My campaign table gets moved to the front

News from the convention: My opponent, Jason Meaders, was found to have violated the election rule that says you can only pass out campaign material from your assigned campaign table. He was passing out materials on a totally different floor where all the state leaders and speed contest writers were located. None of the other contestants were passing out anything because no activities were taking place where the tables are located. As a result, my table location for tomorrow's business meeting has been moved to the front and will be the first table seen by the reporters entering the business meeting.

If I Had 15 Minutes

IF I HAD 15 MINUTES
BRUCE A. MATTHEWS

Going through my materials for my speech at the business meeting, I have found that five minutes is such a short period of time that it barely allows me to discuss two topics in any detail at all. So I have decided to post here what I would say if I had 15 minutes to speak. And believe me, I could talk for a lot longer than that. Having five minutes, you really just have to jump from topic to topic.

First, I would say we have to do what our C&B says, promote stenographic verbatim reporting over all other methods. We have gotten so far away from that, it just makes me crazy. The current officers on this board talk about how we have to work with other methods. Well, we’ve been doing that for years and years. The difference is that now we’re losing more jobs, and instead of fighting tooth and nail to keep those jobs, they say that we have to work with the other methods. Not in my world, we don’t.

We need to stop the divisiveness that has been permeating the Association because the board has been going in one direction, while the majority of the membership wishes they would be going in the opposite direction. We need to promote us, ladies and gentlemen, and the best product on the planet, realtime. And we need a change in leadership to do it.

I don’t know this for sure, but I believe my opposition will say that I have been a cause of some of the divisiveness over the course of the past six months. I have always been a positive person, ladies and gentlemen. But when I’m running against what has been going on for the past several years, I have to talk about the negative things we have experienced. How else would I be able to express my opinions on what we should be doing that is different than what has been going on?

I have heard so many past officers say that they did everything they could to promote realtime and the members wouldn’t go for it. Well, that might be true, but that doesn’t mean you give up. This is partly the fault of the membership as well, and I’m not afraid to say that. We need to have more certified realtime reporters, period, and we have to provide the training to make that happen. We have to force feed the judges and attorneys to use it. That’s what we did where I work, and now they won’t do without it.

The board now says they’re going to listen to the members. Well, that’s good. They are supposed to represent the members, so yes, listening to them would be a good start. The majority rules, ladies and gentlemen. That’s how it is in our society.

While I don’t want to dwell on the past, I do want to talk about the thinking or logic of the board over the past several years. How is it that you are so concerned about the number of students we have in our schools, which we should be concerned about, but at the same time write articles and posts and talk about working with the other methods? I mean, if I’m a young person thinking about going to court reporting school and I see or hear what the board has been saying, why would I decide to go to court reporting school? Like I said, we have to promote us. If a prospective student goes to the NVRA or AAERT websites, they will see how NVRA says you only have to go to school for nine months and you can start working right away, and AAERT says their goal is to be the ultimate expert in making the record. And what has NCRA been saying? We need to work with these other methods. It just doesn’t follow, ladies and gentlemen.

After last year’s convention, I called the president of NVRA and asked her if NVRA had any desire for NCRA to do their testing for them. She laughed and said, “Heavens, no. We derive revenue from our testing program just like NCRA does. Why would we want to turn that over the NCRA?“ Now, I found that out in a five-minute phone call. Why would NCRA waste their time trying to do something which simply is not going to happen? Also, it would cost NCRA money to let these folks who use other methods come in because their numbers are so small. With everything that would need to be put in place to serve these new members, it would cost more to serve them than NCRA would receive from them becoming members.

Why over an eight-year period have we increased the Executive Director’s salary an average of 6.76% per year, while at the same time, over the same eight years, our membership declined 18.2%? Does this make any sense to you? It doesn’t to me, and I don’t put that on the Executive Director. I’m for everyone making as much as they can. I put that on the several iterations of the board who voted to keep renewing his contract at a higher rate.

And then there is the confidentiality issue I have discussed. Why do we, as court reporters, have to sign confidentiality agreements when we are assigned to a committee or on the board? Aren’t we all trying to do the right thing for our profession? I know there are things that need to be held in confidence, and so does everyone else. The Executive Director has even admitted that NCRA is over the top in regards to their confidentiality provisions. When I went to Melanie’s planning meeting in February, I was told everything has to be held in confidence, and I objected. I’ve been to more of those type meetings than any other member, and I was never told that things had to be held in confidence before. And after the meeting, it was determined that nothing discussed was confidential. I mean, we were talking about the future of the Association and the profession. What could be confidential about that? And who would we have been keeping it confidential from, the members? It just doesn’t make any sense to me whatsoever.

We need to move forward with realtime. We need to show the courts, the lawyers, and the funding sources that when you take all costs into consideration, DAR is no cheaper than having court reporters do the job. Why are we always taking a step back? We need to promote us.

So the board now says the question will be asked: What should the future of the profession and the Association look like? I hope we can all get together and tell the board that we want to promote stenographic verbatim reporting to the hilt.

I will have financial and membership data on my table at the hotel in Chicago. Please stop by to talk and take a look. I don’t want this election to be all about the duties of the secretary-treasurer, because to hold that officer position means a lot more than being the watchdog of the funds for the Association. The other part of the job is being an officer of the Association and helping to lead the Association through tough times. Ladies and gentlemen, I have served on the finance and budget committee in the past during tough times in the early 1990’s, and I have been in charge as president of the Association and the Foundation of all things financial regarding those entities. I am qualified and ready, willing and able to hold the position and if elected will try to hold the position for three years.

There’s one last thing I want to say. This past June, just a month ago or so, President Morgan admitted in her President’s Message in the JCR that the Association has been focusing too much time on becoming an umbrella-type testing and membership organization. I believe that to be true, and I‘m sure many of you do as well. The question is: Do you want the same officers who have been involved in that focus and on the board for the last several years to now lead you into the future? Or is it time for a change? That’s what this is all about, ladies and gentlemen.

Please check out my past experience on the next page.

Thanks for listening.



Bruce A. Matthews, RDR-CRR, FAPR

PAST BOARD POSITIONS

Past President, Ohio Court Reporters Association, 1984-85
Director, NCRA, 1989-1992
VP, NCRA, 1992-1993
PE, NCRA, 1993-1994
President, 1994-1995
Past President, 1995-1996
Trustee, NCRF, 1995-1996
Trustee, NCRF, 1997-1998
Vice Chair, NCRF, 1998-1999
Chair, NCRF, 1999-2000
Past Chair, NCRF, 2000-2001

PAST COMMITTEE POSITIONS

COPE, three-year term, two years as chair, after 1996
CAPR, three-year term, after 1996
Technology Committee
Realtime Committee
Realtime Contest Committee, wrote and dictated first two contests
Finance and Budget Committee, helped establish policies still used today
Executive Committee
Past President’s Advisory Board, after 1996
Quality Improvement Committee, Chair
Legislative Committee
NCSA Resolutions Committee
Constitution and Bylaws Committee, Chair, after 1996
Nominating Committee, Chair, 1996
Convention Committee
President-Elect’s Planning Committee, 2010 and many others

AWARDS
Fellow of the Academy of Professional Reporters, 1988
Distinguished Service Award, OCRA, 1990
Spark Award, OCRA, 1990
Honor Award, Academy of Court Reporter and Technology, 1987

Mark your calendars to vote next Thursday, August 5

Hello, Friends.

I know there are reminders everywhere, but obviously it is very important that you remember to vote next Thursday, August 5th, for the four persons you deem best qualitifed to help lead NCRA into the future.

Obviously, I am calling for a change in thinking and a change in direction. And I'm hoping the members will tell the Board that they want a change as well by voting for me for Secretary-Treasurer.

Hopefully, you have all registered your email address with NCRA, but if you haven't you need to go to NCRAonline, making sure you can get into that site with your user name (membership number) and password, and then make sure your email is up to date on the site. Look at your settings to be sure. If you are receiving email from NCRA, you should be good.

Next, mark your calendar, by cell phone if possible, and make an appointment for yourself to vote online on August 5th, 2010.

Check your email on August 5th in the early afternoon and keep checking it, including your spam, until you see an email from NCRA which will give you the needed link to the voting website. You'll again have to have your log-in information available to you, so write that down and keep it handy as well. Know your NCRA membership number and your password.

If you have any problem, call headquarters at 1-800-272-6272 or email them at msic@ncrahq.org. Check to be sure you can get into the site before August 5th! There may also be a phoone number listed in the email NCRA sends you concerning voting if you need help. The voting will begin about two hours after the business meeting and then will remain open for 12 hours, so you can vote from home after work if you like.

I'm ready, willing and able to serve you, so please don't forget to vote!!

Thanks.

BAM

The Tweaking of the C&B

I don't know who writes this stuff, but sometimes I really do find it comical. I read with great interest the Board's assessment of the proposed bylaws amendments. It's funny how they say that they take no position with the substance of the proposed amendments and then proceed to say they cannot support them for all the following reasons. Isn't that like taking a position?

Speaking only about the Board's comments to the proposed amendment that I wrote and the rationale that I wrote as well, Article V, Section 2, the Board says the number of seven years is totally arbitrary on my part, which, of course, it isn't. First I looked at the fact that a director can serve a full three-year term, sit off for one year, and then run again and serve another full three-year term. In essence, just being arbitrary now with this picking of numbers, a qualified reporter could be a director for 12 out of 15 years. In choosing seven years for officer positions, I felt that if a person served as vice president and then succeeded in going through the chairs of president-elect, president and immediate past president, that would be four years, and then three more would be seven, so it would be seven years before that person could run for vice president again. I hardly consider that logic arbitrary. It ends up being three times more time that the person serving in the officer position would have to wait over what a person serving in a director position would have to wait.

Then they say that piecemealing the C&B is just not a good thing and perhaps the whole thing should be rewritten. I wonder what someone would say if it was suggested that we rewrite the U.S. Constitution? And, oh, by the way, weren't there a few amendments to that document?

And lastly, I have said here and elsewhere more than once, but do it again here, that if I win the election for secretary-treasurer, I will not try to move up the ladder again. I will try to stay on for three years in that spot and then retire from board service. So if anyone gets up and says this is all about Bruce Matthews wanting to be president again, well, I'm afraid it just won't be so.

BAM

Which is it?

Recently, the Deposition Reporters Association of California asked the reporters running for positions on the NCRA Board of Directors questions so that members could be informed of where these reporters stood with regard to the issues of the day.

The first question asked if the candidates believed NCRA should remain a steno organization or become an umbrella organization.

My opponent in the race for secretary-treasurer answered: "We should and will remain what the membership decides. I do not see and would not advocate bringing in audio recording operators into NCRA."

But earlier in a post on the NCRA Forum, he said, "I'm not in favor of supporting an ER/DAR operator push for membership -- again, lacking facts to sway me to the contrary."

So I guess my question is: Which is it? Are you against it or are you only against it until someone can convince you otherwise? Don't we have the right to have an organization that advocates for what we do? Don't we have the right to have an association that advocates only for stenographic reporters? Isn't that what our Constitution and Bylaws say we are all about? And haven't the members already told the board on three separate occasions that they want to remain steno only?

I am growing tired of hearing about what DAR can do. I already know what DAR can do. But I also know what we can do, and we ought to be talking about that. The president of NCRA just admitted that for the past couple years, the NCRA board was too engrossed in becoming an umbrella-type testing organization and an umbrella-type membership organization. And my opponent has been a member of that board for four out the the last five years. She said they are now going to listen to the membership to see what direction they want the association to go in. That's great! I do question the timing of it all, coming out one month before the convention with all of these contested elections taking place, but let's advocate for steno. Let's advocate to the public and our members for realtime. Let's do what we should have been doing for the last several years.

LISTEN TO THE MEMBERS!

I just received my June issue of the JCR, and as I usually do, I opened it to the President's Page to read what President Morgan had written. Much to my surprise, she wrote: "Almost two years ago, the NCRA Board of Directors attempted to launch a similar discussion, but, in the process, we were thinking too much about the future of the Association rather than on the furture of the profession. To frame the conversation, we focused too extensively on the potential inclusion of those using other methods of making the record within an 'umbrella-type' testing or membershiip scenario. To say the least, this was an approach that served no one well."

They have finally admitted what was going on. They were panicking about their numbers and felt they needed to bring in other people and money either by way of testing or by way of membership. The problem is the membership has been telling them for years, many more than two, that they want NCRA to remain a steno only organization. At the presidential planning meeting I attended earlier this year, SueLynn Morgan told me that NCRA could not afford to have another motion-to-rescind-type scenario happen again. She stopped short of what she is saying now, but it's obvious if the board would not have been looking to test or bring in other "methods," the motion to rescind would have never taken place.

So now, right before the convention, they come out and say, "We are now going to listen to the membership." Well, I say it's about time.

Clarification in ED cost

The following question was asked of me by the Deposition Reporters Association from California, and I have new information regarding the cost to members of the Executive Director of NCRA. I am only including question and answer 4, because DRA is planning on publishing this in their newsletter in July. I will publish the entire thing here when it comes out. I am posting this on this blog site on June 11.

4. Do you think $30,000 a month is an appropriate salary for the executive director?

Let me first explain that when I posted on my blog site that we pay the ED $360,000 a year, that was salary and benefits. I did not use the word “salary” and should have been more careful in my wording. However, let me explain that I have been working with a group of people in the election campaign who are very interested in the money that is spent on the ED position, as well as other positions at NCRA. I have the IRS Form 990 for the year 2007. All non-profit organizations have to file these. And one of the items is the ED’s pay. For the year 2007, the form listed the ED’s compensation at $313,782 and his benefits at $48,969. Adding those together, it comes to $362,751. That is where I came up with the $360,000 figure.

Now, the people I have been working with have been trying to get those numbers for quite some time directly from NCRA and could never get them. So they went to a service that deals in obtaining this information and we got the numbers submitted to the IRS through this service. You do not even need to be a member of a non-profit organization to be able to obtain this Form 990 IRS tax data. Understand that 2007 is the latest Form 990 that we have. The one for 2008 will come out after this year’s convention. So this is the latest information we have. I have now been told that due to some sort of overlap, the information on the 2007 990 is for more than one year.

I have been told directly by the ED himself that his salary is $273,858, and I certainly believe him. So that would come out to about $22,821 per month.

I have also been informed that sometime next week, which will be the week of June 14th, NCRA will send out a notice to all members explaining what the ED’s salary and benefits are.

Having said all that, there are two things to keep in mind as far as I’m concerned. One is that over the period of time the current ED has been employed at NCRA, the membership numbers have been dropping. When I left the board as immediate past president in 1996, I believe we were at right about 33,000 members. We now have approximately 20,000. You can do the math. That includes all membership categories. I am not trying to say this was the ED’s fault. I’m just saying those are the numbers.

The other thing is this whole concept of confidentiality. Why would what we pay a staff member be a secret from the membership? If I pay someone to come and clean my house, I guess I should know what I’m paying them. If I’m going to hire a lawyer, I guess I should know what I’m going to have to pay the lawyer. It’s my money. They will be working for me. I have every right to know.

When there was a teleconference I believe in January of this year with all the people who had been nominated for a board position and were going to be interviewed by the Nominating Committee, the ED was explaining about a confidentiality form you have to sign if you become a member of the board. Actually, they asked you to sign even before you become a member of the board. They wanted it signed before you were interviewed by the Nominating Committee. And he said that this confidentiality thing was somewhat unique to NCRA. Well, I refused to sign the form and said that if I do get elected, I’ll have a discussion with the board first to try to do away with the requirement before I would ever sign it. So the fact that the information relating to the total compensation we pay the ED is going to be released to the entire membership of NCRA, I think is a real plus and consider it a win for those people who really like to know what’s going on. I think we have been able to kind of kill two birds with one stone as far as gathering information and dealing with the confidentiality issue.

Now, I guess you can draw this conclusion for yourselves, but while the group I’m working with was trying to get this information directly from NCRA, did the board not know they were trying to get this information? More importantly, did the secretary-treasurer not know these members were trying to get this information? If he didn’t, then there’s some communication problems between staff and the board. If he did, why was the information not turned over? The members have a right to know.

DAR

DAR! Hmmf! Good God, ya'll, what is it good for?

I know I'm dating myself by bringing back that old protest song against the Vietnam War, but I thought it might be appropriate in light of the fact that I keep hearing references from the NCRA board that we should be working with DAR technology.

I've been reporting for 37 years, and since day one, before that really, people have been telling me I will be replaced by a tape recorder, or now, a DAR machine. And I keep telling people I'll have my job for as long as I want it and will leave behind many people who do what I do that will keep their jobs for as long as they want them.

I believe that because I care what happens in the courtroom as it relates to my being able to produce the best possible record that can be made. And I believe that because as the proceeding goes through my mind and I translate the words to steno, then write them on my machine, and then my dictionary matches the strokes I am writing to their English definitions, I know that there is no other technology that does that. That entire process is not done by DAR machines, not even close. It just records what it can process, period. It doesn't think about the words it is recording. It doesn't care about the words it is recording. And it doesn't care about what's going on in the courtroom. It doesn't know if someone is not speaking loud enough so that someone down the line will be able to prepare an accurate record from its recording.

I make this analogy between stenographic court reporters and DAR. Think of a young child who has been left in front of a TV for hours each day either watching what's on TV or playing games. The parent is off doing other things and just checks on the child every once in a while. Then think of the parent who reads to the child, who takes the child outside to experience nature, takes the child to museums, zoos and other interesting places to expand the child's mind. I think of the stenographic court reporter as the child who has been nurtured, educated, and taught to care about what he or she does while performing his or her job. I think of DAR as the child who has been left to fend for itself, just letting the information go in the "brain" but not really processing it.

Some of you might say: So what? We're still losing jobs to this other technology. I say why aren't we promoting ourselves with every ounce of energy and using every resource we can to convince these people who do not make their living in the courtroom that they should be keeping stenographic court reporters in the courtroom. After all, that's what the NCRA Constitution says is the purpose of NCRA. And I can hear some of the past leaders of NCRA saying: Are you crazy? We've already tried that. It doesn't work! And I'm saying, then we need to try harder. DAR can never do what we can do because we have a presence in the courtroom or deposition suite and we can make a difference when things get out of hand. And DAR cannot provide the best product on the planet, realtime.

Some will say that realtime is not needed for every case. Well, we all know that. But it should be available. Some of the most important decisions the Supreme Court has made concern cases from the lower courts. And for crying out loud, if you have the best product, why not tout it? And believe me, I'm not throwing the stenographic non-realtimers under the bus. Those folks are also like the educated and nurtured child referred to above. But we need to put the market's best product out in front.

Does size matter?

When you think of the size of an organization, you think in terms of annual budget and the number of members it has. NCRA's budget is about $7.8 million and it has about 20,000 members, down from around 33,000 in the mid '90's. That's a pretty hefty budget and a pretty significant downturn in the number of members over the past 13 or 14 years.

From time to time, it seems about every three to four years, a proposed amendment is submitted to NCRA to permit non-stenographic reporters to become Participating or Registered members, with the right to vote, and if they become Registered Members, the right to run for and hold office. My opponent in the race for secretary-treasurer of NCRA was one of the reporters who submitted the first proposed amendment to permit voice writers to become full-fledged members of NCRA.

The annual budget for the voice writers national association in 2008 was about $125,000, and for AAERT, their budget was about $30,000. Who would benefit if members of those associations became members of NCRA? And how much would it cost NCRA in terms of setting up programs for them? And how much would it cost in terms of the potential decline in membership?

Size does matter, and we should be using what size we have left to promote stenographic reporters. Our members have spoken three times in the last eight years that they do not want non-stenographic folks to become members. It's time to listen to them, don't you think?

IF YOU WANT THE INFO, THIS IS WHAT YOU MUST DO

Below is the policy on a member being able to look at such things as the NCRA budget and other important information that a member may need to decide, for example, if they want to remain a member of the organization. I agree with the fact that COPE complaints and individual member records need to remain confidential. Things like executive salaries that can be obtained by looking at the Form 990 forms for not-for-profit organizations filed with the IRS need not be held confidential. How much is spent on studies or paying for so-called experts to perform those studies should also not be confidential. After all, it's your dues money that pays these fees. I imagine most of you will be quite surprised by the policy set forth below and who it is that decides what is confidential and what isn't. BAM


Association Members’ Access to Confidential Association Information


This policy establishes the terms and conditions under which the Association will give its members access to information that is Confidential Association Information. Information is “Confidential Association Information” if, in the opinion of the Association’s Board of Directors or Executive Director, its disclosure outside of the Association’s senior management (the Board of Directors, the Executive Director, and the Administrative Director) would likely interfere with the Association’s operations. Examples of Confidential Association Information shall include, without limitation, (1) sensitive financial information regarding the Association’s operations, (2) sensitive financial information (including salary and benefit information for identified employees), (3) matters pertaining to the Committee on Professional Responsibility, and (4) individual member records.



In order to protect its legitimate interests in preserving the confidentiality of the Confidential Association Information, the Association has adopted the following policy.



Members of the Association in good standing who request an opportunity to inspect Association books and records that contain Confidential Association Information shall be permitted to do so only as follows:



1. The member must state in writing the purpose for which he or she wishes to inspect the Association’s confidential books and records, and the stated purpose must be a proper purpose.



2. The member must enter into a binding written Agreement in the form attached to this policy as Attachment “A,” by which the Member agrees, among other things:



a. to use the information only for the stated purpose;



b. to keep the information confidential and not reveal it to any other person or entity (except for Board members and the Executive Director);





c. to pay in advance reasonable search costs (at an initial rate of $25.00 per hour or any portion thereof) for any staff time that may be involved in searching for any records that are not readily available



d. to inspect such records only at NCRA’s offices during its regular business hours





e. to give prompt written notice of any actual breach of the Agreement and of any intention to disclose Confidential Association Information to any other person or entity



f. that because of the importance of the NCRA’s interests in preserving the confidentiality of its Confidential Association Information, in the event of a threatened or actual disclosure by the member in violation of this Agreement, NCRA has the right to bring a law suit for an injunction to restrain a threatened disclosure, and to obtain damages (a minimum of $5,000 in liquidated damages) for an actual disclosure, plus court costs, expenses, and reasonable attorneys’ fees; and



g. that any litigation involving the Agreement or the member’s threatened or actual breach of the Agreement can be brought only in the courts of the District of Columbia .





AGREEMENT



This Agreement is made on this ____ day of ______________, 20__ between the National Court Reporters Association (“NCRA”), a not for profit corporation organized and existing under the laws of the District of Columbia, located at 8224 Old Courthouse Road., Vienna, Virginia 22182 and _______________, [address], a member of NCRA (“Member”).



Recitals



1. By letter dated [INSERT DATE OF MEMBER’S LETTER], a copy of which is attached hereto, Member requested the opportunity to inspect the following books and records of NCRA, which contain confidential Association information:__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________, for the following purpose(s) only:_______ _________________________ _______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________.



2. Under NCRA’s Policy on Association Members’ Access to Confidential Association Information, NCRA is prepared to permit the inspection requested, under the following terms and conditions, to each and every one of which Member explicitly agrees as shown by his or her signature below.







The parties to this agreement, in consideration of the above recitals and the following mutual covenants and stipulations, hereby agree as follows:



1. In consideration of NCRA’s agreement to permit the Member to inspect certain books and records that contain confidential Association information, the Member agrees that he or she will:



a. use any and all information contained in or derived from his or her inspection of such books and records solely for the purpose(s) specified above and for no other purpose and will not disclose or reveal any portion of such information at any time to any other person or entity (except to the members of NCRA’s Board of Directors or its Executive Director);



b. pay in advance reasonable search costs (at such rates as the Board of Directors of NCRA shall specify from time to time) for employee time involved in searching for any records that Member has requested that are not readily available; and



c. will inspect such records only during NCRA’s regular business hours and only at NCRA’s offices.



2. NCRA and Member further agree that (i) because NCRA has important interests in maintaining the confidentiality of its confidential Association information, (ii) because the injury to NCRA from any disclosure by Member of NCRA’s confidential Association information in breach of this Agreement is likely to irreparable, and (iii) because it would be difficult to ascertain the amount of damages resulting from such a breach:



a. in the event of a threatened disclosure of information by Member in violation of this Agreement, NCRA may seek appropriate injunctive relief from any court of competent jurisdiction; and



b. in the event of any actual disclosure of information by Member in violation of this Agreement, Member shall pay NCRA the sum of Five Thousand Dollars ($5,000) as liquidated damages for each such disclosure in violation of this Agreement, or, at NCRA’s election, the amount of NCRA’s actual damages from each such disclosure.



3. Member further agrees to notify NCRA’s Executive Director in writing (i) of any breach of this Agreement by inadvertence or otherwise (which notice must include information disclosed, the date(s) of disclosure, and the person(s) or entit(ies) to which the information was disclosed, and must be received by the Executive Director by facsimile or otherwise, within two business days of the breach of this Agreement), and (ii) of Member’s intention to make any disclosure of NCRA’s confidential information to any other person or entity whatsoever (which notice must identify the information the Member plans to disclose, the date of the planned disclosure, and the persons or entities to which the planned disclosure is to be made, and must be received by the Executive Director not less than ten days before the date of the planned disclosure).



4. Member hereby irrevocably (i) consents to the personal jurisdiction of the courts of the District of Columbia, (ii) agrees that such courts shall have exclusive jurisdiction and venue, concerning any controversy relating to this Agreement or Member’s threatened or actual breach thereof, and (iii) designated NCRA’s Executive Director as Member’s agent for service of any and all process in any proceeding relating to such controversy (which process the Executive Director shall promptly forward to Member by first-class mail at the address set forth above or at such other address as Member may designate in writing).



5. If NCRA takes any action (by claim, counterclaim, demand, or otherwise) to enforce this Agreement or prevent a breach thereof, Member agrees to pay all costs and expenses, including reasonable attorneys’ fees, incurred by NCRA in connection with such action, whether or not NCRA ultimately prevails in such action.



6. This Agreement shall inure to the benefit of, and be binding upon, the heirs, executors, administrators, personal representatives, and successors of the respective parties, and as to NCRA only, its assignee, if any. Member is not permitted to assign its rights or duties under this Agreement.



7. No waiver of a breach of any term of this Agreement shall be held to be a waiver of any other subsequent breach. All remedies provided by this Agreement in the event of a breach shall be construed as cumulative, meaning in addition to any other remedy provided in this Agreement or by law.



8. This Agreement shall be governed in all respects by the law of the District of Columbia .



9. This Agreement constitutes the entire agreement of the parties regarding its subject matter, and supercedes any and all previous communications, representations, or agreements, either, oral or written. This Agreement can be amended or modified only by a writing signed by both parties.



In witness whereof, the parties have executed this Agreement as of the day and year first above written.



NATIONAL COURT REPORTERS ASSOCIATION



by:_________________________________________________

Name Title



MEMBER:



____________________________________________________

Numbers Are Important

Did you ever stop and think how important numbers are? I mean numbers as they relate to our profession and how our profession appears to our customers. It's interesting that COSCA would use our numbers against us and how that can affect how other people perceive what we're all about.

As an example, we all know there are many reporters who do realtime on a regular basis. But the fact remains, there are only a little over 2,000 Certified Realtime Reporters. That low number gets used against us. Our opponents can say things to the effect that, yes, they can do realtime, but there's only a couple thousand court reporters in the entire country who can do it well enough to become certified, which I think we can all agree is a negative. We're also hearing a lot about how there is little need for realtime in many situations, and to an extent, I can agree with that. But that does not mean that we shouldn't all try to provide realtime and become certified in realtime.

I like to tell a story about how I took a trial in a small municipal court many years ago. The plaintiff was Kodak, the film and camera company. Kodak used to have little kiosks in shopping mall parking lots, and one mall was trying to kick them out so they could expand the mall. But Kodak fought hard for their rights under their lease because they had these kiosks all over the country and they sold a lot of product out of them and people dropped off a lot of film there to be developed. The lawyers representing Kodak wanted that transcript on a daily basis, and had realtime be available at the time, they would have wanted realtime. The question is: If a case like this came up today in a small municipal court, would you be ready to provide realtime to the attorneys involved? It's important that we are always ready to provide the best product in the market, realtime, and that we all be able to provide it for any type of case.

Steno Only As Voting Members

During the past several years, from time to time the NCRA Board has been in favor of amendments to the C&B which have been proposed to allow voice writers or videographers to become Registered Members of the Association, which, if passed, would allow these new categories of members to vote and run for and hold offices on the NCRA Board. The membership has voted every time to defeat these proposed amendments.

As I'm sure you will recall from last year's business meeting in Washington, D.C., the motion to rescind a motion of the Board dealing with testing voice writers and digital audio recorders narrowly missed passing, once again indicating to the Board that the membership does not favor permitting these people to be members or having NCRA test them. After all, giving them the NCRA seal of approval would do nothing more than help them take jobs away from stenographic reporters. I promise that I will never vote to allow people who use other methods to make the record to become Registered or Participating Members of NCRA.

CRR Exam

In 1996, when I passed my CRR exam, I was thrilled to have passed an exam that was between RPR and RMR literary speed in realtime. Now that the exam has been downgraded to straight 180 wpm, I'm not so sure I think that much of it. I only wish that someone would give their closing argument at 180 wpm while I'm hooked up to four computers in the courtroom.