[pianotech] is this the work of an RPT?

[Joseph Garrett]

Bill said: "From: Bill Fritz <pianofritz50 at aol.com>
To: pianotech at ptg.org
Subject: [pianotech] Is this the work of an RPT?
Message-ID: <8CE3567DD710B9A-2894-8FC3 at Webmail-d120.sysops.aol.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
 
 
We all know the PTG pushes the general public to only use ?RPT?s? for piano
work. If a potential customer finds the www.ptg.org website, they can enter
their zip code and will see (only) RPT?s who live close to them... but how
can the PTG condone the RPT work shown in the attached photos?
If the PTG is only going to push market ?qualified technicians? to the
general public AND have the general public appreciate the professionalism
of the PTG, then the RPT label needs to be associated w/ quality, and NOT
be represented by the work in the attached pics? and yet it is, and more
regularly than one might like or think.
Similar to other professions (Engineers, etc), the PTG needs to have
ongoing qualification of those w/ the RPT ?label?. Passing a test 30-40
years ago and hoping they will retire soon is not a strategy that ensures
professionalism. 
On the contrary, being a Piano Technician is an excellent way to
?semi-retire?... and I doubt many Piano Technicians would dream of quitting
at the age of 65 or earlier. My guess (which is somewhat confirmed by my
father who finally retired at the age of 86) is that these RPT?s will
continue to tune & repair & regulate. (In fact, the RPT who did the
attached work is my age ? 61 ? and will only quit when his physical being
prohibits him from continuing, and not before.) Saying that the older
tested Craftsmen or RPT?s will retire is wishful thinking? and ignores the
elephant in the room.
So... does the PTG NOT care about those RPT?s they promoted who don?t live
up to that status, years later?
It doesn?t seem so... see the quote taken from an RPT?s webpage: ?The most
important thing the Piano Technicians Guild does is to qualify technicians
as Registered Piano Technicians to assure quality piano service by
requiring that a technician pass a rigorous set of examinations.? PS This
particular RPT hasn?t been to a Convention for many years? and has only
been to one local Chapter meeting in the past 15 years.
I would have thought that ?the most important thing the PTG does? is to
increase & improve the knowledge & capability of their members. The ptg.org
website only words it slightly different: The most important thing that the
PTG does is ?to promote the highest possible service and technical
standards among piano tuners and technicians.? 
Would you call the work shown in the attached photos ?high quality
service?? Maybe this Technician (sample work attached) once had that
ability, but it appears to be gone now.
How about requiring RPT?s to pass a reduced, rigorous set of tests every 10
years or less... perhaps at a PTG Convention, in order to maintain their
RPT status. (That would kill 2 birds w/ one stone? that of also getting
RPT?s to show up to a Convention at least once every 10 years.) If they
fail, they get 1 year to re-test... and after a 2nd failure they can no
longer legally use the RPT label.
The PTG needs some type of ?Continuing Education and/or Testing?
requirement for continued RPT status. 
The PTG should not a ?Club? or ?Union?, where one gets thru an ?initiation?
and then cannot be thrown out or fired. 
We need to make the RPT status mean something at ANY given point in time,
not just initial testing (especially long ago)? otherwise, the general
public will not only NOT care about an RPT label, they won?t even care if
ANY of us are PTG members.
Bill Fritz, Associate, St Louis
 
PS I know this subject matter probably should reside in the ptg-l email
threads, but this one gets much more exposure & interest."

Bill,
To start out, you gave no answer to your initial, (subject), question. Was
this the work of an RPT? I have no clue, since you chose to RAG on and on
and not give one shred of evidence that it, indeed, was the work of an RPT!
I'd suggest you get your act together before casting dispersions at all of
the RPTs in general! If this is a case of an RPT doing this sort of shoddy
work, then you should first approach an officer of your Chapter and discuss
it and come to a collective decision as to what course of action should be
taken. Or...better yet, IF you know who the tech is, why not discuss the
work with THAT tech! Or, are you simply not up to that task? I've been an
RPT for over 35 years. I do not condone that kind of work. Nor do I make
public accusations w/o first going through the PTG process. 
Joe


Joe Garrett, R.P.T.
Captain of the Tool Police
Squares R I