[CAUT] Position Announcement, SIU, Carbondale, IL (Fred Sturm)

[Kent Swafford]

It is my strong opinion that we should refrain from giving legal  
advice on the lists.

I have formally asked the Executive Committee if they might attempt to  
acquire legal opinions with regard to the distinction under the law  
between the independent "piano technician as business" and the "piano  
technician as employee", and how those distinctions might affect the  
activities of PTG.

I have received a response suggesting that they will follow up.

I honestly do not know what they will find. Meanwhile, it is OK to  
simply wait until PTG has informed itself.



Kent Swafford




On Aug 17, 2008, at 1:22 PM, Israel Stein wrote:

> At 11:00 AM 8/17/2008, Fred Sturm wrote,
>
>> Yes, I think there is a distinction between the independent "piano
>> technician as business" and the "piano technician as employee.
>
> Yes, Fred. You got it right. Employees have a right under US law to  
> organize and to bargain collectively with employers for matters  
> involving compensation and conditions of employment. The "restraint  
> of trade" legislation (under several Federal anti-trust laws) does  
> not applied to employees receiving wages, who are governed by labor  
> law - not business law. It does apply to business people who charge  
> per service. Just because we piano technicians act as business  
> people when servicing private clients on a fee-per-service basis  
> does not prevent us from engaging in collective bargaining tactics  
> when dealing with prospective employers who wish to hire us as  
> employees. Applying for - or refusing to apply for - jobs is a not  
> business activity - it is labor activity. US labor law deals with  
> employee-employer relations, not business law. Now, if the  
> university were looking for independent contractors - that would be  
> a different story... Here all that price-fixing and restraint of  
> trade legislation applies.
>
> Israel Stein
>
>
>
>> " While
>> the Sherman antitrust act (which is as contrary to the fundamental
>> principles of American democracy as anything I can imagine, but it is
>> the law of the land, upheld by supreme court decisions) does prohibit
>> us from "conspiring to set prices" as independents, I believe labor
>> laws exempt people in an employee relationship from those strictures
>> (unions are not defined as "trusts" or are, at any rate, defined as a
>> specific exception). Not that I am an expert in this area of law, but
>> that is certainly my impression.
>>        In which case, it _would_ be possible for piano technicians  
>> to form a
>> union in relationship to employers (ie, full and part time employers,
>> not per service). Not practical, but possible. And it is certainly
>> legal to the best of my understanding to converse in any way we want
>> about salaries. About tuning fees and other pricing structures for
>> independents, that's where we can get into trouble.
>>        Again, I'm no expert, but I do try to pay attention <G>.
>>
>> Regards,
>> Fred Sturm
>> University of New Mexico
>> fssturm at unm.edu
>
>