tuning and teaching

[Kent Swafford]

On 4/27/02 8:19 AM, "Wimblees@aol.com" <Wimblees@aol.com> wrote:

> The concept that a piano tuner has to work full time to be considered a
> "highly-skilled professionals", however, doesn't give credit to those
> technicians who choose not to be full time, but have decided, for their own
> benefit, or whatever other reason, to work part time as a piano
> tuner/technician, and part time at another profession.  That's a choice an
> individual makes.

I said no such thing, Wim. You make your points; let me make mine.

My comment was in regard to how the PTG as an organization should do
promotion on behalf of its members. There is a clear problem among our
members who are employed part-time in situations where the workload would
actually call for full-time employment. And worse of course, there is also a
problem of techs who are nominally employed full time but paid only
part-time wages and expected to make up the difference in private business.
This problem deserves PTG organizational attention, IMO.

> Before accepting the position here at UA, I had always dreamed of someday
> working for a university as a piano tech and as a teacher. I like doing both.
> I am working full time as a piano tech, and am allowed, by university policy,
> to only teach two classes per semester. How I spend my time is my decision. If
> I choose to work 37.5 hours a week as a piano tech, do 3 or 4 outside tuning
> on top of that, and spend 8 hours a week as a teacher, does that make me less
> of a professional at either job?

I wish to make clear that I made no such suggestion and find it a bother to
have to say so.

You are happy with your situation; this means to me that your situation
warrants no PTG promotional attention. We should concentrate on those areas
which _are_ clearly problematic for our members.

The endeavor of piano technology is of sufficient worth to society and
requires skills high enough to warrant more fully employing its
practitioners, lest the low rewards of developing these skills cause more
and more to leave the field or never enter the field in the first place.

The CAUT committee is doing good work with regard to the contract tech, and
I believe that PTG should encourage the CAUT committee to continue its
efforts to improve the situation of the contract tech. (So, as far as PTG
promotional efforts are concerned, part-time techs _are_ covered. Techs are
expected to have private businesses to "supplement" their institutional
employment; perhaps it would be better for the tech to have the college
simply be a customer to the tech's private business rather than be a
part-time employer.)

Soap box mode off.

Kent