Paul said How do we convince the highest ranks of wallets to believe us? That's where the monies are, and that's what makes the music schools go. Those are the Foundation members, Boards of Regents, or whatever drives your university dollars. It is their wallets and hearts we must hit, not just letters at the end of our names. Unfortunately, universities only recognize education from one of their own kind. We are not hired as educators. Educators can show, on paper, the degrees they have gotten, the papers they have written, classes they attended, and courses they have taught at various institutes of higher education. All of which took years to attain. That is why college administrators are not going to be impressed when we come in and show we attended a week long manufacture's training session or attended a weekend seminar and took a 3 hour class on voicing. As Jeff said, most of us are hourly employees who fall into a wage scale that only pays a small amount of money. Once in a while we can get a music school administrator to go to bat for us to try to get more money for the position, but that doesn't happen very often. Case in point is when I was hired at Alabama. The previous tech was considered full time, although he only worked 30 hours a week, and made $26,000 a year. It took the chair of the music department, (a piano professor), 6 months to convince the dean and provost to make the piano tuning position full time at a salary of $40,000 a year. During my tenure at UA, I attended all of Steinways concert prep courses, for which the school paid, but all I got every year was a small cost of living increase. The current chair of the department is a French horn professor, and he doesn't have a vested interest in making sure the pianos are take care of. So as soon as I left, the dean cut the funds for the full time position, and allocated only $25,000 to take care of the instruments, including tuning fees and parts. What it all boils down to is that getting certification, endorsements, showing we attended seminars, etc, for the most part is not going to give us raises. The only thing we can do is send information to music school administrators that if they want their pianos to play and sound like they would be proud to have an Emanuel Ax visit them, they need to hire experienced piano technicians, who make x number of dollars a year. It's mostly ignorance, that is keeping the price low. It would be in our best interest to educate the schools. Wim -----Original Message----- From: Paul T Williams <pwilliams4 at unlnotes.unl.edu> To: caut <caut at ptg.org> Sent: Fri, May 14, 2010 11:50 am Subject: Re: [CAUT] CAUT Endorsement Requirements Misperception - was Preaching to the Choir Good points. I, for one, after gaining approval from our Director, to attend regionals, nationals, or Steinway seminars, make sure it's documented in my file in the office and really talk it up with the piano and other salient faculty. The downside is that if there is no $$ in the music schools to turn this around to a bigger salary, then, there I am with more education, better pianos for the school, and there I am with the same salary. I consider myself now as having a doctorate+ equivalent in knowledge of piano technology as those who have a doctorate in piano, bassoon, or music theory. They all make far more than I do. I consider those great techs on this list who give me endless education and information (THANK YOU ALL!!) and my mentors; Steve Brady, Michael Reiter, Roger Gable, Jeannie Grassie, David Stanwood, Del Fandrich, and others too many to mention, to be PhD's in this field of endeavor. (I have to go to my homeland Northwest for those who got me going!!!) The endless question of "why?" will always come up. Why aren't we paid more? It's the pure economics... that some "dude" will be willing to do the job for less pay, and that's what the schools want as a bottom line in economic terms. All they look at is the economics; period. Yet, they will always expect the piano to sound great when Yo Yo Ma comes to town, etc. but have no interest in paying great RPT's to maintain their instruments on a day-to-day basis. I see no real "end" to this with a new "credential" saying we're a CAUT, unless we're some sort of union....ie Only those with certain credentials CAN work for a university or college, is far fetched although I like the idea in a dream state. How do we convince the highest ranks of wallets to believe us? That's where the monies are, and that's what makes the music schools go. Those are the Foundation members, Boards of Regents, or whatever drives your university dollars. It is their wallets and hearts we must hit, not just letters at the end of our names. I'll continue to grow, as I love this business and want to make pianos better, no matter what anybody thinks! Sadly I may not make much more $$ for all my ever expanding knowledge. At least I'll die doing my best to make music better.... Enough from me. Paul From: "rwest1 at unl.edu" <rwest1 at unl.edu> To: caut at ptg.org Date: 05/14/2010 03:53 PM Subject: Re: [CAUT] CAUT Endorsement Requirements Misperception - was Preaching to the Choir Why couldn't CAUT develop resume builders, i.e., suggested classes and certificates stating that a person attended those classes. For example, attending Steinway seminars should be CAUT suggested classes. as well as Yamaha Little Red School House. The same with Diskavier and PianoDisk seminars. Closer to home, every national or regional seminar should grant proof of attendance to regional classes or annual convention classes for those that want such proof. The certificate could list the classes that the person attended. Such pieces of paper would not only be good for those wanting to get a job at a university, but it would be good for those who already has a position and is wanting to prove to the institution that the technician was participating in professional classes. Richard West On May 14, 2010, at 3:01 PM, Chris Solliday wrote: Bill, Well if it is SO easy, then just drop the RPT requirement and you will find a great deal more support. The RPT franchise can be marketed to institutions on its own merit. Of course there will be a few of your supporters who will disagree, but we must look for a way for the whole organization to participate in additional certifications. In fact just to get the record straight all additional certifications should be open to ALL PTG members. Then it IS as simple as taking some courses and some written tests. (It was Kent Swafford who said, “I thought this would be simpler.” Or words to that ...) This gives us the universality and flexibility to distinguish those in other area of expertise who will not be tuners as well. And it would allow us to include those very well trained (factory and other) CAUTs who are not RPTs but might want to become so if not forced to. In the face of self interest and political reality please ask yourself why the RPTs who will be voting in council would vote to make a few of their rank RPTs plus, or uber techs, or whatever you want to call it when you build only on the RPT franchise. Franchise ownership is a separate issue. And a much bigger prize. Why would an RPT who does not do much or no institutional work agree to giving an RPT a larger status than he or she has? Drop the RPT component and the endorsement makes sense with a few tweaks. The elephant in the room is , the CAUT endorsement should be open to all, as we have been suggesting to you for quite some time. Continuing to put your head in the sand and continuing to recite what you hope might come true over and over is probably not going to work. I don’t think btw that Jeff Tanner is unfamiliar with the proposal as you would digress. You should have been listening to what he and others have been saying on this issue for years, then maybe you would be familiar with what is reasonable and possible within the PTG structure. It always amazes me when piano technicians don’t listen. Chris Solliday From: caut-bounces at ptg.org [mailto:caut-bounces at ptg.org] On Behalf Of Bdshull at aol.com Sent: Thursday, May 13, 2010 2:37 AM To: caut at ptg.org Subject: [CAUT] CAUT Endorsement Requirements Misperception - was Preaching to the Choir Hi, Jeff, Your last few posts lead me to think you are not familiar with the CAUT Endorsement proposal requirements, and it might be that others have this same misperception too. It would be easy, if one is to just read Regulations and Codes Article IV, to come to the conclusion that the CAUT Endorsement might only be attained by attending the CAUT Academy courses and taking the 4 written tests. However, this is a mis-read of the proposal. The core of the proposal is in bylaws. If you don't have the May supplement you may go to the PTG Page members area, and follow the links - resources, forms and documents, Council 2010, Organizational/LRP: http://www.ptg.org/members/docs/2010/2010_Council_Agenda_Section_4-Organizational-LRP.pdf The only requirements in order to obtain this endorsement are that one be a Registered Piano Technician, and that one pass a written test on CAUT-related subjects. The CAUT Endorsement is designed like a certification, similar to the RPT; preparation for it is not proscribed but a CAUT Academy is offered with comprehensive curriculum. This is similar to the RPT itself, where a variety of paths or combination thereof can lead to the CAUT Endorsement - trade schools, apprenticeships, the Randy Potter course, the PACE lessons. A CAUT Academy curriculum will be developed and offered, and each segment will be followed by written tests. This road to the CAUT Endorsement will be an incredible opportunity to master the knowledge and skills needed for college and university work. However, there are no proscribed courses to obtain the CAUT Endorsement in this proposal. I would expect that all of the excellent training programs - the Theodore Steinway Seminars, the Little Red Schoolhouse, etc, that you've referred to could be of use in preparing for the CAUT Endorsement, as they address many of the skills required in the college and university setting. These courses are limited in their applicant pool, while the PTG does not, and can not place anti-competitive restrictions on its certifications. Further, the CAUT Academy curriculum would be CAUT-comprehensive in nature, unlike anything else available. I would also expect that the CAUT Academy, specifically tailored to the college setting - and not manufacturer-specific - would be an ideal preparation for College and University work, as it will be taught by leading technicians in the field. The time may come when the PTG community would approve of additional testing beyond a written test, but the development of skills tests is a large project. Testing must meet a number of standards, and a process of beta-testing would also be required. Needless to say this has been the subject of considerable discussion in the committee, as well as in conversations with the board and bylaws. It was felt that this approach to CAUT Endorsement requirements would not be onerous or unachievable by qualified members (RPTs). The CAUT Endorsement testing would also provide the candidate with an assessment of areas needing further training or education. But there are only these two requirements - RPT status and the passing of a written test. I hope that you might see that this might satisfy your concerns. Some have considered this a "watered-down" and ineffective proposal, but your arguments actually make the case for the proposal as it is presented, not onerous, not complex, not unattainable, but still a reflection of a commitment to a certain knowledge base, as well as a commitment to continued growth and participation in the CAUT community. The curriculum component of this endorsement is voluntary. Even if the applicant doesn't attend the CAUT Academy, the curriculum is important in that it defines the skills and knowledge base needed for CAUT piano service, and should be an excellent source of CAUT-specific training and education. Anyone who hasn't studied the proposal should look over the curriculum ; they will see the wide range of areas the CAUT technician works in. At present it is only summarized in "regulations" as: The CAUT Workplace: Administrative topics. Concert Tuning and Preparations. Historic instrument Tuning and Maintenance Special Topics in Servicing Institutional Instruments A detailed outline of this curriculum title "Components of Endorsement" was provided last year to council, and I expect that similar supporting documentation in the form of of a beta Policy Handbook with a fleshed-out curriculum will be provided this year, too. Regards, Bill Bill Shull, RPT, M.Mus. CAUT Committee Member In a message dated 5/12/2010 3:23:35 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, tannertuner at bellsouth.net writes: Yes, a certificate of merit from CAUT. Not a doctoral degree in every conceivable facet of the trade plus tangents into other trades. If nothing else, schools might also encourage their tech to attend Yamaha and Steinway training seminars, which the CAUT degree would not, could not recognize. And since there is no way for a CAUT endorsement to recognize other training programs considered highly respected and viable by university faculties and performing artists, it renders the PTG CAUT endorsement uncredible. Jeff ----- Original Message ----- From: "David Ilvedson" <ilvey at sbcglobal.net> To: <tannertuner at bellsouth.net> Sent: Tuesday, May 11, 2010 8:32 PM Subject: Re: [CAUT] Preaching to the choir;was University of Idaho Piano Tech Vacancy > If schools want to do on the job training, that's what they'll do. They > do need to be aware of the talent pool out there and a certificate of > merit from CAUT could start their education. PTG/CAUT needs to be > bombarding music departments with this info. If nothing else, schools > might require their tech to attend classes with PTG... > > David Ilvedson, RPT > Pacifica, CA 94044 -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://ptg.org/pipermail/caut.php/attachments/20100515/cb131780/attachment-0001.htm>
This PTG archive page provided courtesy of Moy Piano Service, LLC