Dear Journal readers, Since my last letter I have received dozens of e-mails and phone calls from PTG members expressing concern about the changes to the Journal implemented by the present PTG Board of Directors. The vast majority of these massages expressed support for what we, Chris and I, have been doing to help create the Journal. We both feel uplifted and gratified by this outpouring of support and send our deepest gratitude. In addition to having a lot of work to do here in the shop and the studio we have been so overwhelmed by the number of messages that we have not responded to each of you individually as we should. I hope that this message, if it reaches all of you, will in small measure rectify this lapse. While mort of you understood and sympathized with my situation a few just didn’t get it. For their sake I will attempt to simplify the situation with an analogy. Let’s say you are employed by a music school to service their pianos. You just signed a one year contract to perform these duties. You have worked at the school for a number of years and you have received praise and support by both the faculty and the students. One morning you arrive on campus and see an ad on the bulletin board or in the school paper. It states that the administration is looking for a technician to fill your job. What do you do? Some of you assumed that I have been in behind the scenes discussions to work out my differences with the current PTG board. Unfortunately this just never happened. I have been kept in the dark as have all of you. They hide behind their silence but their actions speak for them. As I said in my last message they conducted a clandestine search for my replacement last year. They discontinued our editorial meetings and they have dismissed every new idea I have had for further improvements to the Journal. The way the present PTG board operates is like mushroom farming: keep them in the dark, pile compost on them and cut off any heads that poke up. While I attended the conference in Quebec City I received not a word from Jim Birch. Paul Kupelian managed a limp “hi John” but made no eye contact. Many of you have expressed an interest for what could be done to rectify the situation. While I am just a piano technician with a pencil and what is called for is an adept political operator, I do have a few avenues for you to pursue. First of all is “follow the money.” From the very first Journal editorial meeting I attended the issue of the Journal budget was discussed. It came up for the most part because we were told that we couldn’t do something on account of the Journal budget. When we asked to see this budget no one at the home office including the executive director could find it. Every year the same issue came up. Eventually at our last meeting all of us tried to piece together what the Journal cost to members. We added what we knew about printing and mailing expenses and we added up what is paid to the editorial staff. We estimated the amount of time it takes the home office to help get it done and added that cost to the total. Then we subtracted the income from advertisement. It is amazing that this has never been done before and even though our attempt was crudely estimated we were able to glean that it only cost member about $28 per year to create the Journal. So I say the first thing to do is demand that an independent audit be made of the cost to members for producing the Journal. Then members can decide if enough of their dues are being used for this key benefit. I believe that most members would prefer to see a larger portion of their dues be spent on the Journal. Besides getting to know how the money is spent you should look at the talents and skills of your home office employees. Chris and I have been providing design and layout services in order to make the Journal look professional. It would streamline the process if the person doing the layout at the home office were skilled in graphic design. In addition having an Executive Director that understood something about publishing would help a great deal. In fact I think, considering how important the Journal is to members, the ED should be someone with a strong publishing background. I know personally that I would still be happily working on the Journal if this were the case. It is very difficult to work at a creative job for little money when your skills and talent are not seen as valuable by the boss. The last thing to mention is obvious to all of us; PTG needs to have a Board of Directors that truly represent the interest of the membership. I leave it to you to ponder what can be done about that. John Hartman
This PTG archive page provided courtesy of Moy Piano Service, LLC