Motion
The undersigned members hereby move to rescind the action of the Board of Directors taken in November 2008, Motion 08-11-13 (copied below).
Complaint
Pursuant to the NCRA Constitution & Bylaws (C&B), Article IX, Section 5(a), the undersigned members assert that the action of the Board of Directors directing staff to assess the feasibility and desirability of testing nonstenographic court reporters, transcriptionists, and other technologies, taken in November 2008, Motion 08-11-13 (copied below) is in direct conflict with the Constitution and Bylaws of the Association, is beyond the scope of purpose of the Association, and will have detrimental effects on the core membership of the Association.
Statement of Reasoning
The undersigned voting members feel “aggrieved” based upon the following:
The exploration of testing and certifying “nonstenographic court reporters” is in direct conflict of the purposes as stated in the NCRA C&B, Article II, specifically:
” 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.”
We believe there are inherent conflicts of interest in that there would be an inability to promote verbatim stenograph reporting technologies if NCRA were to test or certify the competency of “alternate reporting methods.”
“4. To encourage, establish, and maintain high standards of professional education, competence, and performance of verbatim stenographic reporters.”
We believe NCRA is not charged with establishing any standards beyond those for verbatim stenographic reporters.
“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.
Although this purpose may be interpreted to allow testing/certification of nonstenographic reporters, we believe the intent is to benefit the public vis-a-vis stenographic reporting, not benefit the public as would a governmental protection agency.
Quoting from the November 2008 Summary of the Board meeting NCRA (copied below):
“Using a single, uniform test would protect stenographic reporters by holding all technologies to the same standard and assure a level playing field.”
We believe it is neither the purpose nor duty of NCRA to “level the playing field,” but rather to advance verbatim stenographic reporting.
We further believe that testing/certifying nonstenographic methods would fundamentally change the nature of NCRA from a professional trade association advocating and defending stenography to one focused on the end product; i.e., the transcript. The C&B clearly defines “stenography” in Article II as the use of symbols to capture the spoken word. Any electronic audio recording does not utilize such skill.
“In addition to allowing technologies with no or inferior testing regimes to claim equivalence to verbatim stenography, refusing to test other methods amounts to relinquishing NCRA’s claim of preeminence as a testing authority.”
We believe this statement to be the crux. NCRA’s purpose is not to be the testing authority for all record makers; it is to promote stenographic reporters .
The ultimate question: Do you want NCRA to be the preeminent “testing authority” for all methods, or do you want NCRA to limit its scope and advocacy?
We believe it cannot effectively do both.
-o0o-
NOVEMBER 2008 MINUTES
MVP/MEMBERSHIP: TESTING & CERTIFICATION OF NON-MEMBERS (E.G.; NONSTENO)
Ms. Lehman also reported on the testing and certification of non-members. There was discussion on this item.
MOTION 08-11-13: MOVED, seconded and carried that the Board directs staff to develop a business plan for testing non-members, with the plan to include an assessment of the feasibility and desirability of testing stenographic and non-stenographic court reporters, transcriptionists, and other technologies.
NOVEMBER 2008 SUMMARY
Testing and Certification of Nonmembers
NCRA’s first certification program appeared in 1937. Starting then and ever since, the association has required that candidates be members in order to register for an exam, with two exceptions: CLVS candidat es, and RPR candidates whose states mandate the RPR in order to work. Last year’s in-depth review of all of NCRA’s programs brought this policy under scrutiny. The world has changed in the 71 years since NCRA started certifying reporters.
Among professional associations in general, some require membership as a prerequisite for certification, but most do not. It is a common practice to charge separately for dues and for a certification fee, whether for members or nonmembers, which NCRA does not do.
An intertwined issue with whether to test nonmembers is the question of whether to test nonstenographic methods. Using a single, uniform test would protect stenographic reporters by holding all technologies to the same standard and assure a level playing field. In addition to allowing technologies with no or inferior testing regimes to claim equivalence to verbatim stenography, refusing to test other methods amounts to relinquishing NCRA’s claim of preeminence as a testing authority.
Following discussion, the Board approved a motion to create a plan for testing nonmember candidates.
