Just to reiterate. The doors were reported as required when the defects were discovered, QA and Safety departments were informed. Sunstate procedures for reporting major defects or safety incidents don't provide any feedback for the person submitting.
Whilst Sunstate and Qantas both claim outrage and industrial espionage over the "discovery" of these door problems and deny that there was anything wrong with the doors in the first place, they have had modifications drawn, approved and incorporated on these very same doors that coincidently fix the very problem that was reported.
As Sunstate don't communicate with their engineers very well and didn't put out a maintenance memo highlighting these door problems, or even issue a workcard to inspect these doors at the first opportunity, an engineer that is aware of the existence of a defective component is naturally going to - as they have always done, have a look at the said component the next time they are in the vicinity of it.
This is the standard that Australian Engineers set when they maintain aircraft. This is the normal custom and practice. If Sunstate hadn't skimped on getting the slightly more expensive electronic latched doors originally to save a few bucks they wouldn't have the problems they have at the moment. No long term thought from those that chose the options. That is not the fault of the engineers that report and rectify defects.
By the way the Maintenance Manager that doesn't want people to look outside of the narrow description on a job card - wouldn't look like an American talk show doctor would he?