Max C. posted in a thread of the Firm Owners’ Listserv about his state’s association putting on a party in Denver honoring his installation as President of NCRA. Well, it looks like Tennessee is offering sponsorships for the party to offset some of the expenses. Apparently, if any profits are left over from the party, they will benefit “NCRA’s A-to-Z programs and outreach across Tennessee about the opportunities that exist in a court reporting and captioning career.”
The thread on the Firm Owners’ Listserv began with an announcement about a new organization called Reliance — a group of independent firm owners and reporters — formed on June 1, 2019, because NCRA’s premier events at the national convention remained unsponsored (for many years, these premier events were often sponsored by some of the 1-800, big-box shops*). “The cost of hosting events like the Members’ Gala has been unattainable for a single small firm or individual at a $25,000 price tag.” By June 4, 2019, they raised enough money to not only sponsor the Members’ Gala, but they also funded five student convention registrations, AND have earmarked money to be donated to NCRA Strong, to further promote stenographic reporting! An unbelievable feat, we’re sure that you’d all agree!
Well, a group of “the old guard,” beginning with Sandy V. (who received the Distinguished Service Award while Nancy V. was immediate past president) rebuked Max about her “concerns about using an NCRA annual convention to raise money for a state’s project.” She went on to say, “Is there a conflict there or at least a potential conflict that considers additional thought before anyone contributes to this event?”**
Well, some of us here at WUNCRA recall Sandy V. using NCRA’s Listservs to gather a bunch of NCRA members to put their heads together to discuss the “impending shortage of reporters” which ultimately ended up with a hijacking of the NCRA convention in New Orleans to demonstrate and promote Revolutionary Text. Of course, she was quick to point out that “Project SOS” was not in any way, shape or form associated with NCRA. And now Sandy and Tammy are using their positions on the National Court Reporters Foundation*** to create best practices tantamount to super marketing materials to legitimize remote reporting that will ultimately be the demise of the remaining “mom-and-pop shops.” We don’t believe for one second that what appeared as an innocent request on NCRA’s Listservs wasn’t Step 1 to them helping their friends at Revo Text – and perhaps a couple of large firms that can afford to develop their own remote-reporting platforms in-house.
Talking about “conflicts,” we see SO MANY conflicts in what they’ve done and are doing that we can’t even count them all.
The public rebuke of Max continued with Tonya D. (who mysteriously left the NCRA Board, along with Immediate Past President Chris W. and a few other members of the clique — and since then seems to try to gut-punch Max and the board at every opportunity possible); Chris W. chimed in about all of the problems that she had with inurement (remember the board meeting that she was responsible for on March 9, 2018, regarding NCRA’s stance on contracting that was changed 16 months earlier without membership – and probably most of the board – knowing, that gave a front-row seat to a couple of big-box executives, but left a bunch of members in ante rooms because the room wasn’t large enough to accommodate everybody, which was discovered because the NCRA board wouldn’t show up for Virginia’s anti-contracting legislation that was being argued before its Legislature? Also, recall that the board under her leadership fired NCRA’s long-term lobbyist and hired that young dude from her home state of Wisconsin? A whole bunch of inurement that we have problems with, too!); then Doreen S. (a bestie for life) added a short message about agreeing with Chris; then Nancy V. busted in with a wah-wah-wah lecture about how her business venture isn’t allowed to raise money on the NCRA Listservs (maybe someday she will explain why she waited until AFTER her board tenure to begin that project); Max then ate some crow; then Art R. agreed with Nancy; then WEW added his “wise counsel” requesting that NCRA change its policy so that both Nancy and Tennessee can reap benefits.
Whew, those phones were lit up in a frenzy getting all of those past “leaders” to have each other’s backs on the Listserv while they were “poking the bear,” weren’t they?
Wake Up, NCRA!
Frank N. Sense
*Did they stop sponsoring these events because they no longer have enough self-dealing pawns on the board?
**It would have been nice to know that those little devils at the NCRF were going to use our hard-earned Angels donations to help promote a business owned by two past presidents and a director before making those contributions, too.
***Mission Statement of the National Court Reporters Foundation: The National Court Reporters Foundation supports the court reporting and captioning professions through philanthropic activities funded through charitable contributions.
REMOTE JUDICIAL REPORTING IS GOING TO KILL WHAT IS LEFT OF YOUR BUSINESS!!!
Tami Keenan, as head of the National Court Reporters Foundation, wrote a letter in the May JCR discussing Remote Judicial Reporting or RJR (yes, they’ve already even given it an acronym!). Sounds so nontoxic, doesn’t it? But this is poison to every member of the National Court Reporters Association that makes their living as a stenographic reporter!
Do you know those national contracts that have taken work out of your community? Those contracts that require your best clients to use a 1-800 company when they schedule depositions? Those contracts that you get called for to cover now that don’t pay you for all the copies that the 1-800s are selling? Yes, THOSE contracts!
Well, once this remote judicial reporting (RJR) gets traction, with the aid and blessing of the National Court Reporters Foundation — which also means with the blessing of the NCRA because lawyers don’t know that the NCRF even exists — you won’t even be getting the calls to cover work for your best clients because those depositions will be covered remotely.
Ah, yes, the argument that is going to be made is that they’re only looking at judicial reporting now. But once they get that national notary through, all gloves are off. (Remember all of those defectors to the tape-recording convention earlier this year? That’s a large organization to get behind the national notary, isn’t it?) Believe us when we tell you that this “RJR” thing is VERY calculated.
Below is an excerpt from Tami Keenan’s letter in May’s JCR magazine:
“NCRF has formed a new task force to explore the feasibility of remote judicial reporting, or RJR.* This often-misunderstood process allows for a stenographic reporter to work from a remote location at the time the job is being conducted. The virtual venue can help fill the job gap by supplying reporters to locations where there are shortages** or places that are too far to travel to. In addition, RJR has the potential to appeal to the next generation of court reporters, as the millennial and Generation Z populations place a high value on flexibility and efficiency. “
Look, Tami, this is NOT a misunderstood process! We understand perfectly why the NCRF is doing this!
Who are Tami’s besties? Who are Sandy’s besties? Who was on the NCRA board when Sandy received the DSA? Who did Tami sit on the NCRA board with all of those years? This nepotism must STOP … RIGHT NOW!!!
We believe that it is absolutely OUTRAGEOUS and UNCONSCIONABLE that the NCRF, under Tami’s leadership, is giving its blessing for “RJR” to help two past presidents and one past director market their remote reporting business!!!
Adding millennials and Generation Z’ers to the equation is one, big, fat smokescreen!
Where is the NCRA board while the NCRF is in the process of annihilating most of their members’ businesses? Why is the board just standing on the sidelines?
It is time that membership DEMAND that the NCRA board get involved and INSIST that the NCRF cease and desist!
Wake up, NCRA!!!
Frank N. Sense
P.S. Would you have even donated your hard-earned money to this foundation only to find out that they were going to use it against you?
P.P.S. Please send this to every stenographic reporter that you know so that they know what the foundation is doing to ruin their businesses.
* What gives the National Court Reporters Foundation the authority to even explore the feasibility of remote judicial reporting anyway? We believe that it’s in violation of its charter and bylaws.
** PERCEIVED SHORTAGES!
We all know that Dave Wenhold’s big focus was getting a national notary through Congress when he was the lobbyist for NCRA. Now that he’s the Interim Executive Director and CEO, is that still NCRA’s big goal?
Recently, a bunch of past presidents and leaders of NCRA, as well as executives from the big-box shops, “Benedict-Arnolded” to the electronic recording organization, so we’re sure that they’ll all be advocating for a national notary, too.
The big gathering of state leaders from around the country ends with face-to-face meetings with Congressmen and Senators on “The Hill.” Is it a push for a national notary that is going to be touted, or will the NCRA board take a public stance against being able to swear witnesses over the Internet and phone lines?
We want to know: Where does the NCRA stand on a national notary?
Will this be the final nail in the coffin for independent steno reporters – still the bulk of NCRA’s membership?
Wake Up, NCRA!
Frank N. Sense
P.S. Please don’t play semantics tricks on us by coming up with a new name for “notary.”
P.P.S. State leaders attending boot camp: Beware! Remember, you are there representing your membership.
From a past president who has been screaming from the mountaintops that the sky is falling regarding a shortage of steno reporters across the country; has a company that uses steno reporters remotely; is pushing for a national notary so witnesses can be sworn in across the country from his own basement:
“I’ll try to be less snarky … We NEED a way to swear witnesses nationally.”
Yep, you’ve read it correctly. His thoughts from his head down to his fingers, sent from us to you.
Like we’ve said before: The National Court Reporters Foundation is putting together a “best practices” guide for remote reporting (paid for by the sweat of the donations of Angels!) to benefit one remote reporting company. This “best practices guide” will be wonderful for marketing, along with the sanctioning that the title of “president of NCRA” will give them. It will be so much easier with a national notary, too.
And here we also have a quote from an NCRA board member recently appointed by the board, even though he lost a past election or two:
“Kudos to Reesa, Bill, Judy, and whoever else may be involved. A remote reporter fills the gap in remote areas where, yes, the shortage (or unwillingness to move there) doesn’t allow for a reporter on-site.”
So, do you think that “Reesa, Bill, Judy, and whoever else may be involved” (in the remote reporting company) are going to show up with NCRF’s best practices guide, the imprimatur of two past presidents and one past NCRA board member, AND a national notary, and limit their marketing to “remote areas where, yes, the shortage (or unwillingness to move there) doesn’t allow for a reporter on-site”?
Yeah, we don’t think that they’re going to stop where there is a perceived shortage either. Of course, we believe that the shortage is going to be work for reporters living in every state in the country that the remote reporting company enters.
Wake Up, NCRA!
Frank N. Sense
P.S. Please send this to steno reporters that you know, so they are informed about what the National Court Reporters Foundation is spending their hard-earned donations on AND what past and present leadership are doing to line their own pockets.
P.P.S. NCRA Board: How much more are you going to help the national consolidators put your rank and file membership/local reporters out of business? You MUST put a kibosh to the NCRF publishing “best practices” for a company owned by former leaders of NCRA. When is enough going to be enough already?
That one company is owned by two past presidents of NCRA.
Why is the National Court Reporters Foundation, through a “Remote Reporting Committee,” ”working on educating the industry on remote judicial reporting and potentially coming up with best practices, provide seminars, etc.”?
So now when those two presidents go out to market their remote reporting company, not only do they have the imprimatur of being past presidents of NCRA, they can say that the NCRA is totally behind their company by saying, “Hey, look, NCRA has seminars on remote reporting, they’ve developed best practices, and even provide seminars on remote reporting.”
All we can say is “CHA-CHING!” for two past presidents … again, on the backs of those wonderful angels (and the huge donation from that big 1-800 company).
Now, all they’ll need is a national notary so they can swear witnesses over the Internet in your state, too. Of course, they’ve promised to send you a check every time they take your work and give you the opportunity to stay home, right? No way THAT can go wrong!
The NCRF taking this big step that benefits just a couple of members is wrong … on many levels. Taking this big step for a couple of past presidents is simply unconscionable.
Wake Up, NCRA!
Frank N. Sense
A past NCRA DSA recipient and co-chair of SOS Plan B, the catalyst for the change in the conversation to digital recording going on right now – and the group that was not-affiliated-whatsoever-
“Sandy Bunch Vanderpol: Since NCRA is a boutique association, representing and promoting “Steno Only,” I understand the Board’s actions. However, I don’t necessarily agree. I would like to receive data that steno is the only option for judicial reporting, depositions more specifically … NCRF, and I as the chair of the NCRF Remote Reporting Committee, is working on educating the industry on remote judicial reporting and potentially coming up with best practices, provide seminars, etc. …”
All of us here at WUNCRA — and we’re sure general membership of the “boutique association” called NCRA — want to know if this “chair of the NCRF Remote Reporting Committee,” is an owner in, has any affiliation with, is besties with, or is expecting any remuneration whatsoever from any company or associate of any “remote reporting” company. We also want to know under which board/president this chair of NCRF’s Remote Reporting Committee became a trustee of the NCRF.
Perhaps the “angels” should cease all donations to the NCRF until membership is provided with the requested data.
We took our own poll, and our data reflects that 100% of us here at WUNCRA agree that NCRA needs to continue to represent and promote “Steno Only.”
Wake Up, NCRA!
Frank N. Sense
All of us here at WUNCRA have been patiently waiting for the NCRA board to reveal their big plan for countering the very well organized group that is changing the conversation in this country from stenographers to digital recording.
But all we are hearing are … crickets!
While the board is redefining itself into NCRA 2.0, the world, once again, is passing it by. A big bunch of past presidents of NCRA are attending the national convention of digital recorders in Orlando in a couple of weeks, and what have we heard from the board? Crickets!
The theme of the recorders’ convention is “The Paradigm Shift”!!! A past president with a Ph.D. is the keynote speaker!!!
Here’s a secret NCRA Board: This digital recording onslaught is a bigger issue to steno reporters than contracting! You ain’t seen nothin’ yet.
A bill was introduced in California, AB 424, clarifying a current law:
“Existing law provides procedures for the recording of depositions by means of audio or video technology. A party who intends to offer an audio or video recording of the deposition in evidence must accompany the offer with a stenographic transcript prepared from the recording, unless a stenographic record was previously prepared.
“This bill would clarify that a stenographic transcript accompanying an audio or video recording of deposition testimony offered into evidence must be prepared by a certified shorthand reporter.”
Planet Depos, whose director of court reporting is a past president of NCRA, submitted an opposition to the clarifying bill stating that digital recorders “perform the same functions as a stenographic reporter on the job.”
We need somebody out there getting in front of this assault!
There is nothing that NCRA does right now that is more important than getting front of the misrepresentations and deceit that has already begun to bleed into the profession.
Aside from “essential services,” we implore the NCRA board to put EVERYTHING else aside and get all hands on deck to represent stenographic reporters.
We are tired of hearing … crickets!
WAKE UP, NCRA!
Frank N. Sense
P.S. Please send this to every stenographic reporter that you know so that they know what’s coming down the pike, too!
We now have the knowledge that our leaders have betrayed us. We know that at least two, and likely three, past presidents are going to the national recorders convention in Orlando, Florida.
Steve Z. sent out an e-mail on the firmowners’ listserv:
“I’m a corporate member of AAERT because a part of my business consists of transcription, and I plan on attending. I do know that there are quite a few members of AAERT that are also members of NCRA, as well as other associations.
“FWIW, in my opinion, NCRA and AAERT have quite a bit in common. Mainly, putting words on paper.
“Also, I’ve tested some AI technology in the marketplace to keep tabs on its progress, and exactly how it works.
“Knowledge is power; right?”
Don’t you wish that you knew sooner about his opinion that stenographers and digital recorders are effectively equivalent because, after all, both are just “putting words on paper”? Don’t you wish you knew this BEFORE giving him the moniker of president of NCRA … for the rest of his life?
AND the keynote speaker in Orlando is another past president of NCRA who tries to come off as so forward-thinking, when in reality he’s just giving his imprimatur to digital recorders AGAINST stenographers who thought he was serving them. Silly stenographers. We wonder how much it costs to get a past president of NCRA to play Judas by being a keynote speaker:
“The Paradigm Shift and the Choices You Will Make
“Life is about the choices we make. With the court reporting industry at a critical crossroad, business people must face the reality and make the critical choices that will ultimately impact their survival and prosperity as the industry continues its shift in response to internal and external pressures. Change is a constant, and adaptability is a critical survival tool as change occurs. One can make educated choices and be right or wrong, but standing still and struggling to maintain the status quo in the face of a dynamic force will only guarantee that you will not be standing long.”
Of course, how good do you think the odds are that yet another past president will be in Orlando representing a major digital recording company? What a trifecta!
And what do we hear from our current NCRA president:
“Your 2019 board would like to acknowledge that it stands firmly behind the stenographic court reporting community and does not condone or support the training or implementation of digital recorder operators. While NCRA is aware that a variety of business models exist for capturing the important records of our legal community, NCRA exists by its governing documents to support the stenographic model of capture.
“In addition, please be advised that on January 29, 2019, the Executive Committee of the NCRA Board of Directors took the following action: “MOTION made, seconded and carried to immediately suspend the solicitation of new NCRA Corporate Partnership agreements until such time as the NCRA Board of Directors can review the program in full.”
The board’s actions are just reactionary — always in damage-control mode — while past presidents are attending and keynote-speaking at recording association meetings. NCRA is just hanging on by threads! All of us here at WUNCRA understand that these past “leaders” have left a huge mess to clean up. But why does the board continue to run the association behind a cloak of secrecy? That is exactly how we got to where we are right now. We want to know which board members voted FOR the new NCRA Corporate Partnership agreements in the first place. Why did it take so long to “suspend the solicitation of new NCRA Corporate Partnership agreements”? And are the “partnership agreements” that have already been signed up and allow nonmembers a “seat at the table” still in effect?
If meetings were more accessible, minutes were not just skeleton minutes, and individual votes were made public, membership would have known which “leaders” should never have been on the board. Everything has been done in secrecy – and it continues!
Has the last president that resigned been defrocked from NCRA? Or was it the board that asked her to step down but didn’t let membership know about it? Membership doesn’t know, because everything is a big fat secret.
From a recent forum post:
“I just became aware that Veritext is introducing digital recording here in Massachusetts and encouraging lawyers to modify their deposition notices to include same as a method of transcription.”
Didn’t we predict a few months ago that the SOS Plan B* was trying to change the conversation? There you go, the conversation has changed. Was the past DSA recipient who formed SOS Plan B a naïve pawn, or is the blessing of recording the conversation that she was looking for? We know that the co-chair of that group from Buffalo became a corporate member of the recorders — just like Steve Z. — right before the “SOS Plan DR “ group began. The “paradigm shift”** has been in the works a very long time. While the NCRA board was spending time creating its strategic plan trying to save itself, the world was passing it by.
Maybe the best thing to do is shut NCRA’s doors and divvy up the remaining few dollars to the paltry membership that still exists. That way the moniker of “Past President of NCRA” wouldn’t have so much cachet (or more accurately, CA$H!).
It feels like NCRA is in a deep sleep and will never wake up! But we’ll keep trying.
WAKE UP, NCRA!
Frank N. Sense
P.S. Please, you have a Ph.D. that you toss around – come up with something besides the old saw of “’change is a constant,’” and if you don’t adapt the world is going to leave you behind.” Especially since the real “constant” seems to be former “leadership” selling us out.
* $ELL OUR $OUL$ PLAN B
** “Paradigm Shift” is the theme of the recorders’ association’s meeting in Orlando. We’re sure the theme was developed before all the SOS began.
The Business Summit, formerly known as The Firm Owners Executive Conference, is set for February 1 through 3, 2019, in San Diego. Yes, for a mere $1,045 registration fee, you, too, can attend. If you want to stay in the hotel where the “summit” is being held, that will be an additional $255 a night, plus taxes and fees. We haven’t yet added in roundtrip travel to and from San Diego or food and drinks. You don’t even need to be a member of NCRA to attend this “summit.”
But as you can remember from back in March, 2018, you didn’t’ need to be a member of NCRA to speak at a board meeting while dues-paying members were turned away because the venue was too small to accommodate those members that wanted to attend.
Weren’t a couple of those nonmembers that spoke at the board meeting the same nonmembers that are panelists on the “Truths and Myths” discussion on “multi-case litigation” – the new name for “third-party contracting.” Lipstick on a pig?
Then the president-elect of the association chimed in saying that we don’t even know what terms like anti-trust, networking, bidding, third-party contracting, legal contracting with governmental entities mean because those terms are all called third-party contracting. Wow!!! It looks like we’re going to run out of lipstick for that pig.
The president-elect also went on to say that this panel is “an opportunity to find common ground as professional reporters and firm owners in dealing with the reporter issues, educational approach changes for getting students through more efficiently and what that would look like, what works/doesn’t, as well as other issues facing our industry collectively”; although none of that was even mentioned in the synopsis of the panel discussion. Sounds like lipstick on a pig to all of us here at WUNCRA.
It appears that the only people able to pay to go to the “summit” are those big-box executives making hundreds of thousands or millions in salaries off the backs of the steno talent.
And hold on, everybody, a former director will slap you down at that “summit” with some more “tough love” to challenge your “most sacred beliefs about the business of court reporting with a focus on why being stuck in 1985 isn’t going to alleviate any of the issues faced by agencies and reporters in the 21st century.” Some of us here at WUNCRA seem to recall that he was part of a group that hired a former Texas Supreme Court Justice as a lobbyist to get the current Texas Supreme Court to change its stance on “protecting the public from unfair reporting pricing.” If you remember, Texas had the brilliant one-third rule – the price of a copy of a deposition could not exceed one-third of the price of the O&1 of a deposition. It worked really well back in 1985 through 2018. But, you see, certain “multi-case litigation” businesses couldn’t “compete” under that brilliant rule. So now we all need some tough love with that lipstick on a pig.
If the board just comes out and says, “Listen, these guys paid tens of thousands of dollars for their NCRA advertising program, and this seminar was a part of that package” — lipstick on a pig — “plus, this agenda was set up by a former immediate past president and a probably fired CEO, and it’s just too late to change it,” you may just garner some understanding from membership.
Also, we hope that the board is doing some investigating on all of the rules that were violated by the immediate past president – including her exiting barbs on social media. Are you recalling all of the turmoil she caused back in 2018 based on private conversations that she had without the board even knowing about them? Seems to us like being defrocked from the association is in order. She’ll always be able to bear the moniker of “President of NCRA,” though – just like that president that sold us down the recording river.
MWAH!!! ;-*
Wake Up, NCRA!
Frank N. Sense
P.S. We’re sure that the presenters of “Myths and Truths” will be glad to front the $$$ to broadcast their seminar live. Maybe the board should add a few more thousands of dollars to their “advertising package” to accommodate them blasting their “myths” directly out to the membership.
P.P.S. The NCRA board sent out a shameless e-mail blast this morning capitalizing on the angst of membership: “Don’t Miss Third-Party Contracting: Truths and Myths Panel Discussion.”
NCRA has lost a CEO and four board members within a month. We lost the CFO somewhere along the line, but nobody has let us know when that happened.
THAT IS SOME TURMOIL!!!
Something REALLY, REALLY, REALLY, REALLY, REALLY bad must have been discovered to have lost so much “leadership” in an organization in such a short span of time.
All of us here at WUNCRA have had “that icky feeling” for many, many years. Please check out some of our previous posts.
Did someone’s or someones’ hands get caught in the cookie jar?
Maybe now there will be a full accounting of the $5 million that was made from the fully-paid-off building that was sold behind closed doors. How much rent is being paid on the Class-A office space?
Membership has SO MANY questions, and we deserve to have answers to ALL of them!!! Secrecy breeds mistrust – for instance, causing membership to dwindle down from 36,000 to 11,000. (That’s 25,000 people also experiencing “the ickies.”)
Also, now is not the time for public relations damage control. Membership is beyond all of those platitudes!!!
One thing that we all agree on here at WUNCRA is that we object to the gentleman appointed by the board to fill in until the next election. He lost two elections. Doesn’t that tell the board that MEMBERSHIP does not want him as a board member?
When you keep on doing the same old things, expect the same old results.
There are so many fine members out there qualified to lead NCRA out of these tumultuous times. We threw out names just off of the top of our heads and in less than a minute came up with a fine gentleman from Washington, two or three marvelously smart women from Texas, and one from Colorado.
Board members, please reconsider that appointment for the betterment of the organization.
WAKE UP, NCRA!
Frank N. Sense