Deferred Maintenance Costs Fleets More Than They Think. Tech Training Helps Reduce the Risk

Apr 13
4 min read

Updated: May 7

Understanding Deferred Maintenance

Deferred maintenance has always been costly. David Tod Geaslin’s article, The Disastrous Effects of Deferring Maintenance, highlights this issue. A minor known problem can escalate into a larger failure. This escalation includes collateral damage, downtime, labor disruption, lost service time, and operational consequences. The main message is not just about repair costs; it’s about escalation.

For fleet managers and transportation directors, this message is especially relevant today. Modern fleets manage battery-electric vehicles, high-voltage systems, charging infrastructure, CNG systems, hydraulics, air brakes, and increasingly complex electrical controls. In this environment, a small unresolved issue does not simply remain static. A charging fault can disrupt service. A high-voltage safety concern can delay repairs until outside support is available. A hydraulic leak, air-brake issue, or electrical fault can sideline equipment longer than expected if the shop cannot quickly identify the root cause. The maintenance problem is real, but so is the capability problem.

The Role of Technician Training

Technician training is crucial in this context. Maintenance is not deferred only due to budget constraints. It is also deferred when technicians lack the training to diagnose faults quickly, safely, and accurately. When a team is unsure how to handle high-voltage hazards, charging-system communication faults, CNG service procedures, or advanced electrical diagnostics, manageable issues can linger longer than they should. Over time, this creates more opportunities for small problems to escalate into larger ones.

The broader safety implications are well established. The FMCSA states that motor carriers targeted for interventions due to vehicle maintenance have a 65 percent greater future crash rate than the national average. This statistic does not prove that training alone solves the problem, but it reinforces a simple point: maintenance performance has real safety consequences.

Case Studies Highlighting the Need for Training

Research from the transit sector supports the importance of training. A Transportation Research Board case study found that employee skill level, particularly troubleshooting skills, was the primary cause of road calls for the Ann Arbor Transit Authority. To address this issue, the agency trained mechanics and implemented a team-based maintenance model. Since 1985, they reported a 78 percent decrease in road calls. This finding is significant. The improvement was not solely attributed to training; it resulted from training combined with a different maintenance structure and accountability model. Nonetheless, it strongly indicates that technician skill level and maintenance execution are closely tied to reliability outcomes.

Another TRB synthesis supports this direction of thought. It reports that Metro Transit shifted its focus toward training and ensuring the correct repair is made the first time, rather than emphasizing speed alone. The same source states that if shops are appropriately equipped and employees are properly trained, effective and timely repairs will occur. For fleet leaders, this is the crux of the issue. Timely maintenance depends not only on having a work order system and a PM schedule but also on having technicians who can accurately diagnose problems and complete the right repair the first time.

The Impact of Electric Vehicles on Maintenance

This lesson becomes even more critical as fleets add electric vehicles and charging infrastructure. The Federal Transit Administration’s battery-electric bus guidebook emphasizes that OEM training should be clearly outlined in procurement documents and should occur shortly after bus delivery to limit delays in revenue service deployment. The report notes that agencies cited timing for training and delayed parts as challenges they faced while deploying battery-electric buses. In other words, workforce readiness is part of fleet readiness. When training is delayed, operations can feel the impact.

FTA research on procuring and maintaining battery-electric buses provides valuable insights. One agency reported that the cost of proper training was less than the cost of an undiagnosed or misdiagnosed problem and unnecessary parts replacement. While this is anecdotal evidence from an experienced professional, it reflects a reality many fleet leaders already understand: misdiagnosis is costly, and in complex systems, it often extends downtime far beyond the original fault.

Conclusion: Training as a Strategic Investment

The takeaway is straightforward. Training is not separate from maintenance strategy; it is part of it. A fleet that invests in technician capability is better positioned to identify faults earlier, make timely repairs, reduce dependence on outside support for routine issues, and prevent avoidable escalation. This applies to EV charging systems and high-voltage vehicles, but it also applies to the core systems fleets depend on every day, including air brakes, hydraulics, CNG systems, and advanced electrical diagnostics.

No training program can eliminate every breakdown. However, the evidence points in a clear direction. Deferred maintenance becomes more dangerous and expensive when teams are not prepared to diagnose and repair problems early. Fleets that seek better uptime, improved safety, and better control over maintenance costs should treat technician training as operational risk management, not as an optional add-on.

If your fleet is adding EVs, charging infrastructure, high-voltage systems, CNG vehicles, hydraulics, or advanced brake and electrical systems, WTA can help your technicians build the skills to diagnose problems earlier, repair them correctly, and reduce avoidable downtime. Explore WTA training programs or contact us to discuss training at your facility.