VP and Board Chat Event Scheduled (Submit your questions now)

What I think NCRA can do to combat incentives and gift-giving is to educate the Bar on the topic.  It may have to be delegated down to the state level associations to cover each state, but I would think if the Bar were educated to the fact that NCRA deems it unprofessional conduct -- and educates them as to why it is deemed unprofessional conduct -- the attorneys might just have a duh moment and refuse to do business with the offenders.

Maybe that's wishful thinking, though.

Janice McMoran, CSR, RMR, CRR:

What I think NCRA can do to combat incentives and gift-giving is to educate the Bar on the topic.  It may have to be delegated down to the state level associations to cover each state, but I would think if the Bar were educated to the fact that NCRA deems it unprofessional conduct -- and educates them as to why it is deemed unprofessional conduct -- the attorneys might just have a duh moment and refuse to do business with the offenders.

Maybe that's wishful thinking, though.

Good thinking, Janice.  I'd be willing to do whatever I had to do at the state level.  It just sickens me to see what's out there.  I could never compete with it.  And if I were a large firm, would I?  NO.

Janice and Lillian (et al.)

At its March meeting, the NCRA Board had a lengthy discussion on this topic (including the idea of a task force to study and address the issue).

However, given NCRA's status as, A, a professional association of individuals and, B, a national organization whose members' conduct is bound by the various state and/or local laws, licenses, regulations, and administrative procedures, our initial impression of an appropriate answer to the "What can/is/will NCRA do about these practices?" question was exactly what Janice suggests:  education, but action will probably necessarily be at a state level.

After all, as Supreme Court Justice Louis D. Brandeis famously wrote:  "Sunshine is the best disinfectant."

Lillian Freiler:

I've recently learned that President Kathy DiLorenzo has appointed a task force for gift incentives.  

Thank you, Kathy, for appointing the task force.

Maybe the task force can investigate this, too, offered by Merrill Legal Solutions.  I don't know if it's still in force and effect, but it's certainly still out there in Cyberspace.

http://www.depopoints.com/dpp/about.asp

Edited to add:  Here was the source that led me to this:

http://www.jericosolutions.com/news.aspx?id=2

Adam D. Miller:

Janice and Lillian (et al.)

At its March meeting, the NCRA Board had a lengthy discussion on this topic (including the idea of a task force to study and address the issue).

However, given NCRA's status as, A, a professional association of individuals and, B, a national organization whose members' conduct is bound by the various state and/or local laws, licenses, regulations, and administrative procedures, our initial impression of an appropriate answer to the "What can/is/will NCRA do about these practices?" question was exactly what Janice suggests:  education, but action will probably necessarily be at a state level.

After all, as Supreme Court Justice Louis D. Brandeis famously wrote:  "Sunshine is the best disinfectant."

 

 Thanks, Adam, for that update.

Don't want to start a thread drift, but I'm not receiving these threads even though enabled -- not just on this subject but others as well.

  Judy

It just doesn't work, Judy.  It's very frustrating.  I've had my messages set to "enable email notification" for months and it just doesn't work :(

However, given NCRA's status as, A, a professional association of individuals ...

Thanks Adam.  But let's see if the task force can look into changing "a professional association of individuals" to "a professional association of individuals AND court reporting firms."  Then we can modify the COPE.  Make sense?

These ideas about firm membership are a start, but I think they are flawed in that you certainly aren't going to get the biggest offenders to join NCRA and forego a big cash cow voluntarily, and that's all the firm membership is--voluntary.

I say hold the reporters that work for these firms responsible for avoiding the appearance of impropriety under the same tenet as PAO 29 regarding non-NCRA-member firm owner's actions.  Heck, the reporters heads are rolling when the firm sends out the audio according to the PAOs.  In Kentucky, if a firm sends a reporter out on a contracting job, it's the reporter who is held responsible.  Why not make the firms answer to their reporters on this one, too, when they drop the ball and circumvent the Code of Ethics?

I say deal directly with the bar associations on a state level and make the attorneys answer for why they are accepting "compensation" from a third party, their reporters, without consultation and permission.

I say take some action NOW.  This issue has gone ignored for too long.

These ideas about firm membership are a start, but I think they are flawed in that you certainly aren't going to get the biggest offenders to join NCRA and forego a big cash cow voluntarily, and that's all the firm membership is--voluntary.

Yes, Lisa, very true.  I don't have an answer to that, but if there's a way that firm membership meant something *special* to NCRA???  I'm not quite sure of the words I'm looking for here. 

What you say is true.  Why would a firm that's loopholing through COPE now and the laws or regulations of their state, join NCRA as a firmowner if they couldn't continue to do the gift-giving?  Of course, they would not.

Hopefully, the task force will think about that as well.

Hold the reporters responsible for what their firm is doing?  I don't know about that.  I'm sure most of the reporters who work for these firms/agencies do not have the option of leaving their firm and finding employment somewhere else.  They need to continue to work and make money.   Just assumptions on my part.

If I work for a firm that gives away incentives; I do not like it and have spoken to them about it expressing my disdain and I continue to work there, shall I be the one punished for it?  I hope not.  Shall I stop working for them because of what they choose to do?  If I can be assured of steady work and making the same amount of money, seniority, etc., probably. 

Deal directly with the bar association -- SUPERB thought!

Lillian,

I don't like the idea of holding the reporters responsible for their firm's gifting practices either, quite frankly, but it's the only way I can think of that would make these firms toe the line and fast.  Do the firms want to risk the loss of their valued CRRs, RPRs, RMRs, etc.?  I bet not.  If I lost my certifications because of a firm's action, you'd better believe I'd be filing suit for damages.  It's this--the fear of losing money--that might do the trick.

If holding the reporters responsible for the firm's action is not pallatable, then I would like to point out that the PAO regarding providing audio is lacking in protecting the reporters.  It should be revised so that the entity diseminating it is held responsible for its content.  In far too many cases, the firms are the ones that profit from the value-added services of providing the BAM, they are the ones that create the product, but it's the reporter's head that rolls if they do it poorly.  Suggesting that it's the reporter's decision to provide audio to the firm is naive when the firms are the ones who control the reporter's livelihood.

All guises aside, I think some firms have way too much power and way too much freedom.  Close up these loopholes, please, please, please. Individuals are paying too high a cost to wait for NCRA to take action.

I'd be curious to know how much decrease in VRF traffic has occurred since the "upgrade" to this new platform.  Every other forum, including the former VRF, sends email notifications but the new improved VRF, nothing.  Why do they even bother to have the "enable email notification" button?  Plus the fact that when you hit reply, it takes too long.  I come to this forum maybe once a month whereas I used to come here once a day at least.

Breck,

How about making a deal to hold attorneys' bills until the case is settled.  Incentive or not?  Ethical or not?

Shirley Houston:

How about making a deal to hold attorneys' bills until the case is settled.  Incentive or not?  Ethical or not?

Of course, if payment is contingent upon the client winning the suit, that's in direct violation of the Code, as noted in Advisory Opinion 17.

- Jason
 

Thanks, everyone, for your spirited input to this thread! Moderator Sandy has culled your posts into 10 tough questions for us candidates, and our responses will be posted here tomorrow.

In the meantime, President Kathy today announced the members of the Incentives/Gift Giving Task Force. They are: Huey Bang, Mississippi; Harvey Schulman, Georgia; Doug Friend, Oregon; Jim DeCrescenzo, Pennsylvania; Mary Ann Ridenour, South Carolina; Sandy Bunch VanderPol, California; Rick Levy, Florida; and Pete Wacht and Mona Savino from NCRA staff. As you can see, we have some of the brightest folks in the business and a huge geographic diversity.

The task force members have already started gathering information and taking environmental scans; their first meeting is this week. Hopefully, they'll have information to share with all of us in Anaheim; if not, however, I assure you that this matter is firmly on NCRA's front burner and answers will be flowing your way soon.

No, there are no quick and easy answers, as evidenced by this and other threads. Do we need to work together? Definitely. Can NCRA "do it" for us without our input?  Absolutely not.  We depend on each other :)

Thanks again for your input into our candidate questions and for caring so passionately about our profession. I look forward to "chatting" with all of you on Monday at 9:00 p.m. Eastern time.

Melanie