I’m with @ok4450 on this one.
In addition to being a mechanic/shop manager I am also an arbitrator. I conduct hearings and decide cases in new car warranty disputes between the customer and the car manufacturer. As such I sometimes see internal paperwork regarding repairs done to a car under manufacturer warranty, in some cases seeing what the car maker pays the dealer to correct a factory defect.
I’ve arbitrated warranty concerns on a Jeep where FCA will pay the dealer $33 to diagnose an intermittent stalling condition. I’ve seen GM pay a dealership .3 hours to diagnose a check engine light. For a flat-rate technician at the dealer making $30/hr that translates to less than $10 to diagnose the car. As a diagnostic man myself, I can tell you I wouldn’t open the hood for $10, much less check anything out. It’s no wonder so many issues are left unresolved with the tech noting “unable to duplicate complaint” and then moving on to better paying work.
Labor times are also significantly lower for warranty pay jobs. Here at our independent shop we have a 2015 Silverado waiting for complete engine replacement. Labor time for long block is 19.8 hours, warranty time at the dealer is 14.0 hours. There is some justification for lower warranty times because the vehicle will still be new, clean and not rusted and altered. But in general warranty pay is significantly lower, not higher, so I’m not sure what the Wisconsin lawsuit is about.
Not only is the pay less, but the quality of work is often designed just to get the car out of the warranty period. I arbitrated a case for a Ram 1500 with a Hemi V8 engine. The complaint was valvetrain noise. The technician was directed to determine which lifter was noisy, then remove only the one cylinder head needed and replace only the noisy lifters for that side of the engine. FCA also directed the tech to save and reuse the engine coolant. I don’t think any of the mechanics here on this board consider that a proper repair.