<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.0 Transitional//EN">
<HTML><HEAD>
<META http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; =
charset=iso-8859-1">
<META content="MSHTML 5.50.4522.1800" name=GENERATOR>
<STYLE></STYLE>
</HEAD>
<BODY bgColor=#ffffff>
<DIV><FONT face=Arial size=2>Judge not least ye be judged. =
</FONT></DIV>
<BLOCKQUOTE
style="PADDING-RIGHT: 0px; PADDING-LEFT: 5px; MARGIN-LEFT: 5px; =
BORDER-LEFT: #000000 2px solid; MARGIN-RIGHT: 0px">
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial">----- Original Message ----- </DIV>
<DIV
style="BACKGROUND: #e4e4e4; FONT: 10pt arial; font-color: =
black"><B>From:</B>
<A title=Tompiano@aol.com =
href="mailto:Tompiano@aol.com">Tompiano@aol.com</A>
</DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>To:</B> <A =
title=pianotech@ptg.org
href="mailto:pianotech@ptg.org">pianotech@ptg.org</A> </DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Sent:</B> Saturday, June 28, 2003 =
4:51
AM</DIV>
<DIV style="FONT: 10pt arial"><B>Subject:</B> Re: OT More Realistic =
Test was
RE: tuning exam in U.S.</DIV>
<DIV><BR></DIV><FONT face=arial,helvetica><FONT lang=0 =
face=Arial size=2
FAMILY="SANSSERIF">Which brings me to the point I have been trying =
to make for
years.<BR>If the piano technology industry really wants to get serious =
about
increasing the amt. of Associates upgrading to RPT status they need to =
implement the following:<BR>l. The PTG would be point themselves in a =
much
better direction if they consider having a paid staff of CTEs =
(say a yr.
part time job assignment) who would do nothing but give exams from =
state to
state. You would have more CTEs who would justify the amount of time =
needed,
plus the examiners would become more efficient at maximizing their =
time.
<BR>If they would have a rotational staff of 12 who agree to make =
themselves
available for so many dates and locations, a systematic approach to =
offering
the exam could begin taking place. CTEs would justify their time =
because it
wouldn't interfere (as much) within their earning power.<BR>2. Put a =
time
limit on the grace period one could remain as an associate, say 3
yrs.<BR>After that point put up - or shut up.<BR>3. Raise the exam =
fees to
respectable levels associated with a professional certification. =
Let the
fee reflect the importance of the upgrade.<BR>Obviously this would =
never fly
as their would be a drastic drop in membership and the Guild would =
probably
end up shooting themselves in the foot. The Guild is far too =
fragile to
make such a leap. But if there were to be a drastic revamping of the =
current
system, that would be my call.<BR>Point being, I think in the long =
run, you
would have dictated a new order of progressing up through the ranks. =
Then RPT
status would have some clout behind because it would be one the =
hurdles many
would HAVE to go through.<BR>There are many ways to shoot holes this =
plan, but
if you the industry is ready to get serious, this is one of the =
possibilities
they'll have to consider.<BR>Tom Servinsky, RPT</FONT>
</FONT></BLOCKQUOTE></BODY></HTML>