Workload formula

[Richard West]

---------------------- multipart/alternative attachment
We shouldn't forget that the workload formula is in the appendix, and
although it is important, we shouldn't put undue emphasis on the
formula.    The body of the document tries to describe what elements
make up the task of taking care of an inventory of pianos.  This is the
most important aspect of the Guidelines; the workload formula is
secondary.  I don't mean to dimish the formula's important because as I
read it, the formula attempts to describe the elements that affect a
technician's ability to meet the tasks outlined in the body of the
Guidelines.

I mention this because we shouldn't lose sight of our primary task--to
define clearly what it takes to maintain a piano or group of pianos.
Our ability to make this definition clear is what in essence determines
our job description.  If, for example, I was hired only as a tuner, I
could tune all the pianos here monthly.  But there's more to maintaining
a piano than just tuning and that's reflected in my job description.
Our task is to try to get schools to understand that piano care involves
many things and that there are very few people who know how to deliver
those things competently.  It's my feeling that any full-time position
should justify a minimum $40,000 salary with no outside work. The
Guidelines can help us clarify and define our responsibilities such that
it's clear to those around us that we're highly skilled and highly
specialized and therefore deserve to be paid accordingly.  We are not
custodians!

But first we need to educate ourselves.  IMHO one of the main uses of
the Guidelines is to educate technicians.  If we don't know what being a
college or university technician is all about, then we may look at a job
that promises $20,000 annually for tuning 200 pianos a couple of times
during the school year and believe that sounds pretty good.  We may take
that job and then find out about the pitfalls later.

So few people know what it takes to maintain a piano over its lifetime.
Most people inside and outside the institutional setting have been
taught that a piano needs to be tuned 2 to 4 times a year, and that's
about it.  Why don't institutions and private piano owners know that a
piano needs to be regulated every 5 to 10 years or at least once in the
time that an owner has the piano?  The education process is a difficult
one.  But when a school is having trouble with pianos and needs answers,
that's when we need to be prepared and that's when knowing the
Guidelines becomes most important.  That's why the Guidelines are
invaluable.  What an adminstrator first needs to know is what is
required to maintain a group of pianos over a number of years and then
the administrator needs to know what helps or hinders a technician from
meeting those requirements.

The reason the Guidelines can appear to be self-serving is that we too
often look at what helps or hinders a technician (the workload formula)
rather than looking at what it takes to maintain an inventory. I know
the two are related, but it's a question of emphasis.  We need to always
start with what it takes to keep a piano working.  But we need to also
keep refining the formula and in that I applaud the current discussions
and Fred Sturm's diligence.

Richard West

PS:  Do you all have job descriptions?  Have you ever sat down and
figured out what percent of your time is devoted to each item of the
description?  That can be an eye opening experience.





Wimblees@aol.com wrote:

> In a message dated 5/29/02 11:19:14 AM Central Daylight Time,
> jab367@email.byu.edu writes:
>
>
>
>> I'm refering to the abilities
>> and experience of the technician. Where some technicians are very
>> slow and
>> methodical others are extremely efficient and fast.
>
> When I did a survey many years ago, I found tuning times varied from
> 30 minutes to 2 hours. And these were all "experienced" RPT's.
> Regulation and repair times varied considerably also. If I followed
> the work time pamphlet put out by the PTG, I would get bored. I seem
> to be able to work at a pace almost twice as fast as what is
> recommended.
>
> The problem you brought up, I think, is the same with the
> administrative time I referred to earlier. Some techs do not have to
> worry about administrative work. Other have to spend considerable time
> on it. It all depends on each individual situation, and how much
> detailed paper work is required in each situation.
>
> Not to blow my own horn on this, but this is where a formula I devised
> might be better suited. Although the CAUT formula gives an overall
> idea of how many techs are needed, etc., a time factor formula can be
> much easier adapted to each individual person and situation. While I
> can record 30 minutes to do a tuning, you can adjust the formula to 90
> minutes.
>
> But the formula as it is, should be taken as an average. If you are a
> slow worker, recognize that, and either make adjustments, or try to
> learn to work faster. If you are a fast worker, take some time off.
>
> Just my opinion.
>
> Wim

---------------------- multipart/alternative attachment
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: https://www.moypiano.com/ptg/caut.php/attachments/42/f7/cd/cf/attachment.htm

---------------------- multipart/alternative attachment--