guidelines update/include contract techs?

[Bdshull@aol.com]

Fred:

This would be helpful.  But I would like to include a much larger number of 
technicians/schools in that survey than this proposal would include.  If the 
contract tech schools are included (schools which only use non-employee piano 
tech service), we would finally include the majority of schools in our 
survey, which are presently "falling through the woodwork."

By including the "part-time" university tech (loosely defined), we begin to 
reach out to this important group of technicians, who may want - and probably 
need - the additional knowledge, skills and association which CAUT can 
provide.  This would, of course, make a survey on contract tech school 
service much easier and less expensive to accomplish.  

While most "flagship" institutions employ their technicians (although even 
some of these "creatively" employ these techs, avoiding the additional costs 
of benefits),   a majority of colleges and universities contract their piano 
service.  We can only speculate what the real world situation is in these 
schools, adn we have no database of technicians who service these schools.  I 
would like to see CAUT work to define what a CAUT contract tech is, and begin 
to encourage these techs to participate in CAUT.  Besides the other obvious 
reasons, we would be able to obtain data on these schools too.  

Fred, does this fit in with what you have in mind?  I am interested in all of 
your ideas and experiences, as I prepare the CAUT contract tech session at 
the convention, and an article which I hope to get into the CAUT newsletter 
before the convention.

Bill Shull,  RPT
University of Redlands, La Sierra University
 
In a message dated 3/5/01 2:42:55 PM Pacific Standard Time, fssturm@unm.edu 
writes:

<< I am proposing to develop a rather
 brief appendix to the document, which will give an idea of actual, real
 life conditions in music schools/departments. This is something several
 on the caut list have expressed an interest in. It could form part of
 the Guidelines, or simply be a supplemental document, available to
 CAUT's if they would find it useful. My notion is to acquire raw data
 from technicians (ie, you, the reader of this), and to present it as
 follows (precise wording to be edited and refined later): >>