I was recently discussing comeback (rework) rates with another fleet manager and decided to share my thoughts with the rest of the fleet community.

The accepted comeback rate is usually less than 1% of the total work orders processed during the entire year. The most significant aspect of a comeback rate is how it is measured. Fleet management needs to clearly define and document what constitutes a comeback or repeat repair. In many cases, the assignment of a comeback designation is left to the discretion of the fleet manager.

There are two important considerations when determining if a comeback (or rework) designation is warranted; the time allowed between repairs, and if the comeback was clearly related to the previous work that was done. Unfortunately, the time between repairs varies greatly in this industry. I have personally seen timeframes range from thirty days to six months.

While our Fleet Management Information Systems (FMIS) does a good job in notifying us of a potential comeback, it cannot take into every aspect of the repair to determine comeback accuracy. For example: A police car is brought in for a charging problem and the alternator is deemed to be defective. The alternator is replaced and the changing system is tested  to ensure it is functioning properly. If the car returns after 30 days for a charging problem, and the Fleet Manager determines that the current issue rests with a faulty relay, then he/she may not consider that a rework because it was not directly related to the original repair. The vehicle was used extensively after the repair and the relay was working properly during the quality control test, therefore there was no logical reason to replace it. However, because the work (by repair code) is classified as repair to the charging system, the FMIS may consider it comeback.  It really comes down to whether the repair code structure in your FMIS is detailed enough to differentiate between work on components of major sub systems. The same scenario could be applied to hydraulic systems when one hose breaks then a different hose ruptures after a short period of time. The second hose appeared fully serviceable and not leaking at the time the first hose was replaced. Same repair code, same sub system, but entirely different component failure. So you see…comeback rates are very subjective.

Remember, comeback rates are measured for the purpose of assessing improper or incomplete repairs. You cannot fault a mechanic for the rework of a component that was properly functioning at the time of repair.

Clear as mud? Do you have any thoughts on the issue?