Jeff Fink is general manager of Advantage Truck Accessories, where he is responsible for overseeing the company’s day-to-day operations. He has been active in PRO since 2002 and was first elected to the council’s Select Committee in 2007. He will assume the chair-elect position within PRO in July 2011.

Flash forward to 2011. The pendulum has gone full swing. Stearns is stepping down and will serve as chairman emeritus. Bracken is stepping up to chairman, and Jeff Fink is preparing to take over as chair-elect.

Fink is general manager of Advantage Truck Accessories. An industry veteran with more than 25 years experience under his belt, he is responsible for overseeing the company’s day-to-day operations. He has been active in PRO since 2002 and was first elected to the council’s Select Committee in 2007. SEMA Member News took the opportunity recently to chat with Fink about how he views the council and his new role as chair-elect.

SEMA Member News: How did you get involved in PRO and what was your motivation?

Jeff Fink: I was invited by an industry associate to join PRO and to attend a PRO Long-Range Planning (LRP) meeting. My motivation was to become more involved in the industry.

SMN: What is it about PRO that makes the council valuable to the restyling industry?

JF: Focus. PRO addresses the challenges facing the restyling industry. The information available to the membership through the collective contribution of the restylers, distributors and manufacturers is the real value.

SMN: PRO has always been manufacturer supported primarily for the benefit of restylers. Why would it be important for other manufacturers that are not members to support PRO?

JF: As a manufacturer, I want to do business with forward-thinking, successful companies. The restylers who make the investment in their businesses to be part of PRO have proven to be among the most successful. Additionally, manufacturers benefit by having direct access to current market research through contact with our member restylers.

SMN: What value do you see in the various projects and initiatives that PRO has tackled over the years?

SMN: As the newly elected chair-elect, what are your main objectives and goals going forward?

JF: The heart and soul of this industry—and our council specifically—is the innovative, entrepreneurial spirit of its members. Small companies have woven the fiber of the restyling industry and will continue to do so. Our council needs to support those entrepreneurs. From the person who comes up with a new automotive product idea or starts a restyling company to the distributors and media, it is the passion of industry individuals who make this the industry in which I’m proud to be involved.

It is my objective to continue to support the programs the council has initiated and to work with the select committee and general membership to provide innovative, new products and services. I have been involved with PRO as a general member and Select Committee member for several years and believe that we have a great general membership and a Select Committee that is really special.

PRO has done an excellent job of providing valuable products to its members, including the Technical Skills & Training Conference, business-training materials and one of the hottest receptions at SEMA—NovemberFest. Additionally, the council has a strong initiative to increase membership. All of these efforts need continued support as we move forward. Additionally, we must effectively communicate the value of SEMA and PRO membership. The measure of our efforts will best be shown in the council’s ability to retain and recruit members.

I invite anyone who is involved in the restyling and accessory industry to check out what PRO has to offer.

		Jeff Fink is general manager of Advantage Truck Accessories, where he is responsible for overseeing the company’s day-to-day operations. He has been active in PRO since 2002 and was first elected to the council’s Select Committee in 2007. He will assume the chair-elect position within PRO in July 2011.

Flash forward to 2011. The pendulum has gone full swing. Stearns is stepping down and will serve as chairman emeritus. Bracken is stepping up to chairman, and Jeff Fink is preparing to take over as chair-elect.

Fink is general manager of Advantage Truck Accessories. An industry veteran with more than 25 years experience under his belt, he is responsible for overseeing the company’s day-to-day operations. He has been active in PRO since 2002 and was first elected to the council’s Select Committee in 2007. SEMA Member News took the opportunity recently to chat with Fink about how he views the council and his new role as chair-elect.

SEMA Member News: How did you get involved in PRO and what was your motivation?

Jeff Fink: I was invited by an industry associate to join PRO and to attend a PRO Long-Range Planning (LRP) meeting. My motivation was to become more involved in the industry.

SMN: What is it about PRO that makes the council valuable to the restyling industry?

JF: Focus. PRO addresses the challenges facing the restyling industry. The information available to the membership through the collective contribution of the restylers, distributors and manufacturers is the real value.

SMN: PRO has always been manufacturer supported primarily for the benefit of restylers. Why would it be important for other manufacturers that are not members to support PRO?

JF: As a manufacturer, I want to do business with forward-thinking, successful companies. The restylers who make the investment in their businesses to be part of PRO have proven to be among the most successful. Additionally, manufacturers benefit by having direct access to current market research through contact with our member restylers.

SMN: What value do you see in the various projects and initiatives that PRO has tackled over the years?

SMN: As the newly elected chair-elect, what are your main objectives and goals going forward?

JF: The heart and soul of this industry—and our council specifically—is the innovative, entrepreneurial spirit of its members. Small companies have woven the fiber of the restyling industry and will continue to do so. Our council needs to support those entrepreneurs. From the person who comes up with a new automotive product idea or starts a restyling company to the distributors and media, it is the passion of industry individuals who make this the industry in which I’m proud to be involved.

It is my objective to continue to support the programs the council has initiated and to work with the select committee and general membership to provide innovative, new products and services. I have been involved with PRO as a general member and Select Committee member for several years and believe that we have a great general membership and a Select Committee that is really special.

PRO has done an excellent job of providing valuable products to its members, including the Technical Skills & Training Conference, business-training materials and one of the hottest receptions at SEMA—NovemberFest. Additionally, the council has a strong initiative to increase membership. All of these efforts need continued support as we move forward. Additionally, we must effectively communicate the value of SEMA and PRO membership. The measure of our efforts will best be shown in the council’s ability to retain and recruit members.

I invite anyone who is involved in the restyling and accessory industry to check out what PRO has to offer.

The use of ethanol in gasoline is a sensitive topic. Who would oppose an alternative fuel that can help wean Americans from fossil fuels and reduce the nation’s dependence on foreign oil? The problem is that ethanol in certain quantities has chemical side effects that may pose a threat to older vehicles and some high-performance equipment. SEMA is leading the fight to support the alternative fuel while protecting vulnerable auto equipment and its owners.

A main challenge is the fact that ethanol attracts moisture, leading to increased water formation that can create formic acid and corrode metals, plastics and rubber. Newer vehicles, engines and exhaust systems may have been designed to work compatibly with E10. They may even tolerate E15; however, the materials found in many older vehicles and certain high-performance equipment will not endure the corrosive effects, especially if the vehicles are not regularly used. SEMA is seeking to protect that segment of its membership producing these parts and a large enthusiast base that owns such equipment.

The number of concerns expressed by SEMA members and SEMA Action Network enthusiasts regarding E10 has increased significantly in recent years. In response, SEMA has examined the science behind ethanol and defined its position on ethanol content. The research included in-depth discussions with SEMA members and industry leaders along with representatives from the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), U.S. Department of Energy and Argonne Laboratory, where extensive ethanol research is conducted.

E10 has been around for a number of years, and its use has recently skyrocketed. More than 90% of gasoline sold in 2010 was E10. However, most consumers are unaware of that fact, since E10 labeling rules are subject to state regulation. Some states do not require labels; for those that do, the label is inconsistent in appearance and location on the pump. SEMA has fielded a number of enthusiast complaints about E10 concerns, the inability to locate pure gasoline and confusion on what is being dispensed at the gas station.

In 2009, the ethanol industry asked the EPA for a waiver to market E15. SEMA joined with a diverse coalition of industry leaders in opposing the waiver based on scientific concerns that a 50% increase in ethanol content could harm automobile parts in many model years of vehicles. SEMA supported further study so that there is a clearer understanding of the issue. Besides the corrosion issue, SEMA observed that E15 also has different combustion characteristics from E10 and may cause problems with air/fuel mixtures, fuel-pump sealing and related on-board fuel delivery components.

In November 2010, the EPA approved a partial waiver to allow the use of E15 in ’07 and newer vehicles. In January 2011, the EPA expanded the waiver to include ’01 and newer vehicles. Nevertheless, the EPA agreed with SEMA’s concerns and made it “illegal to fuel pre-’01 vehicles” with E15. The EPA determined that pre-’01 vehicles have the potential for increased material degradation with E15 use, that some of these vehicles may have been designed for only limited exposure to E10 and that the oldest vehicles on the road pre-date ethanol blends in the marketplace altogether. The EPA concluded that the potential for material degradation may make emissions control and fuel systems more susceptible to corrosion and other chemical reactions. (Several lawsuits have been filed to challenge the partial waiver.)

As it turns out, making it “illegal to fuel pre-2001 vehicles” are essentially words without meaning, since E15 will be available to everyone. The EPA would simply rely on a gas pump caution label to instruct motorists that E15 is only to be used in ’01 and newer cars and that it is prohibited in other vehicles because the fuel may damage the vehicles and engines. Despite the potential for economic harm and equipment breakdowns, the EPA is placing responsibility for understanding the difference between E10 and E15 directly on vehicle owners.

According to EPA estimates, the number of vehicles in the United States subject to misfueling includes nearly 74 million pre-’01 model cars and light trucks. Gas stations, automakers and SEMA-member manufacturers would not be granted immunity from lawsuits if a consumer alleges a problem from E15. Moreover, auto manufacturers won’t cover engine problems that result from using fuel blended with more than 10% ethanol.

SEMA supports ethanol as an alternative fuel so long as it does not pose a risk. In fact, there would be no need to raise the fuel content from E10 to E15 if existing flex-fueled vehicles were filled with E85 fuel and more flex-fuel vehicles were sold. Instead, owners generally buy gasoline because the operating price is traditionally lower and many gas stations don’t
market E85.

As the debate continues, SEMA will remain a leader in preventing decisions from being made without unbiased testing on the impact of E15 on vehicle components and engines. If you would like more information or to share how E15 would impact your business or vehicles, please contact Stuart Gosswein, SEMA’s senior director of federal government affairs at 202/783-6007 x30 or stuartg@sema.org.

The use of ethanol in gasoline is a sensitive topic. Who would oppose an alternative fuel that can help wean Americans from fossil fuels and reduce the nation’s dependence on foreign oil? The problem is that ethanol in certain quantities has chemical side effects that may pose a threat to older vehicles and some high-performance equipment. SEMA is leading the fight to support the alternative fuel while protecting vulnerable auto equipment and its owners.

A main challenge is the fact that ethanol attracts moisture, leading to increased water formation that can create formic acid and corrode metals, plastics and rubber. Newer vehicles, engines and exhaust systems may have been designed to work compatibly with E10. They may even tolerate E15; however, the materials found in many older vehicles and certain high-performance equipment will not endure the corrosive effects, especially if the vehicles are not regularly used. SEMA is seeking to protect that segment of its membership producing these parts and a large enthusiast base that owns such equipment.

The number of concerns expressed by SEMA members and SEMA Action Network enthusiasts regarding E10 has increased significantly in recent years. In response, SEMA has examined the science behind ethanol and defined its position on ethanol content. The research included in-depth discussions with SEMA members and industry leaders along with representatives from the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), U.S. Department of Energy and Argonne Laboratory, where extensive ethanol research is conducted.

E10 has been around for a number of years, and its use has recently skyrocketed. More than 90% of gasoline sold in 2010 was E10. However, most consumers are unaware of that fact, since E10 labeling rules are subject to state regulation. Some states do not require labels; for those that do, the label is inconsistent in appearance and location on the pump. SEMA has fielded a number of enthusiast complaints about E10 concerns, the inability to locate pure gasoline and confusion on what is being dispensed at the gas station.

In 2009, the ethanol industry asked the EPA for a waiver to market E15. SEMA joined with a diverse coalition of industry leaders in opposing the waiver based on scientific concerns that a 50% increase in ethanol content could harm automobile parts in many model years of vehicles. SEMA supported further study so that there is a clearer understanding of the issue. Besides the corrosion issue, SEMA observed that E15 also has different combustion characteristics from E10 and may cause problems with air/fuel mixtures, fuel-pump sealing and related on-board fuel delivery components.

In November 2010, the EPA approved a partial waiver to allow the use of E15 in ’07 and newer vehicles. In January 2011, the EPA expanded the waiver to include ’01 and newer vehicles. Nevertheless, the EPA agreed with SEMA’s concerns and made it “illegal to fuel pre-’01 vehicles” with E15. The EPA determined that pre-’01 vehicles have the potential for increased material degradation with E15 use, that some of these vehicles may have been designed for only limited exposure to E10 and that the oldest vehicles on the road pre-date ethanol blends in the marketplace altogether. The EPA concluded that the potential for material degradation may make emissions control and fuel systems more susceptible to corrosion and other chemical reactions. (Several lawsuits have been filed to challenge the partial waiver.)

As it turns out, making it “illegal to fuel pre-2001 vehicles” are essentially words without meaning, since E15 will be available to everyone. The EPA would simply rely on a gas pump caution label to instruct motorists that E15 is only to be used in ’01 and newer cars and that it is prohibited in other vehicles because the fuel may damage the vehicles and engines. Despite the potential for economic harm and equipment breakdowns, the EPA is placing responsibility for understanding the difference between E10 and E15 directly on vehicle owners.

According to EPA estimates, the number of vehicles in the United States subject to misfueling includes nearly 74 million pre-’01 model cars and light trucks. Gas stations, automakers and SEMA-member manufacturers would not be granted immunity from lawsuits if a consumer alleges a problem from E15. Moreover, auto manufacturers won’t cover engine problems that result from using fuel blended with more than 10% ethanol.

SEMA supports ethanol as an alternative fuel so long as it does not pose a risk. In fact, there would be no need to raise the fuel content from E10 to E15 if existing flex-fueled vehicles were filled with E85 fuel and more flex-fuel vehicles were sold. Instead, owners generally buy gasoline because the operating price is traditionally lower and many gas stations don’t
market E85.

As the debate continues, SEMA will remain a leader in preventing decisions from being made without unbiased testing on the impact of E15 on vehicle components and engines. If you would like more information or to share how E15 would impact your business or vehicles, please contact Stuart Gosswein, SEMA’s senior director of federal government affairs at 202/783-6007 x30 or stuartg@sema.org.

		The Manufacturers Rep Council retained independent legal counsel Steven Mitchell Sack (left) to provide manufacturers agents with legal advice on issues ranging from contracts to collections. Sack specializes in manufacturers representative legal issues.

While courts have generally recognized that employers may be bound by written assurances and statements made in employee manuals, handbooks and work rules, they are now increasingly willing to consider oral contracts extended by management and company officials having the apparent authority to make such promises.

However, these are not the only kinds of promises that are getting companies in trouble. When personnel at the hiring interview paint an overly rosy picture of a company, exaggerate the attractions of a specific position or promise the kinds of duties and job functions the employee will have if a job is accepted, the employer could end up with a disgruntled employee who someday might slap a “truth-in-hiring” lawsuit.

In light of recent court rulings, it’s imperative to understand the dangers regarding oral promises and to minimize problems in this confusing area.

Know the law. It’s important to recognize that informal, off-the-cuff oral assurances can bind your company to devastating results. For example, a Michigan jury recently awarded $1.1 million to a worker based on a claim of an oral promise of lifetime employment. In this case, the jury found the existence of a valid, oral contract and ruled that the company unjustifiably breached that contract when the employee was terminated.

In another case, a lawyer was lured to join a rival law firm with promises that she would head its environmental law practice. After accepting the offer and leaving a secure, stable position, the lawyer learned that the law firm had few environmental clients and there was practically no work for her to perform. A federal court judge ruled that she had the right to proceed to a trial with a lawsuit based in part on the theory of fraud in the inducement.

A Connecticut executive was awarded $10.1 million in compensatory and punitive damages after he left a company to join a competitor with promises of a large bonus and profit-sharing plan that never materialized.

Countless other decisions indicate the vulnerability of companies in this area. They include claims of negligent misrepresentation and violations of the Federal Trade Commission Act when false or misleading claims regarding a person’s potential earning or job functions are made.

Act accordingly. To avoid similar problems, all of your company’s hiring policies should be clearly spelled out so they cannot be misunderstood or misinterpreted by prospective job candidates and present employees. Interviewers, recruiters and other intake personnel must be careful not to say anything at the hiring interview that can be construed as a promise of job security.

Avoid using words at the hiring interview that imply anything other than an at-will relationship. For example, try not to use such phrases as “permanent employment,” “job for life” or linking the phrase “just cause only” with termination. Also avoid broad statements concerning job longevity, assurances of continued employment (“Don’t worry; no one around here ever gets fired except for a good cause”) or specific statements regarding career opportunities. Only use these phrases if they are being stated as deliberate reflections of commitments.

Utilize employment applications for protection. As a first line of defense, your company should include language such as the following in employment applications: “I understand that no promises of continued employment have been given to me about this job. If I am offered this position, I have the right to be terminated at will, with or without cause, or notice, and may resign at any time. The foregoing is not to be construed as a guarantee of employment for a specific time, and no promises about the permanency of my job functions or duties have been given.”

Requiring applicants to sign properly drafted employment applications can reduce potential problems.
Indeed, it’s not unusual for job interviewers to be over-exuberant in their job descriptions, leading to unrealistic expectations by the applicant and possible suits for damages.

Train staff to avoid making promises. The best way to avoid problems is to notify your interviewers not to say anything at the hiring interview that can be construed as a promise. It may be a good idea for the person offering the position to have a colleague present when the offer is made to serve as a witness that no additional promises were stated.

Prepare follow-up memos where justified. Some companies furnish just-hired workers with memos that specifically deny that promises of job security and other material promises have been made. Other companies include such a statement in a written employment contract that the worker must sign.

Finally, pay special attention to welcoming letters sent out by company executives—particularly those in marketing and sales—which may talk in inflated terms and sometimes make statements or promises that the employer never intended to keep. In this area, you can never be too careful.