Declining membership

 To address the issue of declining membership has anyone looked to see if there a relation in the decline in membership, the number of graduating/certifying students and those retiring?  In other words are there more CR retiring than new CR's?   The other point in any organization and membership is why do the current members stay members?  Why did they join in the first place?  Who have they influenced to join?  As a lifetime member of Girl Scouts I maintain my membership because of the "good vibe" that everyone has with Girl Scouts.  Do members of NCRA have that same relationship with non court reporters and other legal field organizations?  If they answer is no then we, all of the current membership, need to work on that first.  NCRA may want to encourage all current working members to include the NCRA logo on all of their business cards, encourage all agency members to use the same, and encourage other legal representatives, i.e., paralegals, transcriptionists, CART, Captioner, etc., to also use and display the logo.  The image of NCRA needs to be strengthened and understood by others that use CR's that a standard of professionalism is what NCRA is all about.The American Legion and American Legion Auxiliary group I belong to also struggle with membership and attendance.  Yes, of course, age of eligible participants is an issue but it is also the image.  Again, their first question is, "Do we have an image?"  If the answer is yes, then the next question is, "Is it the image that we want?"So does NCRA have an image with all that come in contact with its members?  Do others in the legal, television, hearing impaired arena even know about NCRA members?  And if they do, is it the image they want?

Virginia Kling

Future CSR

Virginia, I have only looked at the decline in NCRA membership from California -- from a high of 5,967 in 9/97 to 3,885 in 9/07. During that same time period, California licensees have declined by about 300, still running about 8,000 in the state.

The factors are endless, but my perception is that there is great concern about not the image of NCRA, but the direction. It is viewed as being the advocate for stenographic reporters. It is hard for some of us to grasp how NCRA can fight for us and advocate/accept that ER can work in some instances, voicewriters are almost equal, digital recording is the future -- an inherent conflict of interests.

I absolutely realize that is oversimplification and may not be the intent, but that is what it appears to many. To me, Girl Scouts and American Legion are not comparable in that they are charitable and community organizations instead of a professional association.

Lynda Goddard

Let me clarify and thank you for pointing out those things that I knew but didn't even factor in (the not-for-profit status).  California is a good indicator; isn't it? 

 I hadn't looked into the basic of why or what are the immediate reasons for decline. Of course, the direction that NCRA is going is yet another factor to then put into the equation.

 I wasn't trying to compare the GS or Am.Legion to NCRA but that all groups stuggle with membership and sometimes going back to the basics to ask the basic "Why?" questions are a starting off point in evaluating "how" things got to where they are.  So in using those examples (GS and Am.Legion) I was stating that they have built an image of perception to those who are not even involved in them. 

My husband belongs to SAE (Society of Automotive Engineers) and he rarely attends conventions but remains a member because of the value being a member has in the automotive field.  When he says he is an Automotive Engineer and a member of SAE it sends a very positive message to those in the automotive field and those that only know a little about the field.  That is the profession image NCRA should stive for.

Thanks Lynda for responding.

the direction that NCRA is going is yet another factor to then put into the equation.

Virginia and Lynda,

Just my opinion here:  I think the direction NCRA is heading is encompassing what the market is demanding.  ER is here and in full force.  It's been here for a long time and it's NOT going away.   NCRA, in my opinion, is thinking of all methods of voice to text, whether it be ER, voice, machine, smoke signals, whatever.  It can't be machine any longer.  We are an association of court reporters; not machine writers. 

If someone wants to start a machine writer's association, hey, I'm there.  But I'll never give up on NCRA.

 

Honestly, I don't know that California is a good indicator. I don't know why other methods of making the record hasn't taken hold here when it seems to be prevalent in so many areas of the country. I do know that we are large enough to support three statewide associations, and all have paid lobbyists -- shameless plug for the proposed bylaws amendment that would allow more than one NCRA affiliate in states with over 10 percent of NCRA membership. We write and pass legislation to protect stenographic reporters.

I do appreciate the "image" -- great idea. I was trying to convey that NCRA means pretty much zip in California, and I think it could draw people in by accepting our state testing in lieu of the RPR so that they could go for higher certifications. It may not mean much to attorneys, but there still are CR firms that are impressed by an RMR or CRR. The problem I face in promoting NCRA is that here in California, ER is not "here and in full force," as Lillian writes. We are still fighting it, pretty successfully. Although I realize NCRA may be looking at reality nationwide, many CA reporters would prefer to spend their money to support our efforts rather than support that mindset.

Please, I'm not disputing the trend. It is just that we here in California are not willing to accept that we have to acquiesce and "manage" the inclusion of other methods. And the comment I get most often is that NCRA is promoting other recordation means, beyond just keeping apprised. Lynda Goddard

Lynda Goddard:

The problem I face in promoting NCRA is that here in California, ER is not "here and in full force," as Lillian writes. We are still fighting it, pretty successfully. Although I realize NCRA may be looking at reality nationwide, many CA reporters would prefer to spend their money to support our efforts rather than support that mindset.

Lynda, I think the situation is a little less black-and-white than NCRA/nationally v CA.  NCRA, through the ER Task Force and "Marketing Court Reporter Value -Train the Trainer" seminars, is vigorously fighting the spread of ER.  NCRA believes that the best method, bar none, for making the record, is the stenographic -- preferrably realtime-capable -- court reporter.  Each state -- and, often each county within a state -- sets its own rules, however; and NCRA must also deal with the varying realities on the ground in a variety of locales.

In states where ER is "here and in full force," where reporters are faced with the choice of working with their ER counterparts or not working at all, reality dictates accommodation. 

Lynda Goddard:

Please, I'm not disputing the trend. It is just that we here in California are not willing to accept that we have to acquiesce and "manage" the inclusion of other methods. And the comment I get most often is that NCRA is promoting other recordation means, beyond just keeping apprised. Lynda Goddard

Well, I hope in the future you'll advise those who comment that "NCRA is promoting other recordation means" that they are misinformed.  Members of the Member Value Proposition (MVP) team completed their yearlong work in November of 2007, the NCRA Board reviewed and considered their report in a three-day retreat in December, and NCRA staff have labored hard to distill that session into a plan of action for implementing those decisions.  The result is a new Strategic Plan for NCRA, which may be found here:  http://ncraonline.org/AboutNCRA/Governance/statplan/default.htm.  I'd encourage you and all members to read and consider in its entirety this roadmap for the future of our professional association, but I'd like to highlight these two paragraphs:

NCRA needs to fiercely advance the interests of its core membership, continuing and expanding the critical member services that will empower the verbatim stenographic reporting profession to survive and thrive into the future. To accomplish this, the Association will need a focused, pragmatic, and disciplined business effort to expand the customer base for the products and services NCRA offers. New customers and new markets for association products and services will reduce our dependence on membership dues, as well as generate revenues that can be reinvested in meeting the needs of our core: the current NCRA membership.

Simply put: Advocate for and strengthen NCRA’s core membership. Innovate and build on NCRA’s established competencies.

I'd implore anyone -- member or nonmember -- who is uncertain about the direction NCRA is taking or the value and relevance of NCRA to their state, their career, or their future to read those words and take them to heart.  I know every member of the NCRA Board does.

And, Lynda, thank you for your time spent on committees and associations, serving our profession, and for engaging in this dialogue on the Forum.  I look forward to meeting you in Anaheim in July.

  I'm not sure if I understand the situation, so please clarify what I've missed or where I am wrong.  It looks to me that the value of the Engate lawsuit to each court reporter is well above the cost of dues, and benefits many CRs who are riding on the tails of those who joined NCRA.  I could understand not joining out of protest, but wonder if there really is no value to CRs.  What would have happened if Engate prevailed?  Who was leading the defense?

 

Adam, I certainly didn't mean to imply NCRA v Calif. It is the only state I know enough to be able to offer any thoughts. And I absolutely recognize that there are realities in other states that require addressing. I just wrote to a number of people in our state that if they think Calif. can remain an island, I think they are dreaming.

Thank you for the information and link. I did see the NCRA e-mail about ER, which has been favorably rec'd. And, Laura, thank you for reminding me about the Engate litigation. Obviously, I do support our associations and consider those who don't "parasites," living off the work they do.

So, Adam, any thoughts on exploring the idea of RPR reciprocity for certain state licensures? (and thanks for the pat on the back.) Lynda Goddard

>>I think the direction NCRA is heading is encompassing what the market is demanding.  ER is here and in full force.  It's been here for a long time and it's NOT going away.   NCRA, in my opinion, is thinking of all methods of voice to text, whether it be ER, voice, machine, smoke signals, whatever.  It can't be machine any longer.  We are an association of court reporters; not machine writers. 

>>If someone wants to start a machine writer's association, hey, I'm there.  But I'll never give up on NCRA.

Lillian, you know that I'm very fond of you, but I must disagree with your post. In my opinion, if ER, voice, smoke signals, whatever wish to start their own association, they should go for it. As it is currently structured, NCRA is the association for the verbatim stenographic reporter.

NCRA Bylaws

Article I–Name

The name of this organization shall be National Court Reporters Association (the “Association”).

 

Article II–Purposes

Definition: in the context of this document, stenographic verbatim reporting refers to that reporting technology by the use of symbols, manually or by stenographic machine.

The purposes of this Association shall be:

1. To assume responsibility for leadership and enlightenment of verbatim stenographic reporters and of the public regarding the special competency, importance, and value of verbatim stenographic reporters, and to promote verbatim stenographic reporting technologies by the use of symbols, manually or by stenographic machine, over alternative reporting methods.
2. To promote a broader understanding and acceptance of the verbatim stenographic reporter as an integral part of the judicial process.
3. To apply the knowledge and experience of verbatim stenographic reporters, working in cooperation with the bench and bar, toward the upgrading and improvement of the criminal and civil justice system, in order that the public good may best be served, and to promote a broader understanding within the profession of the responsibility of a verbatim stenographic reporter to participate actively in the achievement of this objective.
4. To encourage, establish, and maintain high standards of professional education, competence, and performance of verbatim stenographic reporters.
5. To conduct and promote lawful and proper technical and business research to enhance the services of verbatim stenographic reporters.
6. To promote lawful and proper professional ethics, as well as compliance with all applicable laws, including antitrust laws, for verbatim stenographic reporters.
7. To stimulate and encourage the establishment and maintenance of appropriate training and educational facilities and programs for persons interested in the profession of verbatim stenographic reporting, and to promote verbatim stenographic reporting as a successful career.
8. To cooperate with federal, state, and local governments, their agencies, and other organized groups for the benefit of the public and the verbatim stenographic reporting profession.
9. To conduct educational seminars and conferences relating to verbatim stenographic reporting.
10. To further the exchange of professional knowledge and to disseminate, by all appropriate means, to the extent permitted by law, accurate knowledge and information with respect to the verbatim stenographic reporting profession.
11. To advance the interests and general welfare of the verbatim stenographic reporting profession.
12. To promote and encourage development of realtime reporting skills and ethics to provide communication access pursuant to the Americans with Disabilities Act.
13. To do any and all things that are lawful and appropriate in the furtherance of these purposes.
    

Jerry, I agree absolutely with what you've posted.  But at the same time, don't you feel that our world has changed dramatically, and that we have to change to function successfully and credibly in that world?  While we still compete in some situations, not only do we now work alongside of voice writers, audio monitors and transcribers, in many instances they are US.  We have machine writers cross-training to become voice writers.  We have machine writers who are transcribing audio for the courts.  We have reporters who are using backup audio and in many cases selling it as a value-added service.  Students sometimes transcribe audio while training on their machines.  We can no longer afford to take a divisive stand.  Are there places where only machine writers can and should be working?  I believe that without reservation.  All the rest can be a matter of judgment.  I would like to work toward a day when NCRA gets to weigh in with authority on that judgment across the U.S.

Does that mean I'm advocating membership right now for the other methods?  I am not.  (Chicago in 2004 wasn't fun for me either.)  I believe, though, that NCRA can give and take a lot of benefit from closer alliances with them.

Karen

I also agree wholeheartedly with what Jerry posted.  I know I'm going to get slammed here, but I think there would be a danger in accepting other methods into NCRA because it would lend credence to those methods and may further decrease the number of students entering machine programs.  A simultaneous "written symbol" method of verbatim stenographic reporting is the best method for preserving a legal proceeding.  And until that changes, I think we would be doing a disservice to the public and the legal community to welcome another method.  I do not see that changing in the near future based on my experience.

That being said, Jerry also quoted No. 12 from the purposes of the association of NCRA:   

To promote and encourage development of realtime reporting skills and ethics to provide communication access pursuant to the Americans with Disabilities Act.

While I do not and would not promote voice realtime over the stenographic method, I struggle day to day trying to cover CART assignments.  We are beginning to have to turn down this work.  That concerns me!  I am not concerned over losing the work; I am concerned that persons with hearing loss are not being accommodated.  With a standardized realtime test mechanism for CART (particularly Remote CART), whether machine or voice, more people with hearing loss could be accommodated.  I prefer the machine method; hands down (literally and figuratively) it is the best.  My office had an opportunity recently to test a stenomask reporter using voice realtime who just walked into our office knowing that we were looking for CART providers.  This person has been providing CART.  The output was not acceptable and did not meet even a minimum standard.  It would have been very confusing for a person with hearing loss who was trying to rely on the text output for communication. 

Without a national standardized test for CART, regardless of method, we are doing a disservice to the millions of people with hearing loss.  We need to give some thought to that issue, whether it is an alliance with NVRA, or allowing voice realtimers to sit for our CCP without the benefit of membership.  It is the only way we can compare apples to apples for realtime skill for  communication access for millions of people nationwide.  

  

 

 

Karen,

I know that note was to Jerry but something you said bothers me because I have seen this for about 15 years now.  We no longer are willing to step out and fight for what is really right .  We just want to take the easy way out and just all be one big family.  I truly believe that NCRA is headed for having a family that is a dysfunctional one if we add every method.  I heard someone say the other day that had retired and was only reading the magazine that they were glad they were not active in NCRA anymore because they didn't think they would like it. 

You are absolutely right that we do have to change.  We should only change in ways that are better though and not in ways that some are suggesting.  If we have the kind of organization that some of the officers of NCRA want, I think you will find many that will no longer be proud to be a member of NCRA.. 

So, please, Karen, be careful what you wish for.  You may be sorry when you get it.

Thanks for listening. 

 

 

 

 

 

Shirley, you and I disagree on a couple topics.  You know I don't respond to every post regarding NCRA matters, but you also know I ALWAYS listen.  Have a sunny and blessed Easter weekend.

Karen

>>Karen wrote: But at the same time, don't you feel that our world has changed dramatically, and that we have to change to function successfully and credibly in that world?

Hi, Karen! I'll agree without any doubt that the world has changed dramatically.

I was replying to my friend Lillian's post where she said: We are an association of court reporters, not machine writers; I'll never give up on NCRA.

My goal was to point out to her that unless and until there is a change in the bylaws NCRA (the members) will not give up on verbatim stenographic reporting.

I surrender, Jerry!