it’s the industry’s version of single-ply.
That is the great frustration. I don’t care if prices, wholesale or retail have dropped 100 percent, I want a product that I can install with confidence; a product that fits, is free of distortions and one that won’t cause my customer to call me in three months complaining that the mirror bracket fell off his new windshield of with or without taking glass with it. Is that too much to ask? Even more important, doesn’t our customer deserve that courtesy as well?
Much of this is due to the fact that the world has become flat from an economic sense. Auto glass has been one of those products that has benefited from cheap overseas labor and from predatory trade practices. One can almost trace the general overall decline of our product to the moment when distributors were able to acquire a steady supply stream and found acceptance from the retail end to the low pricing offered by such circumstances.
There are more than 900 companies that have a DOT number assigned to them. Thanks to distribution acquisitions, mergers and closures along with overseas production from American sub-contracts, the U.S. auto glass retailer is seeing only a fraction of those. While some companies have risen above the crowd in volume produced, it seems those very same manufacturers are the ones in which many glass techs have little faith when it comes to installing glass in their customers’ vehicles.
The list of objections and sins is long. Bad bends, visual distortions and mis-set hardware are three fairly common problems installers face. Encapsulations, mouldings and frit paint are areas that oftentimes provide woes to those artistically sensitive techs. With the number of manufacturing scandals (such as poisoned dog food or the use of industrial chemicals for medicines) coming from a country that is responsible for much of our imported auto glass, one simply lacks confidence in the overall integrity of the product.
Let me relate an incident that took place this year. I had a customer contact me to install a windshield for his 2006 Audi A6. He requested that I purchase his glass from the local dealer even after I mentioned that I could buy the same Sekurit brand sans logo for a lower price from a distributor. We talked during the install and the subject of OE came up. He told me he worked for an American drug company and his job was to go overseas and validate that their offshore vendors were actually were making their drugs according to formula. All too often, he said, there were breaks in the supply chain and there were multiple attempts to substitute cheaper chemicals to save money to increase the vendor’s thin profit margin. Based on his experience, he proclaimed that he would never buy a generic prescription if possible.
Ask yourself a simple question: Is it cheaper to live today than it was five years ago? Oil has spiked, making every mode of energy more expensive along with shipping. Raw glass and PVB production are oil-dependent as well, so ask yourself another question: Why has the wholesale price of auto glass dropped so low over the past few years? Cheap labor along with perhaps newer manufacturing facilities certainly can affect cost savings. However, if you are working with razor-thin margins in meeting contracts, would it be beyond the realm of credibility to fear something more fraudulent could be in play? If you argue that all sorts of material certifications are required to import and sell a product here in the States and believe that each and every one of those documents are valid and properly executed, you would be the perfect person to purchase a New York City bridge that is for sale.
How many folks remember the incident a few years ago when there was a urethane release problem on glass and it was determined that an employee(s) from a certain manufacturer was using gasoline to clean residue from glass before shipping overseas? That wasn’t exactly a Sigma Six-approved process—nor was it overly aired.
How many techs and distributor employees have noticed that many windshields have gotten lighter over the years? Remove a Carlite DW1256 and replace with a generic brand and I will bet that the new glass is lighter. If I remove a Mopar windshield and install a generic one in almost any late-model Jeep or Chrysler product, I personally can detect a noticeable difference in weight. Is it magic? Has someone invented “Glass Lite” and not alerted me?
Is it easier for an errant pebble to crack a windshield these days? Seems to be, but this could just be our industry’s answer to planned obsolescence. Perhaps far wiser powers exist than I think. Still, when I experience such things as PVB easily tearing or oversized shards of tempered glass, it simply becomes a safety issue that appears to be all too often ignored to enrich someone’s pocket.
Is there a defense against poorly made glass? Sad to say, probably not, although I wish there was. I try to avoid certain DOT numbers whenever possible when ordering glass, but it is getting almost impossible these days. Some of the worst offenders have the widest distribution. However, making that effort is the only real solution wholesale glass buyers have these days.
No one is more acutely aware of how hard the times currently are than me. However, this entire industry will suffer dire consequences if the public wakes up from their apathy and ignorance and begins to believe that little of what we have to offer is of value. You could spend a lifetime creating a noted reputation or spend millions in building a brand and lose it entirely if the product we sell and install is considered by the buying public to be second-rate at best.
I have been trying to rack my tired, aged brain to find the number of retail sectors that oftentimes sell and replace a new product to the consumer that may not represent an equal trade—other than the fact that it is in one piece. Take toilet paper—a shopper can make a decision if they want to pay and enjoy the benefits of single-, two-ply or plush paper. With auto glass, it is becoming more obvious that we offer only one choice and more times it’s the industry’s version of single-ply.
That is the great frustration. I don’t care if prices, wholesale or retail have dropped 100 percent, I want a product that I can install with confidence; a product that fits, is free of distortions and one that won’t cause my customer to call me in three months complaining that the mirror bracket fell off his new windshield of with or without taking glass with it. Is that too much to ask? Even more important, doesn’t our customer deserve that courtesy as well?
Much of this is due to the fact that the world has become flat from an economic sense. Auto glass has been one of those products that has benefited from cheap overseas labor and from predatory trade practices. One can almost trace the general overall decline of our product to the moment when distributors were able to acquire a steady supply stream and found acceptance from the retail end to the low pricing offered by such circumstances.
There are more than 900 companies that have a DOT number assigned to them. Thanks to distribution acquisitions, mergers and closures along with overseas production from American sub-contracts, the U.S. auto glass retailer is seeing only a fraction of those. While some companies have risen above the crowd in volume produced, it seems those very same manufacturers are the ones in which many glass techs have little faith when it comes to installing glass in their customers’ vehicles.
The list of objections and sins is long. Bad bends, visual distortions and mis-set hardware are three fairly common problems installers face. Encapsulations, mouldings and frit paint are areas that oftentimes provide woes to those artistically sensitive techs. With the number of manufacturing scandals (such as poisoned dog food or the use of industrial chemicals for medicines) coming from a country that is responsible for much of our imported auto glass, one simply lacks confidence in the overall integrity of the product.
Let me relate an incident that took place this year. I had a customer contact me to install a windshield for his 2006 Audi A6. He requested that I purchase his glass from the local dealer even after I mentioned that I could buy the same Sekurit brand sans logo for a lower price from a distributor. We talked during the install and the subject of OE came up. He told me he worked for an American drug company and his job was to go overseas and validate that their offshore vendors were actually were making their drugs according to formula. All too often, he said, there were breaks in the supply chain and there were multiple attempts to substitute cheaper chemicals to save money to increase the vendor’s thin profit margin. Based on his experience, he proclaimed that he would never buy a generic prescription if possible.
Ask yourself a simple question: Is it cheaper to live today than it was five years ago? Oil has spiked, making every mode of energy more expensive along with shipping. Raw glass and PVB production are oil-dependent as well, so ask yourself another question: Why has the wholesale price of auto glass dropped so low over the past few years? Cheap labor along with perhaps newer manufacturing facilities certainly can affect cost savings. However, if you are working with razor-thin margins in meeting contracts, would it be beyond the realm of credibility to fear something more fraudulent could be in play? If you argue that all sorts of material certifications are required to import and sell a product here in the States and believe that each and every one of those documents are valid and properly executed, you would be the perfect person to purchase a New York City bridge that is for sale.
How many folks remember the incident a few years ago when there was a urethane release problem on glass and it was determined that an employee(s) from a certain manufacturer was using gasoline to clean residue from glass before shipping overseas? That wasn’t exactly a Sigma Six-approved process—nor was it overly aired.
How many techs and distributor employees have noticed that many windshields have gotten lighter over the years? Remove a Carlite DW1256 and replace with a generic brand and I will bet that the new glass is lighter. If I remove a Mopar windshield and install a generic one in almost any late-model Jeep or Chrysler product, I personally can detect a noticeable difference in weight. Is it magic? Has someone invented “Glass Lite” and not alerted me?
Is it easier for an errant pebble to crack a windshield these days? Seems to be, but this could just be our industry’s answer to planned obsolescence. Perhaps far wiser powers exist than I think. Still, when I experience such things as PVB easily tearing or oversized shards of tempered glass, it simply becomes a safety issue that appears to be all too often ignored to enrich someone’s pocket.
Is there a defense against poorly made glass? Sad to say, probably not, although I wish there was. I try to avoid certain DOT numbers whenever possible when ordering glass, but it is getting almost impossible these days. Some of the worst offenders have the widest distribution. However, making that effort is the only real solution wholesale glass buyers have these days.
No one is more acutely aware of how hard the times currently are than me. However, this entire industry will suffer dire consequences if the public wakes up from their apathy and ignorance and begins to believe that little of what we have to offer is of value. You could spend a lifetime creating a noted reputation or spend millions in building a brand and lose it entirely if the product we sell and install is considered by the buying public to be second-rate at best.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
