Jeff, I'm not disagreeing with your statement that a qualified technician should earn a good living. I know there are schools that don't put a lot of emphasis on piano technology. I just don't see how complaining about it amongst ourselves, or even coming up with some guidelines will change those schools' priorities. It has to be faculty driven - either on their own, or through their organization, NASM (see Fred's last post). I still hold with my original point: If the job is that bad, change it. If it can't be changed, leave. Life's too short to be miserable. Rick on 6/19/03 9:40 AM, Jeff Tanner at jtanner@mozart.music.sc.edu wrote: > Hi Rick, > Here's where I'll disagree with you. > > I think that no matter how "indispensable" we make ourselves, it will not > guarantee our job security, nor increase our salaries. State government > employees get a bad rap for being unproductive, and in some areas, that > reputation may be well deserved. But if a tech is willing to work hard to > make him/herself indispensable, that just means the government/institution > is getting a higher rate of productivity. You don't get salary raises in > the public sector for becoming indispensible the way other jobs do from > private sector companies. > > Unfortunately, regardless of qualifications/skills/talent, those who set > salary ranges for us look at other schools to determine salary levels for > given occupations. My dean told me not to expect our school to be a trend > setter for higher salaries, because it hasn't been traditionally so. > > But what is not considered in the process is that what may be a great > salary for a single person, or a semi-retired tech with no children to > support, might not pay for trailer park living for a tech with a family. > Sure, if I was single, this salary would be fine. I wouldn't need a 3 > bedroom home in a safe neighborhood with good schools, where the kids would > have friends like themselves to build their social skills after school. I > wouldn't need a 2nd vehicle for the wife, roomy enough for > child-safety-seats AND suitcases. I wouldn't have $80 water bills, $200 > power bills and $600 grocery bills every month. > > But this salary shouldn't be set up for a single person with no dependents. > This skill SHOULD provide a modest living for a family, and there should be > no expectation that the wife needs to get a job so that 90% of her > bring-home pay can go to paying for someone else to raise the children, and > the other costs associated with her going to work. This is a skill and a > talent that few in this country have, and the fact that the salary I am > paid is based on a salary that a single person, semi-retired person, or a > person taking a huge paycut because health insurance has become > unaffordable finds reasonable is what I have qualms with, while private > sector techs earn double our salary and more. > > Becoming "indispensible" goes only as far as how much the next guy will > take the job for. If I can't stay for this salary, administrators see that > other schools are only paying so much, and figure they can probably find > some other single, semi-retired, looking for lower health insurance costs > etc., tech who can be "indispensable" for a lower salary, and the > administration really doesn't give a rat's behind what kind of PTG > qualifications that person might have as long as the faculty is satisfied. > And all that usually takes is for a person to be able to tune a pianer and > fix it when it breaks. > > If Fred's belief that we'll have universal health care (or at least > regulation) reasonably soon does come to pass, I'll have a heck of a lot > easier time telling the school to raise the salary or I'm gone. But right > now, my outside clientele is so small I can't take that leap. And I think > this is the issue most of the other techs who are either already CAUTs or > are considering becoming CAUTs are dealing with. > > There aren't many of these jobs out there, particulary in my part of the > world, where I can stay within reasonable driving distance of family. > Turnover is extremely low and one of these positions comes available at the > rate of about one every 15 years in this part of the country. My > predecessor was here 22 years. One tech at another local institution has > been full-time since 1987, and was on contract since 1972! So, if you like > this work, and you have one of these positions, you'd better keep it. > > You just shouldn't have to adjust to a trailer park lifestyle if you've got > a family, or be forced to work an extra 20 or 30 hours a week to make up > for it. > > Look, if the guy across the street can't be hired at a $70K job playing on > computers all the time for the simple fact that he was accustomed to $100K > plus income and nobody will hire him because they're afraid he'll take off > as soon as the economy turns around, and computer techies are pretty much a > dime a dozen at that income level (I can throw a rock and hit 3 houses on > my street where that's been the case in the past year), wouldn't you think > that the ONE full-time CAUT position in the whole state would be worth at > least $50-60K? > > Sure it is. But it can't be, because other schools aren't paying what the > position is worth either. > > It's not that the "job is so bad..." But if you expect qualified techs to > take these jobs, the pay has got to get better. > > Jeff > > > Rick Florence wrote: >>> From the "if your job is so bad, why don't you get a new one" >> department: > > > _______________________________________________ > caut list info: https://www.moypiano.com/resources/#archives > _____________ Rick Florence Piano Technician Arizona State University, School of Music
This PTG archive page provided courtesy of Moy Piano Service, LLC