CAUT Guidelines

[McNeilTom@aol.com]

In a message dated 4/2/00 11:35:59 AM Eastern Standard Time, 
pianos@traverse.net (Rolf von Walthausen) writes:

<<  What I like about the recommended ratios is that they represent the 
ideal.  By going through the process of applying the workload formula, both 
administrators and
 technicians can move towards an understanding of the compromises that need
 to be made regarding expectations for a given amount of allocated time and
 resources.  >>

As usual, Rolf says it very well. 

When the Guidelines were being drafted, about 100 CAUT techs participated in 
one way or another.  Certainly the development of the Workload Formula 
engendered the greatest share of the discussion.  And the baseline ratio of 
60 pianos per tech was a significant focal point of the discussion.  There 
were some who thought it represented an ideal which would never be achieved, 
or even accepted as a goal, by their institutions.  And there were a few who 
thought the number was too high, and that fewer pianos per tech would result 
in a higher standard of maintenance to which we all should aspire.  In the 
end, that number was chosen as representing a realistic target level of 
maintenance in typical university settings; and there were a few examples of 
well respected institutions at or near that level of staffing.

For those unfamiliar with the formula:  There were a half-dozen variable 
parameters in the formula, any of which could raise or lower the target 
staffing ratio for a given institution.  Given those variables, target 
piano-to-tech ratios for real-life institutions probably range from lows 
around 30 or 40 to highs around 100 or 120.  The main point of the formula 
was to provide piano techs and their administrators some basis for discussing 
staffing needs.  It did this by pointing out some of the most important 
factors and weighting them in a realistic fashion.

Probably the Guidelines for Institutional Piano Maintenance will not be the 
complete answer to determining staffing needs at an institution.  But it can 
be a helpful point of departure.  In fact, when the Guidelines were 
published, the CAUT Committee became aware of a number of success stories 
where they had been used by techs to achieve improvements in their staffing, 
inventories, climate-control, etc.  It seems that the Guidelines, as utilized 
by some of our colleagues, provided some needed insight to the bean counters 
in administration.

Best regards,

      -     Tom McNeil, RPT     -
Former chair of the CAUT Committee

        Vermont Piano Restorations