Dealerships are absorbing the cost and the strain of fixing problems they did not create
I have tremendous respect for all the dealer principals and general managers in Canada, and the challenges they face every day. The car business has always been a rocky one. Today we are dealing with everything from supply constraints and tariffs to interest rates and parts backorders.
When I think back to when I first started in the business many years ago, things seemed simpler. That is not to say I do not still love the car business, especially after-sales, but the challenges in our workshops are changing. They may not be entirely new, but they are becoming more common.
As we sell more EVs and increasingly software-reliant vehicles in Canada, software-related problems are showing up more often. Modern vehicles, whether internal combustion, hybrid or electric, all depend heavily on software. The nature of repair has fundamentally shifted.
In the past, a drivability concern meant verifying the issue, diagnosing it and replacing a faulty component. Maybe it was an oxygen sensor or an EGR valve. I would walk over to Dave in parts, grab what I needed, install it, write up the repair order and get paid for both diagnosis and repair.
Today, more often than not, the issue is software.
On the surface, it sounds simple. The vehicle needs an update. Instead of going to the parts department, we download it from the cloud or wherever it lives. But these updates can take anywhere from 30 minutes to eight hours. Then we verify the update worked and that all systems are functioning properly.
And sometimes they do not.
If the software does not install properly, we have to do it again. I have heard repeatedly from dealers that manufacturer releases are inconsistent. Sometimes they work, sometimes they do not. In some cases, a vehicle drives in, receives an update and leaves worse off than before, even disabled.
The technician followed the bulletin. The process was done correctly. The vehicle still is not fixed.
So who gets paid?
I have even heard of technicians refusing EV training because they do not want to work on these vehicles. That should be a wake-up call.
Technicians are typically paid for the initial software download as outlined in the technical service bulletin. But what happens when they are short two hours because the fix did not work? Many dealerships step in to make them whole, which is the right thing to do. But now that technician is effectively being paid straight time for a job that did not resolve the issue.
And it does not always end there. It is not uncommon to see two or three software releases before a vehicle is finally fixed.
Meanwhile, service advisors are left managing frustrated customers and repeatedly explaining why the vehicle is still not ready. It is a tough position.
In this scenario, everyone is losing. The dealership, the technician and the advisor.
I have even heard of technicians refusing EV training because they do not want to work on these vehicles. That should be a wake-up call. We already struggled to recruit and retain techs. What happens if this sentiment grows?
As managers, we need to recognize what is happening.
Supporting our technicians is critical. Ensuring they are paid fairly is non-negotiable. But beyond that, how do we maintain morale when they are stuck dealing with unpredictable software issues? How do we reinforce that this is a transitional challenge, not the permanent state of the business?
We also need to consider our service advisors. What tools and support can we give them as they manage increasingly complex and often unresolved customer situations?
From a business standpoint, dealer principals and service managers need to start tracking the impact. What are we losing in warranty short payments? How much are we paying technicians to cover time they did not recover? What is this doing to overall shop productivity, efficiency and profitability?
Because that is the bigger issue.
Workshops are slowing down. Productivity is dropping. Technicians are not generating revenue at the same rate, and dealerships are absorbing the cost.
This is not sustainable.
These findings need to be documented, quantified and elevated through dealer councils. Manufacturers need to understand the real-world impact on the retail network.
It is not reasonable to expect dealers to absorb these costs under the label of “cost of doing business.”
Not this time.
