diatribe -Reply

[Ron Torrella]

On Tue, 15 Nov 1994, Bill Spurlock, RPT wrote:

> We finally have a logo which contains the words, "Registered Piano
> Technician", literature explaining what an RPT is and that Associate
> members have not been tested, and we have a single name for our
> franchised category.

I saw a PTG ad for the *very* first time in the November/December 1994
issue of _Piano&Keyboard_ ("R.P.T., The member of the PTG who carries this
designation has made a commitment to quality.  He or she has completed a
comprehensive three-part examination--the only industry-wide standard
available--in the tuning, regulation, repair and maintenance of fine
pianos like yours.") There are many technicians (RTPs) who *never* tested
because the tests didn't exist.  Since the bylaws do not list exemptions,
when will the Board either put in a grandfather clause or inform those who
haven't tested that they must do so or face demotion to Associate level?
I don't see how anyone can be critical of those Associates who, for
whatever reason, haven't upgraded to RPT when we have RPTs who by Guild
definition aren't RPTs.  Also, there are Associate members who are
strictly rebuilders, who do not tune pianos (perhaps rough tuning, but not
well enough to make it a part of their income), who are denied RPT status
because they couldn't pass or will not take the tuning portion of the
three-part test.  Finally, what about the Associate member who has no
desire to be a voting member, hold office locally, regionally, or
nationally, serve on committees, and doesn't find it necessary to verbally
advertise the status of their membership in the guild?  The Guild doesn't
appear to be poised to run non-members and/or Associates out of the
business, so what incentive is there for an Associate or non-member to
become an RPT?

I know that these issues have been hashed and rehashed, but there doesn't
appear to be an equitable solution in place.  If what presently exists is
supposed to be "equitable", I'm interested in hearing the rationale.
Perhaps reading the minutes from Council meetings would be beneficial--if
they're available.

(Note: The last time I asked a Board member about these and a few other
issues--it was at the Texas convention--I was *rudely* given the third
degree.  If that is the kind of treatment one must endure when asking
questions about Guild membership policies then perhaps the Guild would be
better off without the likes of me because the more I become involved the
more I ask questions.  I realize that the only way to make changes--*if*
there are to be changes--is to be directly involved so non-membership
doesn't appear to be the answer.)

The perception I had of "Registered Craftsmen" (many, many years ago) was
that these were folks who had to jump through some pretty high hoops in
order to become members and that even to be an Apprentice member was a big
step in the direction of becoming a respected technician.  Some of my
first interactions with Guild members, though, were bubble-bursting
experiences.  Asking questions about specific technical procedures became
embarrassing and was often unrewarding.  I think things have changed
somewhat for the better, but that perception of what being a member of the
Guild meant may never be the same.  I know that the actions of a few
shouldn't be the measure of the whole, but it was a small world back then
(before the Internet, you know) and those were my "formulative years."
Some things are hard to forget.

I guess I've rambled on, but now you know where my cynicism comes from.

I *really* am on the fence about this education issue.  I regularly
receive telephone calls and email from folks who want to know how to
become piano technicians.  What am I supposed to tell them?  "Go buy a
subscription to the _Journal_.  It has all the information you need to get
started and it's cheaper than becoming an Associate member."?  The
argument that "reading the instructions isn't all there is to becoming a
technician" doesn't hold water when there are probably thousands of
technicians out there who haven't spent a dime on Guild membership and
probably never will.

I hope the ongoing discussion doesn't dissuade readers who are non-members
from joining the Guild.  It is not my intent to bash the Guild and I hope
my questions and jabs at issues aren't taken as such.

Ron Torrella                  "Dese are de conditions dat prevail."
School of Music                           --Jimmy Durante
University of Illinois