"...my colleages across the country who are content with less were no help... Friends and colleagues... There is nothing enjoyable about going thru a difficult loss and what may seem like a forced change...But... these painful experiences provide motivational fuel. It is these times and trials that motivate us to finally look at what we did wrong...And the truth is, we did do something wrong...We made the decisions that got ourselves into this mess... There is not a person alive who would not want to encourage someone in a difficult situation and transition like Jeff is describing. Why? We all go thru similar battles....I'd be glad to share my most recent screw-ups....Very humiliating though they are. Dan Dallas,TX Trial and Error...Mostly error... On Jun 17, 2008, at 11:53 AM, Jeff Tanner wrote: > Yes. I think that is being a doormat. > > First of all, I did NOT quit in anger. I finally gave up the fight > and my colleages across the country who are content with less were no > help. I quit because I was basically told that the only way to get > change is to be the catalyst for it. I quit because the carrot being > dangled out there kept moving farther and farther away. When I'd > catch up to it and ask for the reward, the carrot moved again. > > As employees, it is encumbent upon each one of us to insist on > salaries that are more reflective of the value of what we do, because > it affects everyone else who pursues this work. Yes, if we just > accept what they want to offer and be happy with it, that's being a > doormat, as a collective whole, because we owe it to our > colleagues elsewhere to help support their earnings ability. Our > profession is quite unique in this way. We are so isolated and job > openings occur relatively infrequently compared to other professions > and so we must band together in some way to benefit the whole. We are > as strong as our weakest link, and as long as we have qualified > technicians who accept lower salaries because they don't share the > same perspective on economic issues, then we are a weak chain. > > Different perspective on economic issues? Either we have a market or > we don't. If we are going to market our profession as one that earns > a good living (see the PTG brochure on becoming a piano technician), > it is incumbent upon us to support that, even if we do not require it > ourselves. Just because one person can live on a lower salary is not > the reason to accept it. There are others who depend on our > profession to actually earn a living. The reason Wim's son, the CPA > makes half a million is because other CPAs have worked to increase the > market value of their profession. If other CPA's just said, "I'm at a > point in life I can live on $50K," then that's what that market would > evolve towards. In the private sector, if we have a market of > technicians who have built their businesses based on a certain tuning > fee, and you have new people move into the market tuning for half > price, in a climate where the costs of everything else continues to go > up, that is an example of how people in your own profession are > cutting their own throats. > > > I really don't hear from my self-employed friends who stay busy full > time that they'd like to increase their workload and earn half of what > their making. Many of our colleages would like to do a college job, > but see the pay as degrading to their skill level and hard work. > These college jobs keep coming open over and over and over not because > we have different perspectives on economic issues, but because the > work requires twice the effort for half the pay. > > If the trade offs were equitable, I could agree with you. But after > the trade-offs, we're still 10's of thousands apart (about $30K or > so). Wim's example was misleading because it didn't figure in the > costs to the employee, nor the tax advantages of being self-employed. > > As I said, I left my position, in part, for the benefit of the > profession. The next person who comes here will enjoy a higher salary > band. Yes, I'm frustrated that they made no effort to do that for me, > but it was made fairly clear that the only way that change could be > made was if I turned in my resignation. That's just the way the > system works. I suppose I could reapply for the position, but I've > put too much effort into creating something for me to land on when I > resigned that I can't go back now. > > I remember well the pressures of a house payment, kids in school, etc. > and I’m glad I’ve lived past that. > > Not all the rest of us are financially independent. You must > have gotten to that point during your years you speak of as a > self-employed tech. If I'd stayed on at the university, we'd never > have lived past that. You imply that you are "past" a house payment. > Our was getting bigger because of the insufficiency of the salary. I > don't know your age, but I know that the costs of basic > necessities compared to earnings is not what it was even 20 years > ago. There was no way we could have continued, and I know how to live > cheap. > > My take-home is not as great as my former gross receipts as an > independent tech, but somehow I’m living as well or better. > > Well, you must have gotten everything paid for as a self-employed tech > before you switched to being an employee. > > If anything, because of that inequity alone, we owe it to the next > generation of piano technicians to do our part to support the market > for their work. If we approach it with, "I can live cheaper now", > that is letting our next generation down, let alone those across the > country who'd like to be able to pay their bills now. > > These university positions are unique jobs and they clearly are not > for everyone but some of us weirdos are pretty happy doing it. > > It sounds obvious that you'd like to keep it that way. > > I suppose if we worked to get the salaries up, we might have some > competition for our jobs. > > I don't mean to pick on Dave and I really do rebutt his response with > all due respect, but his post epitomizes why university salaries are > what they are. University positions are being taken primarily by > either singles or empty nesters who don't require as much income. > That mischaracterizes the market for our skill. It undermines the > CAUT committee's efforts to establish a CAUT endorsement and creates a > model that makes it impossible for those of us who are family > breadwinners to be able to fit in. > > If that is the collective will of the incumbents in these positions, > then that is fine. But rather than wasting the CAUT committee's time > on creating an endorsement that should have the effect of improving > earnings, let's just put out a statement that says that "Full Time > college technician positions are not intended for people who want to > work hard and improve their skills and earn a good salary. They are > for people who don't require much money to live." > Jeff > >> ----- Original Message ----- >> From: Porritt, David >> To: College and University Technicians >> Sent: Tuesday, June 17, 2008 11:29 AM >> Subject: Re: [CAUT] Louisiana State SOM Position >> >> Jeff: >> >> I hope you’re not saying that those of us who are happy with what we >> are doing, and have a different perspective on economic issues, and >> are aware of whatever trade-offs are involved and don’t quit in anger >> are doormats. I remember well the pressures of a house payment, kids >> in school, etc. and I’m glad I’ve lived past that. SMU has an >> excellent retirement program (I contribute 5%, they contribute 10%) I >> have good health benefits, I work with great musicians who are also >> delightful human beings, I perceive that I am appreciated and my last >> raise confirms it. My take-home is not as great as my former gross >> receipts as an independent tech, but somehow I’m living as well or >> better. >> >> I’m really glad you’ve made the decision to leave USC as it’s been >> obvious that you have been unhappy for a long time. These university >> positions are unique jobs and they clearly are not for everyone but >> some of us weirdos are pretty happy doing it. I hope your >> independent business picks up quickly and that you earn the lifestyle >> you want and need. >> >> dave >> >> David M. Porritt, RPT >> dporritt at smu.edu >> >> From: caut-bounces at ptg.org [mailto:caut-bounces at ptg.org] On Behalf Of >> Jeff Tanner >> Sent: Tuesday, June 17, 2008 9:52 AM >> To: College and University Technicians >> Subject: Re: [CAUT] Louisiana State SOM Position >> >> Yes, I became bitter over time as I realized I'd been lied to and >> misled about the future. I was committed to the university and there >> was no reciprocal commitment. That will make anyone bitter. But if it >> paid enough to live on and there had been a commitment from the >> administration for a real program of maintenance beyond telling the >> guy they hired to just work harder, I would have been quite happy to >> stay there on and on. >> >> But the point is, the earnings situation around the country isn't >> going to get any better until we start standing up for ourselves. As >> long as we are doormats, that is how we will be treated. If we want >> to change it, it starts with us. So, that's what I did. >> >> If you don't want to see change, just keep on with the status quo. >> Jeff >> >> >>> ----- Original Message ----- >>> From: Willem Blees >>> To: caut at ptg.org >>> Sent: Monday, June 16, 2008 9:02 PM >>> Subject: Re: [CAUT] Louisiana State SOM Position >>> >>> >>> Jeff >>> >>> I'm sorry you are so bitter about your job at USC, and I hope you >>> find what you're looking for. >>> >>> Peace >>> >>> Wim -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: text/enriched Size: 16913 bytes Desc: not available Url : https://www.moypiano.com/ptg/caut.php/attachments/20080617/3a045063/attachment.bin
This PTG archive page provided courtesy of Moy Piano Service, LLC