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.
Friday, June 11, 2010
Tuesday, June 8, 2010
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.
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.
Tuesday, June 1, 2010
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?
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?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)