[CAUT] CAUT job description vis-a-vis salary level (was:

[Richard Brekne]

Hi Eric, Israel.

I tried to make this kind of point in a more general manner three or 
four times. And I agree with Eric here. We dont make the rules, but we 
can figure out how to abide by them to our best advantage. The world is 
what it is. In an idealized world perhaps it should be such that we are 
judged and afforded compensation on other grounds to a large degree then 
we are. But I think you've articulated the reality quite well. Grin... I 
wish I could manage such well formulated posts sometimes...:)

In anycase.

Cheers
RicB


        Tue, 13 Nov 2007 14:37:56 -0500 Eric Wolfley wrote:

         >State systems don’t recognize merit, they go mainly on job
        descriptions and are supposed to align job
         >responsibilities with salary levels. If your job description
        says you are a mechanic that works on pianos,
         >they will equate your position and salary to the state
        car-pool mechanic. If your job description says you direct
         >and manage budgets and inventories, advise and consult with
        faculty, supervise student help, prepare
         >instruments for visiting artists, etc, etc, they’ll be
        comparing you to supervisory or managerial positions.
         >In the past you’ve said that you are the only piano technician
        in the state system…you’ve got to convince
         >them to look at other state institutions for comparisons.
        That’s what they did here for me. In the end, they
         >had to create a new position in which to put me because I
        didn’t fit anywhere else.

        Eric,


    This is an interesting perspective, which perhaps has been neglected
    in the current discussion, and may have broader implications.
    Perhaps we have been barking up the wrong tree all along, thinking
    that by proving ever higher-level piano skills - whether through
    testing or curriculum certification - we may someday convince
    "management" that we are worthy of a professional-level
    compensation. Perhaps the CAUT accreditation - whatever form it
    takes - needs to stress management skills in order to position the
    job description in a higher paying classification. As you imply, the
    most skilled mechanic is still just a mechanic...

    There are many precedents where practitioners repositioned
    themselves into higher job descriptions by augmenting the skill set
    associated with their profession. The classic example would be
    nurses who in the early part of the 20th century raised their job
    description from bedpan carriers and bandage changers to direct
    deliverers of health care - by developing a science-based
    curriculum. Just about any other "profession" raised itself to its
    present status by a similar expansion of its skill set beyond the
    craft itself. Fact is, we piano people are still working and
    presenting ourselves the same way as just about all other
    professions did in the 19th century...

    So perhaps the CAUT credential needs to stress ancillary skills -
    such as management related to pianos - that would push us above
    being mere mechanics. Because as long as we try to be only the best
    possible piano technicians that we can be - well, great piano
    technicians are still just very specialized mechanics... From what
    Eric writes above, perhaps we need to be thinking beyond that...

    Just food for thought...

    Israel Stein