I am curious about something. This relates in part to another thread of mine http://forums.taunton.com/tp-breaktime/messages?msg=68169.1 which is about a pilot test on a new method of plumbing.
But I am curious about the side-aspect in terms of a plumber’s business. For instance, the plumber half a day to rough-in 2.5 baths, where had he used copper it would have been two days. His words, not mine.
Being a tradesmen (him, not me), his business is based on some aspect in which the amount of labor is a component of his base costs, which in turn go into the cost of the job he is doing the work for.
Now we have him spending 1/4 the time roughing in the supply lines. With this, I’ll guess (for the example of this post) means his total labor time is reduced by 35%, and not 75%. So, should this individual charge by his previous method is all other components (materials, etc.) remain constant, or should the reduction in operating costs be passed onto the client (builder/homeowner)?
What would you do if you were the plumber?
Replies
Seems like any major shift such as this in the ratio of labor to material costs could change the way overhead needs to be calculated. On the other hand, if the business is available, he can get more jobs done in the same time, and/or be more competitive. Sounds like some reanalysis may be in order.
Don