Issues to be addressed.

Re: Issues to be addressed.

washdoctor wrote:
2) Spares pricing.

Disagree.
This (IMO) will split us in opinion. Some of us carry out work on behalf of a Manufacturer or WP, others don’t. Ultimately, for those that do, it doesn’t matter what the spares are charged at because you charge back at that rate to you. However, I can understand why this will be for the benefit of traders that do not do work for WP’s because it can increase their profit margins.

I think you will find that it does affect you because they have your money tied up in spares that you are not allowed to make a penny on.

It took me a while to get my head around this one too. any time you are looking for a credit on wrong spares, damaged spares, appliance replaced and you have just recieved the spare, etc. etc. It affects your profitability and cash flow. You also have to incurr accountancy and vat costs. O.K. I know you get the vat back eventually but it still your money/cash flow tied up till you do. I’m dam sure there would be a lot more repair work for us all if spares were more reasonably priced rather thasn bining the appliances which is what is happening at the moment

My main concern is that the trader to the public doesn’t really stand to loose anything by upsetting suppliers or manufacturers, whereas it concerns me that the service providers to Manufacturers and WP’s may get some backlash and may affect working relations that in many cases, at the moment are very good.

If we do this collectively as a T.A. then there should be no backlash on individuals
3) Specific CORGI issues

Partially agree.
I do agree that the lengths of training are a bit OTT and more can be done to help people obtain these certifications without lowering the level of training. This does need to be addressed, but on the other side of the coin, the Corgi registration is something that should not be easily obtained, for safety reasons alone if nothing else. I think that a Corgi registered gas engineer should have the basic knowledge of flue systems, meter installations, ventilation requirements etc so these types of faults can be identified if present. If lets say a cooker engineer entered a 1 bed flat, with open flue appliances, and all sources of ventilation taped up because he doesn’t like the noise of the kids outside, the Engineer must be responsible for advising the customer of the dangers and rectify the issue. If that man was later found unconscious or worse, the Gas Engineer saying “I didn’t know, I only work on cookers, I was only there to change an FSD” wouldn’t be good enough.

I agree with a lot of what you say here but the fact still remains that the scope of the core is still to vast and a reasonable compromise should be sought.

Long-term Objectives.

1) Share and develop work opportunities with each other.

Disagree.
We are all self employed. We are all responsible for bringing in the money and in some cases, responsible for other peoples incomes. Surely, by sharing work opportunities, we will be cutting our own income and capping our own growth potential?

What about REPAIRS@ is this not sharing work oppurtunities it is work that the customer had the oppurtunity to approach manufacturers service but chose not too. You have a lot more to gain than you stand to loose here. No one is going to hold a gun to your head to make you do this with the guy in the next village but what if you get a whisper that a national company or manufacturer is looking for independent national coverage is that not an oppurtunity that you could share with collegues via the T.A. ?

IMO, in the private market, we are worth a lot more than what some of us charge at the moment. Where WP’s are concerned, the rate should be balanced with quantity. For example, if a WP offered £45 per call, but only 100 calls per year, compared with another who offered £38 per call, but 300 calls per year, which would be the better deal?

But, in the private market, I think that people who are charging £25 to unblock a pump etc are doing this trade harm, as that breeds the type of customer who, 1, doesn’t value our skills because it only cost them £25 (IMO people know deep down that if they pay peanuts…. They get…..) and, 2, they will assume that they are being ‘ripped off’ next time a repairer charges £45 to fit a pump because the last guy only charged them £25. I believe that there should be a recognised pricing structure put into place that will be available for independents to look at and believe that they are worth that amount. Ultimately, it will be up to each person to tailor they’re own charges, but we should try and do away with the’ £25 for cash madam’!!

I believe in the mission statement “Support the independent Service Industry in whatever way we can” 100{e5d1b7155a01ef1f3b9c9968eaba33524ee81600d00d4be2b4d93ac2e58cec2d}, that to me means that we need to be approachable by Engineers, like myself, that needed help, and didn’t get it from DASA. I now am starting to think that this association is going to be in danger of upsetting the ‘trade big boys’ to early on and that will inevitably lead to some re-percussion somewhere. Would that be supporting the independent service industry? I think that we should firstly, be there for the independents, up and down the country, offering support and assistance with legal matters, technical issues and any trade related queries etc. Anything else, like Corgi, taking on suppliers etc IMO is something that we can look at in the very distant future with the majority backing of our members.

As for the Admin of the WTA, whilst I appreciate and understand that Ken has done a HUGE amount of groundwork and has spent many hours on the WTA, I can’t see that we are going to seriously be seen as a ‘stand alone’ association if UKW are administrating the finances etc. I again believe that the WTA’s finances should be run by an appointed Treasurer, running an Independent account (With the WTA on the account name).

I look forward to your replies.

Adrian.

p.s Any chance you can go one topic at a time in future Adie as you’ve given me a soddin’ headache here especially as it’s quite obvious that i dont know how the bloody quote gizmo works lol

Sean

Re: Issues to be addressed.

washdoctor wrote:Sorry guys, but as good and bad had to be addressed, I have to raise a few issues that have arisen for me the more that I think about the association.
Below is what I’ve copied from the General Trade forum. I now find myself in a position where I only agree with some of the below. For the benefit of the committee, I will point out what I agree with, what I don’t and why.

Honesty ,brilliant just what’s needed ,remember we said that this thing will grow organically ,we need to discuss and adapt as we go

washdoctor wrote: 2) Spares pricing.
Disagree.
This (IMO) will split us in opinion. Some of us carry out work on behalf of a Manufacturer or WP, others don’t. Ultimately, for those that do, it doesn’t matter what the spares are charged at because you charge back at that rate to you. However, I can understand why this will be for the benefit of traders that do not do work for WP’s because it can increase their profit margins.
My main concern is that the trader to the public doesn’t really stand to loose anything by upsetting suppliers or manufacturers, whereas it concerns me that the service providers to Manufacturers and WP’s may get some backlash and may affect working relations that in many cases, at the moment are very good.

The price of parts is the price of parts ,unless you do work for a WP that gives you van stock ,the cost of the spares does affect you ,the value of the stock you carry and have paid for still comes off your bottom line ,especially if you end up with perfectly good parts you have to bin as no one will take them back –think Connect/NESN with Philco,Zanussi ,and Mastercare ,Hoover,Merloni sadly the list goes on …..If we as a TA can even change the prices just a bit by highlighting the inconsistency of parts prices then that will surely benefit everyone,and if there is a good relationship with WP’s or manufacturers ,there should be a way forward

washdoctor wrote: 3) Specific CORGI issues
Partially agree.
I do agree that the lengths of training are a bit OTT and more can be done to help people obtain these certifications without lowering the level of training. This does need to be addressed, but on the other side of the coin, the Corgi registration is something that should not be easily obtained, for safety reasons alone if nothing else. I think that a Corgi registered gas engineer should have the basic knowledge of flue systems, meter installations, ventilation requirements etc so these types of faults can be identified if present. If lets say a cooker engineer entered a 1 bed flat, with open flue appliances, and all sources of ventilation taped up because he doesn’t like the noise of the kids outside, the Engineer must be responsible for advising the customer of the dangers and rectify the issue. If that man was later found unconscious or worse, the Gas Engineer saying “I didn’t know, I only work on cookers, I was only there to change an FSD” wouldn’t be good enough.

As I shared at the meeting CORGI is very close to my heart at present ,I agree with the point re flues etc .
I was told that to add this experience to my body of work portfolio why didn’t I approach a gas fire installer and go out with him for a week and gain spillage test experience and flue testing ,I asked how come I couldn’t do that at the training centre ,to which the reply was you can’t come into the training centre until you have done it !! Catch 22 the criteria is just too rigid and we need some way of communicating that .

washdoctor wrote: 1) Share and develop work opportunities with each other.

Disagree.
We are all self employed. We are all responsible for bringing in the money and in some cases, responsible for other peoples incomes. Surely, by sharing work opportunities, we will be cutting our own income and capping our own growth potential?
The TA has a database of established repairers that will have signed the charter ,if a manufacturer or WP approaches it we should recommend our members for the benefit of our members .
I have actually gained from the sharing of info ,and will gladly share when I can ,If you want to know contacts then ring me and I will gladly share them ,I have learnt from bitter experience not to put all my eggs in one basket and now I spread my WP base as thinly as poss so as to minimize the risk should one decide to pull the rug .

washdoctor wrote: IMO, in the private market, we are worth a lot more than what some of us charge at the moment. Where WP’s are concerned, the rate should be balanced with quantity. For example, if a WP offered £45 per call, but only 100 calls per year, compared with another who offered £38 per call, but 300 calls per year, which would be the better deal?

But, in the private market, I think that people who are charging £25 to unblock a pump etc are doing this trade harm, as that breeds the type of customer who, 1, doesn’t value our skills because it only cost them £25 (IMO people know deep down that if they pay peanuts…. They get…..) and, 2, they will assume that they are being ‘ripped off’ next time a repairer charges £45 to fit a pump because the last guy only charged them £25. I believe that there should be a recognised pricing structure put into place that will be available for independents to look at and believe that they are worth that amount. Ultimately, it will be up to each person to tailor they’re own charges, but we should try and do away with the’ £25 for cash madam’!! I think we need to bang the don’t underestimate your value drum wherever possible ,however look at the thread on callout charges and you will see what an uphill struggle it is

washdoctor wrote:I believe in the mission statement “Support the independent Service Industry in whatever way we can” 100{e5d1b7155a01ef1f3b9c9968eaba33524ee81600d00d4be2b4d93ac2e58cec2d}, that to me means that we need to be approachable by Engineers, like myself, that needed help, and didn’t get it from DASA. I now am starting to think that this association is going to be in danger of upsetting the ‘trade big boys’ to early on and that will inevitably lead to some re-percussion somewhere. Would that be supporting the independent service industry? I think that we should firstly, be there for the independents, up and down the country, offering support and assistance with legal matters, technical issues and any trade related queries etc. Anything else, like Corgi, taking on suppliers etc IMO is something that we can look at in the very distant future with the majority backing of our members.

I think we are about to enter a golden moment in this trade ,there is an ever diminishing pool of labour from which the WP’s can draw ,the members of this trade are beginning to realise there worth ,as for getting a hard time of a WP -FACT they don’t like us talking to each other ,Think why ,FACT we have collective strength That’s why. What if someone leans on a member during our infancy do we sit back until we are more established ,no we support them

washdoctor wrote:As for the Admin of the WTA, whilst I appreciate and understand that Ken has done a HUGE amount of groundwork and has spent many hours on the WTA, I can’t see that we are going to seriously be seen as a ‘stand alone’ association if UKW are administrating the finances etc. I again believe that the WTA’s finances should be run by an appointed Treasurer, running an Independent account (With the WTA on the account name).

I still see no problem with using UKW resource ,If we are accused of being UKW –so what – we just carry on what we are doing ,once people ( the members ) see the results they won’t care who we are or aren’t affiliated too all they will see is the end result and that is what this organisation will stand or fall on it’s end results .

Adie ,I type as I talk my grammar is terrible ,and if any thing has come over as abrupt that’s NOT my style so please don’t take it that way
Lawrence

Re: Issues to be addressed.

And, to a degree, you can now see why I’ve avoided this for so long. 😉

Fact is, as has been pointed out several times now, spares pricing does affect everyone whether you work for a manufacturer or not. I work for several and, if they want to pay me back more than I can buy the same part for from elsewhere I’ll be quite happy thank you very much. But it doesn’t quite work like that does it?

They have a monopoly and they want to keep it.

Backlash, how? What will they do, sack us all? I think not.

And, there we’re right back to the anonymity questions. Believe it or not I do actually think these policies through and implement/defend them for a reason.

Ducks in a row. 😉

The thing is that, if handled correctly, this can be done with little to no involvement from the people that carry out manufacturer service, they can easily be over-ridden by the sheer volume of sole-traders in terms of voting and calls to do something about it. So, in the end, you can be forced with no choice but to pick up that mantle anyway.

So do you go against the overwhelming views of the members because it doesn’t suit one faction of the trade?

CORGI, sorry I do not and will never agree with the HSE on this. You have to realise that CORGI is only one part of the problem, the “public” facing one, the HSE is the real problem as they listened to idiots that wanted to monopolise the industry to a degree. The HSE more or less granted them that wish IMO.

Our responsibility as appliance repairers is to the appliances, not the windows, not the flue, not the fire in the bedroom… where do you stop? Where do you draw the line on what is or is not safe? How far to you have to go? How much responsibility is the appliance engineer that replaced an FSD supposed to carry and for how long? Or are we supposed to have an intricate knowledge on a subject of which we have little to no knowledge of? What about CO2?

If only it was as simple as you pointed out but, it isn’t. If you give an inch, you’ve gone a mile on this one I’m afraid.

On sharing work this has and is done by repairers so as it is mutually beneficial. In the main there’s enough work to go around on contract stuff, for example I’ve knocked back work and recommended others as I don’t want it.

Private market calls are a minefield.

The first bit is actually about contract work and it’s for each business to weigh up the pros and cons of any contract, but the equation is more complex for me than the basic outlines that you give as an example Adrian. I tend to be a little more encompassing in my view.

Setting rates, forget it, it won’t happen. How people choose to run their own businesses and how they charge for their services is entirely up to them, no TA has the right to dictate how someone trade in that way. I know, from my own perspective that purely on principal, if that were the case I’d tell the TA to go forth and multiply PDQ.

Without legislation, enforcement does not work unless you have a captive audience in some other way.

I know why this is brought up and I can only but say, there’s absolutely not a thing that you can do about it. It’s annoying and extremely irritating, but without power to act there’s nothing to be done other than stand by your own service.

The trick here is to be able to put yourself in other people’s shoes. A TA, any TA, is not about one business or one person’s situation and it can, as I know only too well, be difficult to remain objective in a lot of this but you have to be objective and pragmatic about it.

With that in mind you have to consider all the people that the TA represents and not merely one faction of it, such as the ones that just happen to work for a WP or manufacturer. No, what you have to think about is what benefits the trade, or the majority of it, as a whole first and then attempt to address the side issues.

To put that into perspective for you, there are approximately 3500 live repairer companies in the UK. Of that, around 1-200 are multi-engineer businesses and in total it will amount to about 7-8000 engineers.

Now, you tell me, who’s more important, the multi-engineer businesses or the sole traders? 😉

K.