Klarinet Archive - Posting 000051.txt from 2008/11

From: Alexander Brash <brash@-----.edu>
Subj: Re: [kl] After Drucker
Date: Sat, 08 Nov 2008 18:40:03 -0500

Again, besides the point. I'm pointing out there are likely many
others who could perform the same job at an equal or higher level. We
don't know because people with tenure are not regularly asked to
compete directly against a "fresh crop."

Is there major harm in reauditioning orchestral players every 15
years? Certainly that gives enough time for stability, income, and to
plan alternatives.

On Nov 8, 2008, at 6:37 PM, Forest Aten wrote:

>
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Alexander Brash [mailto:brash@-----.edu]
>> Sent: Saturday, November 08, 2008 5:18 PM
>> To: klarinet@-----.org
>> Subject: Re: [kl] After Drucker
>>
>> Oh quite right - I was just pointing to the legislation which
>> actually made age discrimination illegal. I'm not trying to start a
>> debate about "how things are run today." That is a matter of fact. I
>> am trying to start a debate about whether it makes any sense to
>> change these rules. Personally, I don't find the concept of tenure
>> palatable given the disparity of supply and demand for these
>> positions. I say that as an academic matter - I am in no position to
>> actually win one of those positions :) It simple seems "more unfair"
>> to me than "forcing retirement." I can't give you a metric of scale
>> on which I measure that - that's my subjective position on it.
>>
>> If I were 60, it might well be different.
>> On Nov 8, 2008, at 6:09 PM, Forest Aten wrote:
>>
>>>
>
> I don't think people really understand what "tenure" means....
>
> It does not protect your job....if you fail to perform at the
> professional
> (or whatever) level required for the position.
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------
>

------------------------------------------------------------------