Dear Mr. Feeney:

Thank you very much for your presentation at the IGA Conference in Las Vegas last month. It was incredibly generous of you to speak before a group that you yourself acknowledged was “unfriendly.” That took a lot of guts and was a very courageous thing to do. I especially like the part where you talked about how Safelite and independent glass shops have more in common than they have differences. That’s very true. It takes a lot of fortitude to place yourself in the crosshairs when you don’t have to do it. And you didn’t have to. What you did will be remembered as a landmark moment in the auto glass industry.

Now I know you’ve gotten beat up a lot on the Web recently, and I’m not going to do that here. Like I said, you didn’t have to make that speech. I’m not going to ask you about the AGRSS thing or who the customer is or any of those “gotcha” questions a couple of people in the audience asked (though most of the questions were pretty straight-forward). I’m not even going to argue with you about the contention that all you guys do is “answer the phones” and that shouldn’t constitute steering. I’m pretty sure that the claims administration you do involves more than just answering phones.

But there are two questions I have got to ask, because they go to the heart of one of those differences between Safelite and the independents. You mentioned that you believe there should be a standard requiring drug testing and background checks for technicians. You said you don’t believe the AGRSS Standard goes far enough and should require this (never mind AGRSS is not a technician standard or certification, I could tell by your comments you didn’t get that and had been poorly briefed). It was also clear from your comments that this drug testing and background check idea is extremely important to your company. You mentioned that your techs are drug-tested. I expect there are background checks too.

So, Mr. Feeney, here’s my first question: If drug testing and background checks are so important to you, then why don’t you require them of the companies on your network? Why don’t you suggest to your insurance partner that they require them as part of the criteria they use? Why don’t you apply the same standards to the companies that you subcontract work to as you say you apply internally?

I gotta tell you, Mr. Feeney, I haven’t seen a whole lot of concern from Safelite about the companies that join your network. I have seen a ton of concern over making sure those companies accept the price you want to pay, but not much concern over the quality of that company or the technicians they have. If these background checks and drug testing are important, why don’t you require them? Please believe me, I am not asking this to be contrary. I would really like to know the answer because the only answer I can think of can’t possibly be the right one.

The only reason I can think of is that doing so would decrease the number of shops that could do your work. It would mean higher costs for Belron and higher prices for its customers. And I know that can’t be the reason because, as you said, safety and quality are more important than price.

And let’s talk about safety for a minute. You mentioned that you believe your own internal “certification” program is better than AGRSS. You emphasized how important quality is to you. So here’s my second question: If safety and quality are so important, then why don’t you require certification for those companies on your network? Heck, you could require any kind of certification you wanted—even your own—from the companies that do work for you.

If I didn’t know better, I’d think you were trying to keep the industry uneducated. It’s a lot easier—and a lot cheaper—to compete against guys when you can tell your insurance company you’re better than they are. You guys must laugh your heads off when the insurance companies buy it.

Or maybe you don’t require it because you know that a ton of people doing your work wouldn’t be able to any more and then you’d have some supply and demand issues, if you know what I mean; you’d have lots of jobs and no one to do them. That could be a threat to the whole network model.

The ability to use uneducated, “inferior” people for economic gain while refusing to educate them has long been the sign of an oppressor and the methods he uses to keep the oppressed in line. Surely you guys are better than this.

Belron is the biggest AG installer in the word. Say the word and thy will be done.

There’s a disconnect when you talk about the need for these things, yet you dole out a lot of work without any such requirements. Sorta like Congress exempting itself from following the laws it makes. It’s a pretty neat trick.

But that is just what it is: a trick.

Thank you again for your time. I look forward to hearing from you.