Poor Technician Workmanship Question (kinda long)

[jolly roger]

Hi Gina,
                Thank's for showing some clarity on how the system works.   
Members rights committee, before the ethics committee?   The very name is
to imply the consumer is up against a brick wall.

If we are to be a truly proffessional organization.   We need a more direct
method of bringing consumer complaints to the organisation.   That group
being empowered to investigate immediately, and not get bogged down with
the members right's, before proceeding.

We need this to be 1. Effective at a local level. With the power to remove
or suspend a member for mal practice.
                             2. We need the organisation to take
responsibility for the actions of it's members.  A worth while cost in time
and effort for honorable people.
                             3. The National level committee's, should be
there to formulate a workable policy, and act as the final board of appeal.
 A committee spread all across the continent, is hardly in a position to
completely investigate such a complaint fairly and quickly.
                             
If I appear angry, I am.   Having been ripped off so many times by RPT's.
With poor quality work, and sub standard ethics.  I am longing to see some
real policing of standards.

Because of the low quality of workmanship that I have experienced over the
years,   I made myself several promises.
1.  To train myself to do better, and to continually strive to improve.
Slowly I'm getting there, and the high bar is continually being raised
2.  To work and make sure that those around me share the same attitude.
3.  To share and exchange what little knowlege I have to effect
improvements. I think my actions speak for themself.
4.  Protect the consumer as well as humanly possible.  They are ulimately
our employers.

Sorry for my rant.
Roger






At 09:47 AM 8/25/01 -0400, you wrote:
>
>----- Original Message -----
>From: <JIMRPT@AOL.COM>
>To: <pianotech@ptg.org>
>Sent: Saturday, August 25, 2001 8:14 AM
>Subject: Re: Poor Technician Workmanship Question (kinda long)
>
>
>> there is where it should be handled...not on the internet.
>> Jim Bryant (FL)
>
>Jim, Joe, Roger, Terry, All,
>
>I agree that this should not be handled here; however, it is good that Terry
>is receiving some guidance as to how to follow up.
>
>As one of those who worked creating PTG's new disciplinary code, may I offer
>some suggestions:
>
>I would not recommend involving the RVP as that person could be directly
>involved in the appeal process, should the matter eventually go to trial.
>Neither would I recommend involving any individual member of the Ethics
>Committee since it would be the Ethics Committee who would conduct a trial,
>should the matter go that far. To keep the process as fair as possible, we
>should keep those individuals who may become part of the decision process
>removed from as much of the preliminary process as possible.
>
>Any PTG member or any Chapter may seek advice from the Chair of the Ethics
>Committee, who as part of his/her duties, may advise any member on any
>ethical situation. The Ethics Committee itself may only become involved in a
>situation based on the recommendation of the Members Rights Committee.
>
>The Chair of the Members Rights Committee is the person any member, or
>Chapter representative, should contact to begin any kind of investigation
>into any ethical situation concerning PTG. This Committee determines if PTG
>itself should become involved. If the MRC determines PTG should become
>involved, it will then attempt to resolve the situation between the parties.
>This mediation step usually can resolve almost any conflict.
>
>Should a resolution at that step not be achievable, the MRC makes the
>determination if the matter should be referred on to the Ethics Committee.
>Upon receiving such recommendation from the MRC, the Ethics Committee would
>then conduct a full investigation, including a trial if the EC deems it
>necessary.
>
>The process is about as fair as a group of people could make it. The two
>foremost aspects, imho, is to remember that the process protects PTG, not
>any member per se; and all legal matters are outside the domain of PTG
>itself.
>
>We might want to consider further discussion, if any, move to ptg-l.
>
>Gina
>