Don, Ken and List: The Guidelines recommendation of 60 pianos/technician should be made in the context of the use of the formula. Wisdom was used in the compromise recommendation of 60 pianos/fulltime technician. It is an informed but arbitrary and conservative recommendation. In most cases it is likely to result in work left undone. The formula numbers will tell the truth about a specific program's needs. The more I try to figure out the real world staffing situation across the country, I think it is well above 100 pianos/fulltime tech, maybe 140/tech average. It's been said before, but I think needs repeating: Solely using one standard for the # of pianos/full time tech is potentially misleading, and disregards the point of using the formula. If you've crunched the numbers, you realize how meaningless this one point of reference is, because the formula might give you 40 pianos/full time tech, or less! Or possible more. I think that when the Guidelines was first developed there was some discussion about abandoning a standard recommendation altogether. But the compromise number seems to be more helpful than harmful - and it will be MORE helpful, if we successfully disseminate the need to use the formula and crunch the numbers. <<We will keep this topic open until the end of the forum in Arlington. I propose that at the forum, we put the question of the formula to a vote. If there is any dissension from those who cannot attend speak now.>> I hope you all read my upcoming newsletter article (I have to finish it first...), which will address not only Guidelines and contract tech issues, but it will also argue for attempting to get a better handle on what the real world service situation is like. It will also recommend that CAUT adopt practices of promoting and implementing the Guidelines. << If something can be incorporated into the Guidelines to help technicians get through to the bean counters, it is worth pursuing.>> YES! Ken, did you have a formula worked up on piano value/depreciation relating to rebuilding and servicing? Also replacement vs. maintenance/rebuilding? It seems that we could include proposals for calculating maintenance/rebuilding/replacement options, all of which may appeal to the administrative beancounters. I think this could be included in the Guidelines if we reviewed the Guidelines about every ten years. That would allow us to account for changes in the piano and piano service markets, as well as any changes in the way music schools use acoustic keyboard instruments. Another idea would be for one of us to write an article about the experiences of piano technicians in upgrading programs. School administrators are like the rest of us, they relate to the lessons of real life experiences. An article illustrating Guidelines implementation in the real world might even make a great companion to the Guidelines. It might make a good project for next year. FWIW, I have had interesting conversations with several full time techs here on the West coast, including a very interesting talk with Robert Koning, the head tech at SC, who seems to finally be making some real headway there (he just got one more 1/2 time tuner, to bring his total staff to 2 full time equiv. techs incl. himself). Maybe more on that later. OK, I'll shutup and go back to work.... Bill Shull University of Redlands, La Sierra University, Riverside City College
This PTG archive page provided courtesy of Moy Piano Service, LLC