<HTML>I see three important areas the CAUT credential thread= s are touching on: 1.  Certification of advanced technical skills 2.  Credentialing an increased body of specialized knowledge in the CAU= T field 3.  Successful marketing of the CAUT PTG. I haven't neglected the $ issue - see below. Frankly, we are not doing so well in any of these areas, and as long as we c= ontinue to argue the chicken/egg, we will never get started.  There is no doubt that a CAUT credential will not be primarily an advanced t= echnical certification.  But I believe it should require attendance in = a broad range of technical classes which ensure exposure to the subject area= s (both PTG Annual Institute and mfg's workshops, as Fred noted).  That= is why I made it clear that the CAUT credential would qualify the technicia= n to spec rebuilding work and supervise the vending of rebuilding work.&nbsp= ; Not necessarily to actually perform that work. The certification of a higher technical specialization is something differen= t.  This is a huge challenge which up until now has not had any takers,= but is a cause which I believe in;  if the PTG ever develops specializ= ed certification, the CAUT would benefit.  The Long Range Planning Comm= ittee is taking the right approach here, which is to address the broader, un= derlying issues of PTG identity and purpose first, then work with the organi= zation on how to implement these in our organization. But the body of CAUT knowledge and the quasi-administrative skills required = for effective college and university piano service - these things are essent= ial to being a CAUT professional.   The credential coursework will= provide this. And consistent, persistent marketing of the CAUT RPT has not yet taken place= .   Of course we know that word-of-mouth is a primary means by whi= ch techs are hired;  but not the only one, and it doesn't happen in a v= acuum, nor is it always reliable, either.  As I previously mentioned, s= chools hire dealers with less experienced tuners, they hire tuners without t= raining and experience, etc - it is up to our profession to address these pr= oblems and work to upgrade the standards in universities and their state adm= inistrations, and this won't happen until we start the ball rolling and keep= it rolling. $?  We have been extremely resistant, as an organization, to any discus= sion about this.   But I agree that it should be on the table for = the CAUT committee to address in the next few years, at least as a study - W= im, I know you won't let us off the hook on this one.  We are premature= to discuss it seriously now.  Let's move forward with a CAUT credentia= l, a CAUT PTG curriculum, and a successful marketing of the CAUT RPT to the = universities.   Regional and other economic forces will still prev= ail, as they do in general to skew salaries and contract figures across the = country.  But I can't imagine piano technicians forming a labor union, = nor would it be likely to succeed if we did (though there is something primi= tively appealing to me about the idea).  It seems to me the best way to= address the salary issue is to address the credentialing issue and successf= ully market the CAUT over a period of time. Bill Shull   The greater challenge of providing advanced technical certificationIn= a message dated 6/14/03 1:39:20 PM Pacific Daylight Time, Tompiano@aol.com = writes: <BLOCKQUOTE TYPE=CITE style="BORDER-LEFT: #0000ff 2px solid; MARGIN-LEFT= : 5px; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px">Yes, but without the accredited= recognition equivalence of a BS, MBA, or Ph.D. degree, this will never impa= ct the way (in which) schools evaluate one's performance and salary ladder. = Look at any school's systems pay scale and it is very clearly spelled out fo= r faculty members with BS degrees, compared to MBA, and Ph.D. degrees. Profe= ssional staff degrees go into this foggy area which is nebulous at best. Lets face, we work in a profession which has no entry level standards and ex= tremely vague references with regard to professional standards..other than R= PT. Which I argue still doesn't impact the public to the degree in which we = think it does. Don't get me wrong I would love no love nothing more to see our profession e= levated to heights more deserving. But we have a long way to go to convince = a public which still views this profession, in general, as a so-so way of ma= king a living. As long as someone can read the first page of a piano tuning book, get some = business cards made, hang a shingle, and then charge the same amt. as the mo= st experience tech in the area, you got a problem. On the upswing of this argument is the serious piano playing public does und= erstand the training needed in order for us to work at the level that we do.= They do appreciate the fine nuances a good tech can bring to a given piano.= It's another issue altogether to be able to establish accredited credential= s which can be used across the board to evaluate one's performance. We have a long way to go on this one. Tom Servinsky, RPT </BLOCKQUOTE> </HTML>