<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN"> <html> <head> <title>RE: [CAUT] CAUT Endorsement (was Re: Job Opening, U. of Michigan,Ann Arbor)</title> <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=us-ascii"/> <style type="text/css">  </style> </head> <body> <blockquote cite="" type="cite"> <p align="left">I don't buy that...PTG is us.   RPT or Associate.   The whole idea was improve the overall quality of piano tuners.  If a tech becomes a member he is more likely to go to meetings and conventions and upgrade his skills.   I remember my Craftsman test eons ago...I tuned a horribly out of tune piano and the "Craftsman" said OK, you in.   This was in North Dakota.   When I took the test the 2nd time California, I just had to do a few repairs, file a hammer and I can't even remember if I tuned a piano...I was established...sort of.  I finally took the RPT test and it was a much improved test of skills.   </p> <div>"it used to be that you had to actually prove skills via a rebuilt or restrung piano</div> <div>with a new block and attending finish work. RPT is paperwork albeit tuning skills."</div> <div> </div> <div>Does anyone else remember this testing for Craftsman?  I sure don't.  </div> <p align="left">David Ilvedson, RPT<br/>Pacifica, CA 94044<br/><br/></p> <div style="padding-right: 5px; padding-left: 5px; padding-bottom: 5px; border-left: #000000 3px solid; padding-top: 5px"> <hr/>Original message<br/>From: "Jon Page" <jonpage@comcast.net> </jonpage@comcast.net><br/>To: caut@ptg.org<br/>Received: 10/12/2007 6:51:26 AM<br/>Subject: [CAUT] CAUT Endorsement (was Re: Job Opening, U. of Michigan,Ann Arbor)<br/><br/> <blockquote cite="" type="cite"> <p align="left"><font face="Arial" color="#000000">"Our consensus is that we should test for the skill level appropriate </font></p> </blockquote> <blockquote cite="" type="cite"><font face="Arial" color="#000000">for a concert tuner. What does this mean? In simplest terms:</font></blockquote> <div><br/></div> <div>These tests are good for proving one's ability but when you stop and look at it,</div> <div>who's going to say they want to jump through these hoops for half pay. It's like</div> <div>asking how long can you hold your breath while standing on you head in</div> <div>2 feet of muck., so the guy who holds it longer gets the job.   OOooooooo</div> <div>sign me up for qualifying.  It only proves that one has a high threshold for BS.</div> <div><br/></div> <div>I don't mean to sound negative but an improved skills test is a result of the</div> <div>'dumbing-down' of the classification "Craftsman" from by-gone years.  RPT</div> <div>is (pardon the expression) just to keep 'asses in the seats'. When I started,</div> <div>the requirements to attain this status was far beyond what qualifies for RPT.</div> <div>it used to be that you had to actually prove skills via a rebuilt or restrung piano</div> <div>with a new block and attending finish work. RPT is paperwork albeit tuning skills.</div> <div><br/></div> <div>Personally, I have no desire to attain RPT status because I do not like to or</div> <div>want to tune pianos. So why take a test to qualify me for something I am not</div> <div>interested in??  Heck, some of my workload is fixing the work of RPT's!!!!!</div> <div><br/></div> <div>The Happy Associate,</div> <x-sigsep> </x-sigsep>  <pre>-- </pre> <div><br/>Regards,<br/><br/>Jon Page</div> </div> </blockquote> </body> </html>