Eric said I think the people who pass through this program will have a better sense of self-worth and more bargaining chips than someone who hasn’t and will in all likelihood be able to bargain for a better starting salary. I don't know how you did it Eric. but it seems that the school has the upper hand at the bargaining table. If you ask for more money, but they won't give it, I don't know too many techs, except Jeff, who would call their bluff and walk out. I certainly wouldn't have done that, and I don't think too many other techs would either. Were you ready to walk out if the Dean had not given you a raise and higher classification? I asked for, but never got, a raise higher than cost of living, and the school even paid for my Steinway training. So they know I was better at my job from one year to the next. The bottom line is this. A good relationship with the department chair, the piano faculty, and the dean will help when it's time to get a raise, or jump to a higher classification. But schools are going to give techs a raise only if there is money. The certificate will be a nice piece of paper, but it won't do any good to get a raise. Threatening to quit will not get you that rasie either, because there are too many tuners, including RPT's, out there ready to take your place. Wim -----Original Message----- From: Jeff Tanner <tannertuner at bellsouth.net> To: caut at ptg.org Sent: Fri, Jun 19, 2009 2:43 pm Subject: Re: [CAUT] Ca ut Certification Hey Eric, We are friends -- I consider us to be very good friends, often on the same page -- so I don't want this to turn into a war. Please respect my comments as results of years of research and observation. No. I don't think I don't miss the point. It IS most definitely about a piece of paper. I was in on all the CAUT committee discussions of why the idea should move forward, and it all had to do with "credentials" and how that relates to music faculty and the way they value each other. We are not music faculty, and even if we were, we would still be earning half of our private sector market value (benefits included) WITH this endorsement. But music faculty rules as they pertain to HR do not apply to us as classified employees. If we want to forego the protections afforded to us by labor laws of the United States, by all means, lets proceed towards an initiative to declassify us. But I don't think any of us wants to work more than 40 hours a week for 130 bucks a day (5 days, that is). It was my perception that the CAUT committee is of the opinion that salaries are low because CAUT skills are not what they should be. I can't disagree more. Anybody who can improve a spinet and get referrals for their work can make $300-$400 a day pretty easily. The best CAUTs among us are doing concert work and high level rebuilding for half that. I don't care how bad you r tuning and regulation skills suck, in most CAUT situations, if you can tune a unison, you can improve the conditions of the pianos, and for just that alone, you're worth more than most F/T CAUTs are paid. Regardless of how techs feel about their skills, F/T CAUTs are ALREADY compensated well below 50% of our market value -- INCLUDING BENEFITS. That has less to do with how we feel about our skills and more to do with what SO MANY TECHS are currently willing to conceed to get access to lower cost (NOT FREE) health care and retirement benefits. If we could simply instill some confidence that anybody who can improve the condition of the worst practice pianos is worth what F/T CAUTs are paid, that alone would improve the situation. Techs who KNOW they have skills need to be laying the ground work, JUST LIKE YOU AND I HAVE. That is how salary progress will be made. That, and preaching to each other that it doesn't matter that we don't have a doctorate in piano performance, there are 100 of them to each of us and we have a higher value just by that reality alone. The skills improvement we get from the CAUT endorsment will matter more only as a political instrument among ourselves. Not in the hiring process. Remember. The fellow who replaced me has never even been a PTG member, and he got a 15% pay raise over what I was making before the job was even advertised. I think that those of you who are still somew hat optimistic about the pay-grade system must be in states which haven't yet switched over to the "job family" system of employee classification. This system which most states are gradually switching to makes accurate assignment of our particular skills more difficult, not less. It uses FEWER job classifications in order to "simplifiy" the system and eliminate "creative" job description assignment to class. If your state hasn't yet moved to that system, it's coming. That's how states are saving money in the HR department. (i.e., they're not increasing salaries, they're reducing them) The "leverage" exerted when I left came from the realization the dean came to when he came to the conclusion that a good tech wasn't willing to work for what he'd been paying. I'm still baffled as to why he was willing to extend that courtesy to a tech who had not proven his work, snubbing one who had, but that's bureacracy for you. But I need to disclaim that I can't foresee any further reclassification of that position in this system. I'm actually quite surprised they were able to move it from "Program Coordinator" to "Program Manager". The dean claimed that "supervising employees" was the difference, but that also was a characteristic of the lower classification. But this much is for certain: There's no higher classification that currently exists in the SC system to move it to. Look, I am ALL FOR a program which offers a CAUT the opportunity to improve skills. But, you know, don't we do that on a daily basis already? Aren't we already doing that when we attend any convention? national or regional? What, really, is this "piece of paper" going to do for us that we aren't already doing? The way I see it, the only issues that separate CAUTs from other piano technicians are politics and inventory management. Everything else is the same, isn't it? If we want a more advanced classification of piano technician, why don't we just call it that rather than disguising it as a CAUT endorsement? As far as the physical and mental ramifications of tuning spinets and old uprights, I can assure you that the peace of mind of knowing you have more control over being able to make the house payment by the end of the week far outweighs any physical and mental detriment caused by being able to do so. Look, when you know you have the potential of making $400 or $500 tomorrow instead of $130, the mental detriment caused by what the work is performed on fades tremendously. Jeff ----- Original Message ----- From: Wolfley, Eric (wolfleel) To: 'caut at ptg.org' Sent: Friday, June 19, 2009 5:11 PM Subject: Re: [CAUT] Caut Certification Jeff, I think you miss the point…this isn’t about a piece of paper. Maybe if techs felt better about their skills, their work and worth they would hold out for more money…none of this happe ns overnight, it will have to be incremental.. I think the people who pass through this program will have a better sense of self-worth and more bargaining chips than someone who hasn’t and will in all likelihood be able to bargain for a better starting salary. This is leverage. I think you’re wrong to think more education will only make you a better tech. Hopefully, it will also make you a smarter one when it comes to working the salary system. We all know about the pay-grade system…it sucks. But if we all are working towards putting it more in line with reality, things will change one school at a time. I have moved my position up 3 pay grades since I’ve been here and my assistant’s up one grade. I’ve used every bit of leverage I could to raise it the first 2 grades, but the last raise was because I was able to convince the HR dept. that my position warranted it and they CREATED the new position. This even took place at a time of significant budget cuts. This is the grade where my successor will start. This is progress, no??? This is the reality on which I’m basing my faith that our educational efforts will pay dividends in the long run. I don’t really understand what leverage you might have exerted to get your position changed AFTER you left, but it sounds like somebody really benefitted from all your labors. Eric BTW, I would need at LEAST 6 figures to be able to afford the mental and physical health ramifications of tuning spinets and old uprights all day, every day for 50 weeks a year… Eric Wolfley, RPT Director of Piano Services College-Conservatory of Music University of Cincinnati From: caut-bounces at ptg.org [mailto:caut-bounces at ptg.org] On Behalf Of Jeff Tanner Sent: Friday, June 19, 2009 3:28 PM To: caut at ptg.org Subject: Re: [CAUT] Caut Certification ----- Original Message ----- From: Joe Goss To: caut at ptg.org Sent: Thursday, June 18, 2009 12:24 AM Subject: Re: [CAUT] Caut Certification Hi It would be a bargaining chip the bean counters could better relate to. The more letters after your name the smarter you are supposed to be Taint so but------- Joe Goss BSMusEd MMusEd RPT imatunr at srvinet.com www.mothergoosetools.com Hi Joe, all, With the highest respect due... I think this is the misconception that the CAUT endorsement is based on. Unfortunately, it isn't based in reality. The Human Resources job classification system doesn't allow for it to be. The unfortunate reality is that there is no way for HR to recognize any difference between a candidate endorsed by PTG and one who just read a few books and started tuning last week. The salary band is the same for both, and it is too low for both. What the CAUT committee is trying to "create" is something the search committees already expect we are supposed to live up to, and they still think so little of us that they are still offering full time positions at $40K for a high level concert tech and thinking that is a great salary for a non-tenure track position, while techs tuning spinets and old uprights can make six figures. Job descriptions are one thing. Job classifications are another thing all together. One can write a job description for a piano technician that outshines the presidency of the United States. But if there isn't an existing job classification that will adequately accommodate it, you are unfortunately stuck with overqualified people in a job class that is below their qualifications. That is where we are - ALREADY. You can't put a job description for a janitor, no matter how well written, into a job class for medical doctors. The CAUT endorsement is a wonderful concept for self-improvement. In that regard I have no opposition to the idea. But it will have zero effect on the salary situation of full time piano technicians, short or long term. The reality is that an RPT (or equivalent, and yes, it exists) with the right attitude can develop all the skills necessary for a CAUT job in the first 6 months on the job. I was scared to death when I took the South Carolina job, but within 6 months I had developed a confidence level in my skills I'd not had in the 14 years prior. But by that point, th e faculty had absolutely no concern as to whether or not I was an RPT (and I wasn't at the time). They just knew they liked my work. The only thing that will ever affect the salary situation is leverage. And the other faculty members will tell you the same thing. The way they get pay increases is by applying for other positions that pay more and going back to their deans and saying "look, match this salary offer or I'm leaving." We can't really do that because that really doesn't exist for us. The only alternative is self-employment, and you can't show them a salary offer for that. You have to threaten to quit and be prepared when they call your bluff. I quit my position after working hard for almost 10 years to prove my worth. AFTER I quit, they did what I had been asking for for years: Reclassified the salary to a higher band, increased STARTING pay for the next incumbent 15% more than my final salary and reduced responsibility to 1/3 of what I had been responsible for. And the guy they hired has never been a PTG member. That's how you make improvements to the situation. Leverage. More education and training might make you a little better tech. But it won't help your salary. Jim, your $2K per tech idea is right on the money -- but it won't be because of a CAUT endorsement. It will be because techs start insisting on higher salaries. Let=2 0me say it plainly -- THEY ARE NOT GOING TO OFFER YOU MORE MONEY BECAUSE YOU'VE EARNED YET ONE MORE PIECE OF PAPER SAYING THE PTG ENDORSES YOUR WORK. THEY WILL OFFER YOU MORE MONEY ONLY IF YOU INSIST ON IT. Fred Sturm wrote (about tuning): Determining "what matters and what doesn't matter" is a fundamental part of becoming a skilled professional. If we spend a lot of our energy pursuing perfections beyond "what matters" and in realms that "don't matter," we are wasting that energy. Goodness knows, there is always more to do than there is time to do it. We need to focus on "what matters." Wow! Fred, I couldn't agree more. This profound concept might be the fundamental concept of professionalism. It certainly also applies to improving the circumstances for salaried college piano technicians. Jeff Tanner -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: <http://ptg.org/pipermail/caut.php/attachments/20090619/6d9826fd/attachment-0001.htm>
This PTG archive page provided courtesy of Moy Piano Service, LLC