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

Just food for thought: Perhaps NCRA might consider soliciting volunteers to serve on task forces before making the appointments. I don't see anything on the NCRA website about the Incentive/Gift Giving Task Force. I am sure those on it will do a wonderful job, but there are many familiar names.

I did go to Donna Collins's website and appreciated her comment that it is good to give others a chance to participate. Of course, I won't miss the chance to mention that this is part of the reason DRA members (and others) are promoting a bylaws amendment to be able to be considered for affiliation. Pure speculation, but I expect all of those folks have served in their state affiliate, part of a network that is automatically considered to supply volunteers on important issues facing our profession. Lynda Goddard

Just an update on the VP and Board candidate chat process.  The candidates have been submitted ten questions based upon your question posted.  Early tomorrow, a link to those questions and answers will be posted for you tomorrow.  The chat sessions are scheduled for Monday for VP and Tuesday for board - please use the intervening time to formulate your follow-up questions.  I would ask you all please to allow the candidates to prepare for that chat and resevere your follow-up questions until the chat.

Later tomorrow I'll post the chat guidelines.  Please be informed about the guidelines before you join the chat.  If you have any questions about the guidelines, I'll be checking the posts throughout the weekend, and hopefully be able to address them.  However, they should be fairly clear, and I'm hoping they won't result in any questions.  But if they do, please don't hesitate to contact me.

Sandy.

Good morning.  Below are the links to the questions and the answers submitted by your vice-presidential and director candidates:  Melanie Humphrey-Sonntag, Jason T. Meadors, Tami Smith and Donna L. Collins.   (You may have to cut and paste to your Web browser)

• http://ncraonline.org/Vote/Candidates/chat_vp.htm
• http://ncraonline.org/Vote/Candidates/chat_director.htm

Our chats are scheduled for Vice Presidents on Monday, 9:00 EST and Tuesday 9:00 EST for Director.  Please join in for the chat.  The guidelines for the chat will be coming out later today, as indicated in my prior post.  Any questions?  Please don't hesitate to contact me directly or post here.  My e-mail is:

realtimecsr@calweb.com

Sandy Bunch VanderPol, RMR, CRR, CSR #3033

Thanks, Sandy. 

I'm looking forward to this.

I think we should all sit down with a glass of wine Monday night and enjoy the dialogue that will be going back and forth. 

(Now, if we had this on a Saturday night, I'd say let's go all out with martinis!!) 

 

Sarah,

Sorry you might have misunderstood what I said to Breck.  He wasn't in the turmoil that happened in 2001 and 2004 and I didn't want him to accidentally get anything started on voicewriting unless he was ready for the war when that subject is usually brought up.  That is what I was saying.  I said from one Texan to another, if you remember.  Texans usually understand each other.  I feel certain Breck understood exactly what I was warning about. I don't care who says what on this forum unless what they say is against forum rules.  I just had a friend that mentioned voicewriting one time on this forum in either 2001 or 2004.  He was the owner of a huge firm in the United States.  He said he was attacked so badly that he would never be back on this forum again.  I have never seen him. back.  I did not want this same thing to happen to Breck Record by innocently stepping in to a question like that unless he wanted to.

Hope that clears up the meaning of what I said.  The meaning seemed to get lost somewhere.  Perhaps I worded it poorly.  

 .

Thank you for the explanation, Shirley.  It's much appreciated! 

Will you be in Anaheim this week?

No, I attended the firmowners in February.  Had to make some tradeouts.  Since we can vote remotely I will probably not be at all the NCRA conventions in the future but will go to those where I have not been before.  I guess we'll have to meet again here sight unseen on the forum.

Adam,

I would suggest that the Board be certain that our members know what an incentive is.  Firms are getting around the problem by saying they are staying within the $100 limit.  They are not.  These same firms are giving gifts for birthdays, secretaries' day, Christmas, etc.  I assure you that this adds to over $100.  The advertising of giveaways has really made this a problem.

We can take away membership at NCRA.  We can take away advertisement for only the member representative in good standing.  First though we must define that it is an incentive from day one to know in advance that the firm will definitely receive work if they give a gift.  If this one thing could be changed and a proper definition be advertised that this is definitely an incentive and not a gift, we would at least be headed in the right direction.

We might consider that firms have to have as member representative to advertise with NCRA and that member would be in jeopardy of losing their license.  We could do that right away while we are studying how to make firms members.

One big firm starts this, another follows.  Then the smaller firms have to do this to compete.  The consumer's price goes up because it is fairly obvious that $25 cannot be given for each job.  The end user will be paying more for the product just because the secretaries, paralegals or attorneys are accepting these payoffs.

Here, here, Shirley!

Gifts are something given with no expected reciprocity, as a "thank you." To me, incentives/rewards -- based on number of depos, length of depos, referrals, whatever -- are a fancy name for "kickbacks." Although I have several examples, the latest is:

Merrill Legal Solutions has a web page on the Internet offering an incentive rewards program called Depo Points: http://www.depopoints.com/dpp/about.asp. The offer is one point, or $1.50, per every $50 spent with the reporting firm. A different court reporting firm based in Alabama, Freedom Court Reporting, offers the same kind of incentive rewards program, also offering one point, or $1.50, per every $50 spent with the reporting firm, but calls them Freedom Points: http://www.freedomreporting.com/freedom_points.html Interestingly, the Merrill site specifically mentions Alabama.

Are these incentives being passed on to the clients ultimately paying the bills? Is there price-shifting to copy orders to finance the rewards? Are more depos booked, more questions asked (to make it longer), increasing the cost of litigation, that might not be necessary? Worse, are individual reporters being paid less as a trade for more work?

I can only hope those appointed to the Incentive/Gift Giving Task Force distinguish the difference and solicit input. Incentives/Rewards, in my opinion, are unethical, whether $2 or $200. Lynda Goddard

Are more depos booked, more questions asked (to make it longer), increasing the cost of litigation, that might not be necessary?

Linda,

That is an excellent point.   

 

Thanks, Lillian, for agreeing.

I don't expect that it is a consideration for the majority of attorneys, but raises the question(s) of either actual or perceived favoritism. In any event, vying for clients based on, basically, kickbacks is dispicable to me. There is a major difference between "gifts" given in appreciation for business versus calculated "rewards" based on business generated and referrals.

Okay, I've probably said enough. Lynda Goddard

Lynda, you are so liberal.

I think it starts at zero.  I don't even agree to $2.  You were nice to call it kickbacks.  They called it bribery at the firmowners' meeting in February. 

Hopefully, this will be a top priority for the association this year.  I appreciate that a task force has been appointed.  Hope they come forward with some workable ideas. 

Merrill, I think, is doing this only in Alabama.  They had quit advertising the $25 gift certificates they were giving nationwide for a while.  I have seen one of the transcripts of one of these companies and they have some unique spacing.  With not giving any more than that on a page, they can easily give away the gifts.

 

 

Whether it's called a gift or incentive or ANYTHING OF VALUE, I think it's a violation of our current Code of Ethics:

Refrain from giving, directly or indirectly, any gift, incentive, reward or anything of value to attorneys, clients, witnesses, insurance companies or any other persons or entities associated with the litigation, or to the representatives or agents of any of the foregoing, except for (1) items that do not exceed $100 in the aggregate per recipient each year... 

Call it what you will, incentive or BRIBE, it's a violation, and I agree with Shirley in that I believe it's the REPORTER'S obligation to avoid the appearance of impropriety, and having a firm do the dirty work of bribing attorneys for work that directly puts additional income into the reporter's pocket doesn't mesh.

 Lisa,

Don't you mean Code of Professional Ethics and not bylaws?  (Don't mean to be picky, but there is a big difference there.)

Yes, you're a great mind reader.  Edit made.  Thanks.