Lawsuit Update: Pasqual Perez III v Speech-to-Text Institute, et al. March 2024 Update

ORIGINAL POST HERE.

July 2023 update.

November 2023 update.

I’ve been slacking on our favorite Texas Western District Court case. Perez had contacted me at some point saying I should look into the case. I wish I’d done it sooner.

Unfortunately, I am trying to keep my billable pages under 30 with PACER so that I don’t have to pay any money. So I’m going to include the docket report and a few select documents below.

There’s been a lot of back and forth, looks like a dismissal with prejudice at some point. A scheduling order was also filed. Lots of motions and replies.

Of course, my interest is with regard to the Speech-to-Text Institute. The organization was ordered to appear through a licensed attorney. It failed to do so. Subsequently, an order to show cause was issued. So STTI may have defaulted. I suspect this is because it has no value and therefore nothing to lose. But it will be really interesting if they ever get to the part where STTI’s materials were being used around the country to mislead decision makers and break non-digital businesses in favor of what I’ve termed the STTI Bloc, a group of relatively powerful corporations in our field that had representatives on the STTI board, including names like U.S. Legal Support, Veritext, and Stenograph. Notably, Veritext has allowed me to associate its name with fraud for the last several years despite being directly informed of what I was doing and its propensity toward harassing reporters for what they post on Facebook.

When you Google Veritext fraud, there’s a chance you’ll find my work.

Anyway, the docket report is here.

The order that ordered the Speech-to-Text Institute to appear is here:

The order to show cause with regard to STTI’s failure to appear? That’s here:

The scheduling order? Right here.

They have to complete discovery on or before February 28, 2025. Good luck, folks!

————-

Addendum:

Footage of Trey Perez being kicked out of a deposition was later brought to my attention. We continue to follow the court process for updates about the group boycott of his business.

Scopist: Degradation of Reporter Skill is Helping AI Infiltration

As told to me by a valued Stenonymous reader:

“Hi, Christopher. [REDACTED]. I was a decades-long practicing [REDACTED] court reporter, and [REDACTED]. I edited my own work, so I was well aware of my good days and bad days. I started scoping/editing full time for reporters in around [REDACTED]. I am still scoping/ editing for reporters from all over the US — [REDACTED]. I have to say I am extremely disappointed and dismayed at the lack of qualifications I have experienced from the majority of these reporters. I find they are dropping an extraordinary amount of text, at times 15-20% and I am typing in the missing text for the reporters. This is not a one-off or occasional occurrence. I only bring this up to you because of the threat this industry is facing re AI, digital recorders, big box corporations, etc. I don’t know if this is a subject you (gingerly) would consider addressing in your Stenonymous articles – which I thoroughly enjoy, by the way. You are a driving force in the fight to save this industry. I do not expect a response from you. I am asking that you please keep this writing anonymous and confidential.”

I have to say that I have been a voice for quality in our field since before Stenonymous’s time. We used to have this weird mannerism in the profession where we had to pretend we were all perfect and never made mistakes. That may seem like a foreign concept to students of this day and age, whose mentors seem more willing to say everyone makes mistakes. It was never true that we didn’t. Being in New York City, I saw firsthand the degradation of skill in the stenographic reporter. By the time I came into the field, audio had become ubiquitous and many were reliant on it to the point where they couldn’t pass the civil service test that the state eliminated a few months ago. And worse, people pretended, and encouraged others to pretend, that the audio was not in use.

As best I can tell, this was under pressure from agencies, who were under pressure from high-strung clients. The Introverted Lawyer, Heidi Kristin Brown, once spoke to a crowd of court reporters about the nastiness she’d experienced in the legal field. I’ve met that nastiness too. So I understand the wilting nature of the court reporter and its agencies. Without each other to hold us up, it is easy for outside influences to cause us to feel less than — and it is easy for the people holding the wallet to screw any individual “person” out of a day’s pay. That’s understandably scary.

But I never ran from the digital problem or the misinformation campaign spread by the corps. I can’t run from ours either. This is not the first scopist to mention this to me. Probably won’t be the last.

I’ve been on jobs where using the audio as a crutch would’ve made the transcripts unusable.

I’ve been on jobs where the audio was a must because I was physically prevented from interrupting (think public meetings).

I’ve been on jobs where I used audio as a crutch.

I’ve been on jobs where I’ve been ordered not to use audio even where others factually do.

I hired a scopist once who called my writing “labyrinthian.” Haven’t hired one since.

I understand, more than anyone (hyperbole), the importance of the use of the tool, where appropriate.

But if you’re at the point where you’re dropping a fifth of the testimony in your stenographic note taking, it’s time to identify and correct that issue. And might I suggest that the issue is likely that you never learned to “control a room” because you used audio as a crutch. And that’s okay. It’s what you do with the future that counts. Making mistakes in our line of work is a much smaller problem than taking no action to correct them.

Those “button pushers” we denigrate? Some of them are better. Think about the ones that are honest about who they are and what they do. What do we have on them? Isn’t that what all this is about? Speaking out against corporate dishonesty and corner cutting because the transcript is important? I know some of them have told me they were trained to lie, obfuscate, or even provide fake names (cough, cough, Naegeli rumor, cough, worst court reporting company in the country?) But for the ones that are honest and feed us info, aren’t they “on our side?”

Maybe I’m kidding myself.

Maybe everybody’s afraid of the truth?

After all, you don’t think people in positions of power have heard my allegations? I sent them directly to a judge quoted in an article about us once. You think he wrote back?

People so afraid of looking foolish they’d rather promote a comfortable lie or ignore a terrible wrong than look at a situation with the analytical nuance that they do any day-to-day issue or case. It’s not their job. Why care? And the people whose job it is? They can make up excuses ad infinitum why they can’t care right now without consequence or accountability. This is why my publishing strategy is to get louder and louder until they all look like assholes for ignoring it. I don’t see another way forward. Doesn’t anyone else get it? Being nice to people that deny the truth got us where we are.

Reader, in a world of evil apes and ostriches, be a lion.

Or a sheepdog.

P.S.

Anyone actually good at fundraising/P.R./sales? Maybe we can make a deal and split donations. It’s a gamble. I can go months with minimal funding or make $1,000 in a day. It’s not like the money isn’t there to turn this into a small media operation. It just needs to be redirected a little bit. My real-life friends are too busy to help, so I leave it up to my readership.

Having our marriage ceremony soon. It’ll probably get pretty quiet on here for a while. Thanks for putting up with my double-post days these last few weeks. Have a wonderful weekend.

Ever eager to be a platform for your…

Words & Voices, Stenonymous.com

Addendum:

Toward the end of March 29th, Erin Blair made a comment that I asked to share with my audience. They are a respected member of the field, so I’m happy to share their views with my audience.

Erin Blair’s comments on Stenonymous’s blog post “Scopist: Degradation of Reporter Skill is Helping AI.”

We also had a brief discussion where I tried to explain I don’t mean to victim blame and believe the issue is nuanced.

Words Per Minute Episode 1 Transcript

I contracted with stenographic service MGR Reporting shortly after the conclusion of the Words Per Minute Podcast Episode 1. MGR’s got me a transcript. It is available for download.

Experimental idea. Perhaps we can hire multiple transcribers and see if their transcripts are objectively better or worse. Donations that come in today and tomorrow will be dedicated to that purpose as long as we get at least $100.

Obviously, such a small sample size is almost meaningless, but then again, the Speech-to-Text Institute was going to upend our entire field on much less solid argument. And I was able to upend them with the power of one. So maybe small sample sizes can still have big results.

Below is a plain text version.

MR. DAY: I’m going to make a

               ...backup audio just in case.  

DIGITAL COURT REPORTER: Yeah. Do

for that. So will I.

MR. DAY: So we'll have three

backups, so we're good.

DIGITAL COURT REPORTER: All

right. And it's also rec --

MR. DAY: Yeah.

DIGITAL COURT REPORTER: So, are

you ready?

MR. DAY: Yeah.

DIGITAL COURT REPORTER: Okay.

Don't be afraid. Welcome to Words per Minute.

This is the inaugural episode. This is everything,

all things about court reporting. I'm with my

co-host, Christopher Day. How are you?

MR. DAY: I'm good. How you

doing?

DIGITAL COURT REPORTER: I'm good.

We'll get into a whole situation and my name is

(censored). I can't name it because I currently

work for a service that supplies depositions, and

hopefully maybe one day I could reveal who I am,

but today I am (censored). That's how we're doing
                                                          2



               it today.  Sound good?  

                                MR. DAY:  We call them big boxes.  

               Yeah, that sounds good to me.  

                                DIGITAL COURT REPORTER:  Yeah.  

               I'll just be an unnamed reporter that can talk 

               about (censored) whenever I can.  So  But let's 

               just talk about how we combine forces.  I met 

               Christopher on the internet.  He runs the website 

               -- go ahead, you could say what it is.  So you -- 

               so everyone --

                                MR. DAY:  Stenonymous.com.  

                                DIGITAL COURT REPORTER:  

               Stenonymous.com.  And I was thinking about, you 

               know, the more that I started learning about court 

               reporting, I started realizing that I don't know 

               anything.  So I decided to reach out to you, and 

               you weren't sure where my intentions were at the 

               same time.  Not that I was being evil, or anything, 

               it was just --

                                MR. DAY:  I think I was pretty 

               open.  

                                DIGITAL COURT REPORTER:  Yeah, you 

               were.  And you were trying to feel people out, so 

               that's where we were.  So I'm interested to hear 

               what your story is, but I also thought as we have 
                                                          3



               gotten to know each other, I realized that I think 

               you would be more potent because now, you know, the 

               long form of writing is not getting the influence 

               that it once was.  And I think video and podcasts 

               are something that is moving the needle, and maybe 

               you'll be able to get your point across.  So I 

               think for me personally, and maybe probably for 

               you, is to just get more exposure, and just try to 

               see if we can get more prominence in this business 

               that we -- both you and I love, right?  

                                MR. DAY:  Absolutely.  Yeah.  I'm 

               all for it.  I mean, I've made the longhand writing 

               work as much as it's going to work, and I'm eager 

               to see what this is like in a podcast format.  

                                DIGITAL COURT REPORTER:  Yeah.  

               Very excited to speak to you.  So I just wanted to 

               talk about how you got into this whole racket.  I 

               mean, this is not something that somebody wakes up 

               and says, "You know what, I want to be in the 

               courtroom in a murder trial, and I want to be the 

               one that writes all of the words word for word."  

               That's not -- it's kind of something that you 

               stumble in by accident, and I think through my 

               trials and tribulations, and just my journey to the 

               road to success, I've realized that a lot of people 
                                                          4



               have said, you know, their parents were in it.  

               Somebody else in my family was in the court.  

                                MR. DAY:  Yeah.  

                                DIGITAL COURT REPORTER:  And they 

               kind of just -- kind of stumbled upon it after, you 

               know, doing a myriad of different things.  How did 

               you get your start in court reporting?  

                                MR. DAY:  So I was this super 

               introverted high school kid.  And I saw it in a 

               high school fair, and I had no idea what I wanted 

               to do with my life.  You know, I knew I wasn't 

               coordinated enough to do like food service and 

               stuff like that.  So I came up on senior year and 

               people were like, "What are you going do with your 

               life, what are you going to do with your life?"  

               I'm like, "I don't know.  Court reporting school.  

               I saw it in the high school Fair." 

                                So I set up with this school and I 

               took to it almost immediately.  I really practiced 

               hard.  There're three forms of court reporting; 

               there's stenography, there's voice writing, and 

               there's digital court reporting.  And so, I took 

               the stenographic route.  And at that point in 

               history, that was really the main route.  So  And 

               that's it.  I mean, I got hooked up with the -- it 
                                                          5



               was called New York Career Institute at the time, 

               and they later sold themselves to Plaza College in 

               Queens, and the rest is history.  

                                DIGITAL COURT REPORTER:  Yeah.  

               Very interesting.  So, just to piggyback of what 

               you're saying, you're into the stenography part.  I 

               still have the ability to advance to that, but I've 

               also thought about my moment in time of the digital 

               reporting thing of trying to master that aspect of 

               it.  

                                MR. DAY:  Yeah.  

                                DIGITAL COURT REPORTER:  What I do 

               like about it as opposed to what you're doing is 

               that you are kind of in the courthouse day to day 

               when things are happening.  And you know, that's a 

               great place to be.  I know my other line of work, 

               I'm able to, you know, be out and about and see all 

               the people and kind of get those networks and, you 

               know, really is able to be part of the community.  

               Me, it's, the digital part is interesting because 

               you're not necessarily meeting the people that's 

               giving you feedback.  There's not necessarily 

               people giving you the right way of doing things.  

               You just kind of learn and then you go, oh, yeah, 

               okay.  You get the feedback later on in an e-mail.  
                                                          6



               So it's a lot more informal.  And it's kind of like 

               learn as you go.  

                                MR. DAY:  Yeah.  

                                DIGITAL COURT REPORTER:  But I'll 

               tell you just for me, somebody saw me type and they 

               were like, "Wow, you should be a stenographer."  

               And I, you know, I've always seen it from just 

               watching TV, or TV shows --

                                MR. DAY:  Yeah.  

                                DIGITAL COURT REPORTER:  -- of 

               people that are being stenographers, and you could 

               see that -- okay, they could type very fast.  And I 

               always saw that they weren't using a normal like 

               laptop, or a computer.  They were using some sort 

               of weird machine.  I would imagine that's a Steno 

               machine, right?  

                                MR. DAY:  Yeah.  We call it a 

               Steno machine.  I think you can call it a 

               Stenotype.  Some people call it a Stenograph, but 

               that's technically a company name.  So yeah,   

               Steno machine.  

                                DIGITAL COURT REPORTER:  Right.  

               So, you know, going back to my situation after 

               somebody saw that, I got a hold of an ad saying 

               that if you, you know, if you're really good at 
                                                          7



               just being professional, just being able to type 

               quickly, there's going to go a couple of steps and 

               then you could be a digital court reporter.  Now, 

               little did I know the world that I was going to 

               join in because I didn't know, you know, where we 

               fit in.  I guess the tension that you had between 

               --

                                MR. DAY:  Yeah.  

                                DIGITAL COURT REPORTER:  People 

               that are in the conventional world.  And that's why 

               I was able to, you know, really get a bond with you 

               because you taught me a lot of just the 

               differences.  I had no idea, and I often think that 

               seldom somebody, a stenographer like you, and a 

               digital reporter like me don't necessarily 

               communicate.  So I don't know what's going on in 

               your world, and you probably don't know what's 

               really going on in my world, even though you do 

               extensive research on synonymous.  But we're going 

               --

                                MR. DAY:  Yup.  

                                DIGITAL COURT REPORTER:  -- to get 

               to know a lot of different things that have been 

               going on.  So we're going to find out what really 

               it entails.  And, you know, I really think that we 
                                                          8



               will be able to shine light to a lot of things that 

               are happening in the court reporting industry, as 

               well as trying to influence maybe people to get, 

               you know, more of traction of people wanting to do 

               this.  

                                But, you know, after you found 

               your footing and you went to school, you know, just 

               talk about the steps of like what it's like to get 

               to where you're at, which is, you know, a 

               courthouse.  How do you get to that?  

                                MR. DAY:  So for me personally, I 

               graduated school and we graduated 225 words a 

               minute.  And at that point, your kind of -- I would 

               say it's kind of like you're saying, there's less 

               guidance.  You don't really know exactly how things 

               are going to go.  

                                DIGITAL COURT REPORTER:  Mm-hmm 

               (affirmative).  

                                MR. DAY:  And you hook up with one 

               of these court reporting agencies and they 

               generally hire you as an independent contractor.  

               Side note, I've done some workers rights research, 

               and we may not actually be independent contractors, 

               but that's a whole different story.  

                                DIGITAL COURT REPORTER:  Yeah, 
                                                          9



               we'll get into that.  That's another entirely 

               different --

                                MR. DAY:  We'll get into that.  

                                DIGITAL COURT REPORTER:  Yup.  

                                MR. DAY:  But anyway, so I'm 

               taking depositions probably just like you.  Well, I 

               think you do a lot more remote than I got to do.  

               At the point I did, it was more 2010 to 2014, and 

               the depositions at that point in time were 

               basically all in person, you know?  So it was a lot 

               of running around the city, they used to hold 

               depositions in the Bronx Courthouse.  

                                So I went into the -- you would 

               laugh at it actually.  It was this big wide room 

               with just -- I want to say like nine tables set up, 

               or maybe six tables set up.  And everybody's just 

               having a different deposition at each different 

               table.  So it was, you know, it was kind of chaotic 

               like that.  It was kind of like wild west, you have 

               no idea what you're walking into.  The attorneys, 

               you know, might be combative with each other, or 

               they might be the nicest people in the world, and 

               it was just this mixed bag, and kind of learning 

               the ropes the hard way.  

                                And then at some point, a friend 
                                                         10



               of mine said, "You should go do grand jury in 

               Manhattan.  They're hiring."  And Grand jury is, 

               you're working for the district attorney as a grand 

               jury court reporter.  And as of now, the ones in 

               New York City only takes stenographers, I think.  

               By law I think they have to use stenographers.  And 

               basically, I do grand jury for a little bit.  I 

               leave that line of work.  And then the next thing I 

               know, I'm back in this freelance world.  And I 

               wasn't really enjoying it at that point, it wasn't 

               paying me enough.  

                                DIGITAL COURT REPORTER:  Mm-hmm 

               (affirmative).  

                                MR. DAY:  And they had the civil 

               service test to become a court reporter for the 

               courts.  So I said, "All right, I'll go take that."  

               Sit for that test, I placed 14th in the State for 

               that test.  

                                DIGITAL COURT REPORTER:  Wow.  

                                MR. DAY:  And the rest, like I 

               said, is history.  I started up with the Brooklyn 

               Criminal Court and, you know, at this point, I've 

               seen every, you know, most of the spots of our 

               criminal justice system.  I've seen the grand jury 

               where felonies get indicted, I've seen Brooklyn 
                                                         11



               Criminal Court, which is all misdemeanors and 

               stuff, and now I'm in Supreme Court, which is all 

               felonies and felony trials.  So I've really -- I've 

               lived quite a life and gotten to see a lot through 

               this job.  

                                DIGITAL COURT REPORTER:  That's 

               amazing.  That sounds like a whole myriad of 

               different experiences.  

                                MR. DAY:  Yeah.  

                                DIGITAL COURT REPORTER:  Does it 

               take an emotional toll when you are, you know, I 

               think when you're in the room with people that, you 

               know, their lives are at the fate of a jury and a 

               judge, and you're just there typing away verbatim 

               of what's happening?  I suppose you can't help but 

               get swept up into, you know, people's situations 

               and just how crazy it is that you're just there.  

               You're a fly on the wall.  

                                MR. DAY:  Yeah.  I mean, so 

               there's different schools of thought and there's 

               people who in our field who are just like, "No, 

               don't even think about it.  Just do your job."  And 

               I respect that view.

                                DIGITAL COURT REPORTER:  Right.  

                                MR. DAY:  But I really do take it 
                                                         12



               seriously.  And I think about, you know, even the 

               tiniest little transcript can end up in, you know, 

               New York State's highest court, the court of 

               appeals.  And it can change the law.  And so, you 

               really have to kind of think about, you know, not 

               only is this someone's life, but this may go on to 

               impact other people's lives.  

                                DIGITAL COURT REPORTER:  Right.  

                                MR. DAY:  So you'd better get it 

               right.  Because, you know, and that's the wonderful 

               thing about the job, is we don't have to make those 

               hard decisions, we don't have to make those calls, 

               so we're kind of removed from the feeling of, you 

               know, being the person who's putting this person in 

               this situation.  Although there's also an argument 

               to be heard and some people feel this way, they put 

               themselves in that situation.  I don't really, you 

               know, I think it's a case-by-case basis, and we 

               just have to trust the system to kind of work it 

               out.  But I do think about the impact that our work 

               has on people, and I think it's pretty important.  

                                DIGITAL COURT REPORTER:  Yeah, 

               it's got to be.  I just know for me, I do it in the 

               State of New York --

                                MR. DAY:  Yeah.  
                                                         13



                                DIGITAL COURT REPORTER:  -- and, 

               you know, sometimes I'll get somebody that is like 

               a big wig in the department of whatever it is, and 

               I'm just like, I can't believe this is happening, 

               and I'm here.  And, you know, you just have that 

               sense of -- it's one of those things where you are 

               the fly on the wall, but you are involved, but 

               you're not involved.  So I completely understand 

               the nature of it in which that you are saying.  But 

               I feel like I haven't gotten emotionally involved, 

               but how could you not get swept away about what's 

               happening, because sometimes this is like 

               irreparable damage.  

                                I know for me, recently, September 

               1st, 2022, has been a big bone of contention.  That 

               specific date.  It was the same day when there was 

               a lot of flooding in New York State, and it was 

               Hurricane Ida.  So I constantly hear about somebody 

               lost a piece of their backyard, and now they're 

               suing, you know, the town that they live in because 

               they tried to put an insurance claim and they 

               weren't able to do that.  

                                But, you know, in this particular 

               situation, it was like somebody that just moved in.  

               They were thinking about, you know, how much 
                                                         14



               millions of dollars that they spent, and now 

               they're being affected because they kind of bought 

               something that's a money pit, and they didn't think 

               of it.  And it was only because of a natural 

               disaster.  So I'm interested too because you hear 

               about the emotional stories, but then you're pitted 

               with the legal interpretation of what you should do 

               to adjudicate it.  

                                MR. DAY:  Yeah.  

                                DIGITAL COURT REPORTER:  And, you 

               know, I think also people -- sometimes you see 

               people that have been, you know, 30 depositions in.  

               Where they're a supervisor in a specific part, 

               maybe they're in the town of Public works and 

               they're used to having depositions.  Then you got 

               somebody that might be on their bed, they've never 

               been on a deposition before, and they're just 

               acting completely unprofessional.  So

                                MR. DAY:  Yeah.  

                                DIGITAL COURT REPORTER:  One thing 

               I do like about the job is the uniqueness of every 

               day, meaning two different lawyers, different 

               witness.

                                MR. DAY:  Yeah.  You don't know 

               what you're walking into.  
                                                         15



                                DIGITAL COURT REPORTER:  So you 

               don't know what is going to happen.  It makes it 

               much more interesting than just having a 9:00 to 

               5:00 job.  Do you find that the same way even 

               though you probably are in a trial that's probably 

               going to be a couple of days, couple weeks, couple 

               months long?  

                                MR. DAY:  Well, back when I 

               freelanced, that's exactly how I felt.  

                                DIGITAL COURT REPORTER:  Yeah.

                                MR. DAY:  I liked the feeling of 

               having a new thing every day, never knew what I was 

               going to learn that day.  You know, sometimes 

               you're listening to someone talk about, you know, 

               pharmaceutical coding of the pills, you know?  And 

               then sometimes you're listening to, you know, one 

               man was an electrician who got horribly burned, and 

               he was looking for compensation for that.  

                                So it really ran the gamut of 

               things that you could hear about, learn about.  And 

               so -- and that was what made my twist into the 

               criminal court reporting that much more 

               interesting, because criminal, I have to say, is a 

               lot more formulaic, especially the procedural stuff 

               leading up to a trial --
                                                         16



                                DIGITAL COURT REPORTER:  Mm-hmm 

               (affirmative).  

                                MR. DAY:  -- it's very similar.   

               It's always like there's an arraignment and then 

               they do some motions.  And for the most part, we're 

               not involved with the motions unless they have a 

               problem.  And then they bring it back to the court 

               and put that on the record, and they'll go back and 

               forth a little bit, and then they'll go to trial.  

               And the trial, like you're saying, is kind of where 

               the magic happens.  Where, you know, you could hear 

               anything.  

                                There was one summation by a 

               prosecutor I had, and she said something like, "To 

               believe the defendant's story, you'd have to 

               believe that magical space unicorns came down and 

               stabbed the victim."

                                DIGITAL COURT REPORTER:  Oh, boy. 

                                MR. DAY:  Not the victim, the 

               complainant.  And I, you know, you're sitting in a 

               courtroom, you never thought you would hear magical 

               space unicorns, but there I was and I had to type 

               it up.  So

                                DIGITAL COURT REPORTER:  Well, you 

               haven't seen My Cousin Vinny, that's probably why.  
                                                         17



               You know, you said that type of talk from a 

               prosecutor.  

                                MR. DAY:  I actually saw that 

               movie, and I was very impressed by it.  It's very, 

               you know, it does it in an entertaining way and in 

               a way that's funny, but it brings out a lot of 

               legal principles, and it just does it so 

               masterfully.  So

                                DIGITAL COURT REPORTER:  Yeah.  

                                MR. DAY:  Anybody that hasn't seen 

               that movie should.  

                                DIGITAL COURT REPORTER:  I agree.  

               Now, since you're at a very high-profile 

               courthouse, obviously, everyone knows the, you 

               know, the New York State Supreme Court, you 

               probably get a lot of high-profile court cases?  

               I'm not asking you to talk about specifics of a 

               specific case, but I am asking you of the 

               high-profile nature and being involved with that.  

               That's got to be very tough to see, because I'm 

               assuming that some people in your personal life 

               kind of ask you about the case, and obviously you 

               have to be mum about it, but do you like being in 

               that celebrity status type of thing, that you know 

               it's getting coverage from a lot of news outlets 
                                                         18



               and a lot of eyes are on it nationwide?  

                                MR. DAY:  You know, it's really 

               interesting because the high-profile stuff I 

               generally don't get assigned to.  But I definitely, 

               you know, I know my image has made it on the news 

               before just from being in the courtroom.  So I do 

               kind of like that stuff.  I think it's really cool.  

               I think that -- I wish that the news would cover 

               more of the criminal justice system.  Because I 

               think that there's a lot that goes on that every 

               citizen should know about, and hear about, and just 

               be educated about.  Because there's a lot that 

               people don't know, and there's a lot I didn't know 

               till I made it into the system.  

                                DIGITAL COURT REPORTER:  I also 

               think it's often misinterpreted only because you 

               might see it in one way, and if you're not really 

               in tune with some legal jargon you can kind of get 

               caught up to what's really happening.  So for 

               instance, if there's like a, you know, a summary 

               judgment of X amount of dollars, you don't know 

               what the implications are.  You know, some people 

               could just say, "Okay, well, he's getting sued for 

               50, there's a summary judgment of $50 million on 

               this."  He's not going to pay.  Like, that's just 
                                                         19



               what we're going to boil it down to.  But you don't 

               know what the legal ramifications are until you 

               really get into it.  But --

                                MR. DAY:  Yeah.  

                                DIGITAL COURT REPORTER:  I have a 

               personal question that I have for you.  

                                MR. DAY:  Sure.  

                                DIGITAL COURT REPORTER:  I'm 

               thinking about, you know, doing this remote, I 

               always got to go to the bathroom.  What happens 

               when you got to go to the bathroom and you're 

               typing away, and people are just -- you just don't 

               go -- you just don't drink?

                                MR. DAY:  Generally, try not to 

               drink before you got to go into the courtroom.  If 

               you're having an emergency, then you got to speak 

               up.  You know, that's really all you can do.  

                                DIGITAL COURT REPORTER:  So you've 

               had to go, excuse me, I need a three-minute break.  

               I know, I -- but meanwhile, I'm certain that once 

               the first person speaks up, they're like, "Yeah, I 

               got to go too."

                                MR. DAY:  Oh, yeah.  No.  And I've 

               even had -- I've had lawyers back in the deposition 

               days and I think even in the courtroom occasionally 
                                                         20



               kind of like blame us and be like, "Oh, the court 

               reporter needs a break."  And then -- and meanwhile 

               I didn't ask for a break, but they need the break 

               --

                                DIGITAL COURT REPORTER:  Yeah.  

                                MR. DAY:  -- so they're like -- 

               yeah.  So sometimes it happens that way.  

                                DIGITAL COURT REPORTER:  Yeah.  

                                MR. DAY:  Sometimes it happens 

               where I'll have to speak up.  A lot of times in 

               court depending on how the day is going, they'll 

               either have natural breaks, or they will be calling 

               cases one after the other, and so what you'll do is 

               you'll give someone a heads up, either the judge, 

               or the clerk, like, hey, in between one of these 

               cases, I got to, you know, I need to use the 

               restroom.

                                DIGITAL COURT REPORTER:  Right.  

                                MR. DAY:  Or whatever it is.  And 

               you got to -- that's one thing that as -- like I 

               said, I was a real introverted kid.  I had to learn 

               to kind of just be upfront about my needs --

                                DIGITAL COURT REPORTER:  Mm-hmm 

               (affirmative).  

                                MR. DAY:  -- because you can very 
                                                         21



               easily get in a situation where they'll just keep 

               going no matter what your needs are.  

                                DIGITAL COURT REPORTER:  No.  

               Yeah, I've seen that.  I'm just like, "Wow, nobody 

               has -- nobody drank water today?" Like, I don't get 

               it.  Everyone is like Ironman.  And it's always --

                                MR. DAY:  Yeah.  

                                DIGITAL COURT REPORTER:  More like 

               the onus is on you.  You don't want to be the first 

               -- you also don't want to be the first person to 

               break in it.  Like, you don't want to go, excuse 

               me, I got to -- you want to be strong and say like, 

               all right. Let somebody else there.  So that's 

               interesting because I think you've just convinced 

               me, I'm going to be remote forever.  I don't know 

               about all that, I got to go to the bathroom.  

                                MR. DAY:  If you can get remote, I 

               would say do remote.  So I actually have a question 

               for you.  

                                DIGITAL COURT REPORTER:  Yeah.  

                                MR. DAY:  At this point are you 

               doing a hundred percent remote?  Because I'm sure I 

               have people listening that want to know.  

                                DIGITAL COURT REPORTER:  Yeah.  

               Listen, I think that there's a -- the money isn't 
                                                         22



               as good as what you're doing and what people are 

               doing in the court, but I'm thinking about, let's 

               say if I got into this racket before the pandemic.  

               And obviously the pandemic is what really opened up 

               the floodgates for this to happen, which you have 

               documented chronically on your website.  I'll say 

               that if this wasn't remote, I don't know if this 

               would ever be on my radar, right?  So like once you 

               get used to like working remote, very difficult to 

               get back, very difficult to get back once you're 

               used to it.  

                                Now, at the same time, I have a 

               very plush office situation.  Not only do I have a 

               plush office situation, I have a plus plush studio 

               podcast office situation in another location that's 

               30 yards away.  So for me --

                                MR. DAY:  Wow.  

                                DIGITAL COURT REPORTER:  -- I 

               don't know if it pays because I'm very comfortable 

               here.  I got my family here, got all my equipment 

               here.  Obviously, you could see my Zoom is just as 

               professional.  So for me, I don't know if it's 

               worth going driving to Brooklyn from where I live, 

               which is probably an hour away if we take into 

               account with traffic.  And I think about all of the 
                                                         23



               no-shows that happened for me, where I could be in 

               the courtroom, get there -- try to get there by 

               9:30, and there's a no-show.  That's a waste of a 

               day.  

                                So I think that the decrease in 

               pay for me is worth it because I don't have to go 

               to Brooklyn.  Right?  I don't have to figure out 

               buying food somewhere along the way, and then 

               coming back.  I think for me, it's justified.  And 

               I would rather take the pay cut with the 

               comfortableness that it affords me.  And I also 

               like the fact that you can do this remote and it's 

               still be a worthwhile job.  It's something that I 

               have personal pride in wanting to get better at, 

               and I feel like I'm steadily getting better.  

               There's something to be said of being out in the 

               field independently and trying to figure it out on 

               your own with no guidance, right?  So --

                                MR. DAY:  Yeah.  

                                DIGITAL COURT REPORTER:  -- for 

               me, it's a puzzle.  Now, it remains to be seen.  

               I'm the type of person that tries to reassess my 

               goals every six months.  So I'm never going to say 

               never, right?  

                                MR. DAY:  That makes sense.  
                                                         24



               Because I do think what's cool is what you're 

               doing.  Maybe if they had a toilet underneath, you 

               know, the desk, maybe that would work for me.  But, 

               you know, right now I'm going to be remote, but I'm 

               enjoying it.  I'm enjoying and, you know, I think 

               I've said this since I've met you and we've been 

               talking for three or four months, I've always said 

               I've enjoyed it, right?  I haven't -- there hasn't 

               been one time where I'm like, "Oh, I don't enjoy 

               it."

                                MR. DAY:  Definitely.  I think 

               you've told me that sometimes they kind of come out 

               of left field with criticisms, but I think I told 

               you something like "Sometimes they criticize just 

               to keep you guessing about how valuable you really 

               are."  And that's kind of like -- that's kind of 

               the shady side of it, where it's like you can make 

               money and you can do, you know, really well.  And 

               you can find something that fits your lifestyle, 

               but at the same time, they're always, you know, 

               they're interested in trying to get people to work 

               for less.  So it's kind of that balancing act of --

                                DIGITAL COURT REPORTER:  Right.  

               See --  

                                MR. DAY:  Yeah.  
                                                         25



                                DIGITAL COURT REPORTER:  -- I 

               don't know what the stats are, but I would imagine 

               that they're -- and you've had it chronicled on 

               your website, the shortages of just court reporting 

               in the industry of it not being exposed.  And 

               that's one of the -- I think the things that we're 

               united of starting this podcast to just raise 

               awareness that it's a very fulfilling, you know, 

               occupation if you decide to do it.  

                                But I would imagine that the 

               amount of lawyers versus the amount of people that 

               are court reporters is -- there's such a huge 

               disparity on top of judges on top of anybody that's 

               a court officer.  I think that, you know, it's one 

               of those things where like, kind of like a referee, 

               right?  Like, nobody really wants the referee.  So 

               there's kind of like a balance where it says like, 

               there's a shortage, and they still try to treat you 

               as if it's prestigious, but it can't be prestigious 

               and there's a shortage at the same time.  That's 

               where I find solace in knowing that, you know, 

               regardless of what I do, I'm going to be 

               professional.  I'm going to do the best I can no 

               matter what.  But at the end of the day, I just 

               know the court industry as a whole still needs us 
                                                         26



               more than they need -- than we need them.  You know 

               what I'm saying?  So that I don't feel necessarily 

               scared of in terms of like them keeping me on my 

               toes, right?  

                                So what I did want to ask you too 

               though is just the genesis of Stenonymous.com?  How 

               you came to that conclusion, because there must 

               have been something that guided you to say, "You 

               know what, I'm going to make a whole website, I'm 

               going to make a whole -- I want to raise awareness 

               in this specific niche."  It's, you know, it's -- I 

               just find it interesting that you got to that level 

               and it's matured over the years where there's a lot 

               of people that are watching it, and, you know, they 

               really want to get inside your brain.  How did you 

               start it and how did it develop over time?  

                                MR. DAY:  So I started just from 

               remembering all the difficult times that I had.  

               And kind of like you're saying, I had to learn it 

               on the job.  What does this mean?  What am I 

               supposed to do when XYZ happens?  You know, I can't 

               think of an exact example at the moment, but it's 

               kind of like you're saying, it comes at you fast 

               and you kind of learn as you go with minimal 

               feedback.  And basically, I started by typing out 
                                                         27



               all the things that I had had difficulty with, and 

               all the things that young court reporters were 

               coming on our message boards and asking questions, 

               and asking the same questions again and again and 

               again year after year after year.  And so, I 

               started to build popularity that way.  

                                And at some point, I started to 

               also document current events, things going on in 

               our field, things our associations were doing.  

               Trying to get people to be more involved in the 

               professional community so that we, you know, we 

               can't be taken advantage of the way I felt I was 

               taken advantage of as a young reporter because 

               basically I've done out the math and I think I was 

               making about 40 percent less than I could have.  

                                DIGITAL COURT REPORTER:  Mm-hmm 

               (affirmative).  

                                MR. DAY:  So I started to document 

               these current events, and I started to realize 

               that, "Oh, these numbers don't really add up.  Like 

               the Bureau of Labor Statistics says we have 

               whatever it is, 21,000 court reporters, and the 

               speech to Text Institute says, we should have 

               23,000, and the National Court Reporters 

               Association says we have 27,000.  
                                                         28



                                And it's like, the more you looked 

               into it, the more it didn't make sense.  And so I 

               started to publish about that, and people were 

               interested because it totally went against the 

               grain.  It went against the professional 

               community's paradigm of just kind of like, "Oh, 

               let's just practice and do our best and be 

               professionals."  And it's like, no, guys, like, 

               there's a little bit of Tom Foolery going on here, 

               basically.  And it excites people.  

                                DIGITAL COURT REPORTER:  So going 

               into that, after you decided to make, you know, how 

               did you come up with the name, and then, I guess 

               just talking about the first couple of months of 

               just trying to get content.  And also, you know, 

               starting to finally be open because I'm sure that 

               people have approached you to just try to get more 

               of a digital presence outside of just the written 

               form.

                                MR. DAY:  Yeah.  

                                DIGITAL COURT REPORTER:  More so 

               video and podcasts.  What made you start to just 

               think about giving this a chance?  

                                MR. DAY:  The blogging?  

                                DIGITAL COURT REPORTER:  Well, 
                                                         29



               just more so -- yeah.  Like the development of the 

               blog and then also just your -- now, at this point 

               in time in 2024, your willingness now to just have 

               other multimedia forms of disseminating the 

               information.  

                                MR. DAY:  Well, so I guess I'll 

               start with how I named it, and how I named it is 

               actually pretty funny.  I was walking to the movie 

               theater with a friend of mine and I said, "Yeah, I 

               really want to start writing and start documenting 

               all these things that we have had problems with 

               when we were younger, and all these things that 

               people come onto our message boards and ask about.  

               I want to make something and I want to make 

               something interesting.  And I want it to be like a 

               real presence."  

                                And at the time that Hacker Group, 

               Anonymous, or -- yeah, I think it was Anonymous.  

               They were, you know, in the news and they were real 

               popular.  He's like, "Why don't you call it 

               Stenonymous?"  And I'm like, "Oh." I went with it.  

               I ran with it.  And so after that, I just, like I 

               said, I wrote out things that I had trouble with.  

                                One of my first articles was, Get 

               a Real Job.  And Get a Real Job was actually all 
                                                         30



               the jobs you could get in New York City as a 

               stenographer.  And at the time it was workers 

               compensation, and grand jury, and the courts, and 

               something we call CART, which is basically 

               captioning for the deaf and hard of hearing.  I'm 

               trying to think.  I also mentioned teaching, and I 

               gave links to all the places that you would get 

               these applications and find information about this 

               stuff.  And because that was something that I had 

               an issue with.  

                                So anyway, as time went on, like I 

               said, I started to expand a little bit, I started 

               to do a little advertising, and all that kind of 

               stuff.  And what you realize pretty quickly is that 

               images and videos and this kind of multimedia 

               approach, it gets a lot more attention than just 

               writing.  

                                And so, for example, if I run an 

               advertisement on an article, maybe I'll get, you 

               know, let's say I'll get a thousand views on a 

               written article.  If I run an advertisement with a 

               picture, I'll get like 10,000, 20,000 views.  So 

               you start to see that people don't all respond to 

               sitting there reading a blog.  Some people respond 

               to hearing someone's voice, being able to 
                                                         31



               understand, oh, this is someone I can trust rather 

               than just this name on a screen, you know, this 

               faceless guy or this voiceless guy.

                                DIGITAL COURT REPORTER:  

               Interesting, interesting.  So how are you enjoying 

               your first podcast experience?  

                                MR. DAY:  Oh, I'm loving it.  

               There's totally better than you.  

                                DIGITAL COURT REPORTER:  Well, 

               I've done this so many times, so I'm happy that you 

               are united in this front.  Because, you know, this 

               is something that I've grown in the past six months 

               that I've been doing.  It's very passionate about.  

               I truly enjoy it.  It's something that I wake up 

               and I -- it's like part of my day.  Something -- 

               like I said that I want to do well in.  And, you 

               know, I just think the things that I am involved 

               in, it's such a niche.  And I feel like if we could 

               expose other people to something that can be just a 

               viable solution to what they could be doing as an 

               occupation, I think we will make the court industry 

               a better place.  Especially with somebody -- you 

               under the helm given that information.  But --

                                MR. DAY:  I tell everybody, this 

               could be your dream job, you know, give it a shot, 
                                                         32



               you know?  And for me, I'm always pushing the 

               stenography.  So I tell them, go to National Court 

               reporters A to Z, go to Project Steno, go to Open 

               Steno, you know, Open Steno.org.  There's so many 

               different ways to start learning about it and start 

               getting into it, that I always found it a shame 

               that people have a hard time finding that 

               information.  I actually had a question for you, if 

               that's okay?  

                                DIGITAL COURT REPORTER:  Sure.  

                                MR. DAY:  I know for me there's 

               certain things I think about with this question, 

               but for you, is there anything you think, "Wow, I 

               wish I really knew this before I went in?"

                                DIGITAL COURT REPORTER:  What I 

               wish that I knew?  I wish that I knew -- well see, 

               the thing is that -- so I do another thing that's 

               very independent contract oriented, and you realize 

               it's kind of the same situation where a lot of the 

               information in the beginning is suppressed because 

               you don't know anything, right?  

                                MR. DAY:  Yeah.  

                                DIGITAL COURT REPORTER:  And the 

               more -- and it's not like you dig in the beginning, 

               it's more like you kind of discover things and you 
                                                         33



               go, "Wait a minute, if this deposition was $800, 

               why am I only getting 75?  Where's that other 700 

               going?"  So I'm not going to say that I didn't know 

               about that because it's the same thing in my other 

               line of work where it's like the people that run 

               things are the ones that set the price, and 

               sometimes the middleman gets a cut, this person 

               gets this cut, this person gets this cut.  It's 

               just that now I've grown, and I'm certain that we 

               will talk about what that is at some point.  

                                But, you know, as you get better 

               at the line of work that you're in, you start 

               knowing more, you start wanting more.  You start 

               realizing that you should have equal representation 

               at the table.  Somewhat so where you want to just 

               kind of like be independent, and you want to start 

               your own thing.  

                                So the thing is for me, I've 

               always thought that any court reporting agency that 

               I'm in as an independent contract has always been a 

               learning situation, where I think that I'm the 

               talent, I know that one day this is still working 

               towards me learning something in the future.  So, I 

               don't know.  Maybe I've always thought of it as a 

               means to an end of just being an expert at this 
                                                         34



               whole thing in its totality, right?  And I think 

               Stenonymous.com has given me, also colored me with 

               a lot of information.  

                                Maybe I wish I read your website 

               before I hopped onto a court reporting agency.  So 

               I think if I had to answer the question, I wish I 

               knew about your website, because maybe I would 

               revisit some options that I could have had as 

               opposed to just, you know, signing up because I 

               didn't know anything.  But at the same time, I am 

               happy where I'm at.  I'm, I want to say I'm content 

               with what I'm doing because I'm still in learning 

               mode.  The moment that I start feeling that I'm 

               plateauing and I'm not learning and it's not 

               working for me, I'll start thinking about different 

               situation.  And I know in the background, we are 

               working on some different things.  So I'm excited 

               for that.  

                                But I know for me, I'm just like 

               somebody that's really independent.  I like 

               standing on my own two feet.  I like figuring it 

               out on my own.  And if that means trying to figure 

               out another situation where I'm being able to 

               control that, I feel like I'm going to shine much 

               better in doing so in that regard.  Does that 
                                                         35



               answer your question?  

                                MR DAY:  Yeah, I think so.  I 

               think that the entrepreneurial mindset is something 

               that you really -- you can't recreate it, you know 

               what I'm saying?  

                                DIGITAL COURT REPORTER:  Right.  

                                MR. DAY:  Like, you can't really 

               teach it.  It just kind of has to come to each 

               person in their own time.  And it sounds like 

               coming into it, that's what you've got.  So you 

               have that ability.  And I would say most people, 

               you know, many people who come into this, and 

               probably most people have that ability, but not 

               everybody goes in that direction.  Not everybody 

               wants to get that kind of mastery.  

                                DIGITAL COURT REPORTER:  Right.  

               Well, the only thing that I'll say in terms of the 

               mindset that you need to have, whether it be a 

               stenographer, you know, somebody that's voice 

               writing, or digital, I think one thing definitely 

               is always going to ring true, you have to be open 

               to learning in public, right?  

                                So I know that there's the 

               apprentice level in the background where you're 

               learning and you're trying to get to a threshold of 
                                                         36



               minute -- words per minute of you trying to type.  

               But, you know, when it's being recorded at this 

               moment in time, it's really hard in the beginning 

               to be perfect, right?  And still, you and I are 

               still not perfect when we're doing it, but we try 

               -- we strive to have that accuracy.  But it's 

               really hard, especially when you're learning, to be 

               at there, right?  So you're at 70 percent, and 

               you're striving to be a hundred percent.  

                                MR. DAY:  Yeah.  

                                DIGITAL COURT REPORTER:  But how 

               could I be a hundred percent if I've never done 

               this before?  Of course, I'm going to -- so at the 

               very least, if you have the growth mindset of 

               saying like there's more room for improvement and 

               eventually, you'll get there, and not being so hard 

               on yourself and trying to be perfect the first 

               time, I think you'll be very successful in this 

               type of line of work.  Even with the podcasting, 

               this is your first time.  I'm not going to hold you 

               to a standard that you're going to be nominated for 

               a podcast award when you --

                                MR. DAY:  Thank goodness.  

                                DIGITAL COURT REPORTER:  -- you're 

               starting out.  But at the very least you know like, 
                                                         37



               okay, you like it.  You feel comfortable in doing 

               it.  You feel okay with your voice.  You know what 

               your voice sounds like.  You've also been on other 

               multimedia platforms.  So at the very least, it 

               makes you want to improve.  It makes you want to do 

               it again, and that's all I can ask for.  Now, if 

               we're on our hundred episode I would hope that at 

               some point you're going to be like, "You know what, 

               I'm trying to get good at this."  So I hope that 

               answers the question.  

                                MR. DAY:  I think so.  I think so.  

               And actually, I'm not sure what it was, but I was 

               thinking while you were speaking, I actually made 

               this court reporter rates discussion group on 

               Facebook.  And that was -- that's kind of like when 

               you take that entrepreneurial mindset and you start 

               to apply it to things that aren't necessarily money 

               making, but more ethical based.  Because there's a 

               multi-pronged strategy to having created that 

               group.  First off, it's the consumers.  

                                DIGITAL COURT REPORTER:  Right.  

                                MR. DAY:  Through my website and 

               my writing and my documentation, all that great 

               stuff, I realized that there was kind of a game 

               being played on consumers, where the companies are 
                                                         38



               bringing down the page rates, bringing down the 

               page rates, but then they're nailing them with all 

               these other little charges.  

                                DIGITAL COURT REPORTER:  Right.  

                                MR. DAY:  And so now all that 

               stuff is out in the public, so consumers can just 

               go, oh, I could get this, you know, cheaper from, 

               you know, whoever, let's say me, or let's say you, 

               or whoever it is.  And then that person can make 

               more, and this agency, you know, doesn't need to be 

               taking all my money for -- doing me the honor of 

               printing basically.  

                                DIGITAL COURT REPORTER:  Yeah.  

               Listen, I think competition is always healthy, 

               competition always breeds creativity in terms of, 

               you know, the things that -- the way I think of 

               things.  

                                MR. DAY:  Yeah.

                                DIGITAL COURT REPORTER:  But, you 

               know --

                                MR.  DAY:  And that --  

                                DIGITAL COURT REPORTER:  You know, 

               I don't want to make this podcast too long.  The 

               only final question I want to ask for you after 

               doing this, I hope you had fun, but what are you 
                                                         39



               looking forward to of this, you know, eventually 

               evolving?  You want to get some guests in the court 

               reporting industry, do you want to get some 

               lawyers, like, what are you looking forward to and 

               what's your goal for this podcast to grow?  

                                MR. DAY:  All the above.  I mean, 

               I know -- I already know pretty much all the heavy 

               hitting stenographers in the field, and I'm pretty 

               sure that most of them will take the time to tell 

               their story.  But I would really love to get some 

               lawyers on the thing, and, you know, get their true 

               feelings.  And I imagine that it's going to be -- 

               again, you're going to find people all across the 

               spectrum.  There's going to be lawyers who are all 

               about hiring stenographers, there's going to be 

               people who don't, you know, they don't really care, 

               they don't mind if a digital's at the deposition.  

               There's going to be some that they don't even think 

               about the transcript because it doesn't matter to 

               them unless the thing is going to trial.  

                                DIGITAL COURT REPORTER:  Right.  

                                MR. DAY:  And so, I really want to 

               start bringing together all those voices.  And in 

               fact, it's been the front page of my website for 

               the longest time, is Words and Voices.  And that 
                                                         40



               phrase is basically because we want people's 

               opinions.  We want people's ideas.  We want to have 

               a more full understanding of the range of how 

               people, you know, interact with our services and, 

               you know, our field.  

                                DIGITAL COURT REPORTER:  Yeah.  I 

               think that's important.  I also think sometimes 

               when I'm talking to a lawyer, they just -- I feel 

               like -- I don't know, I feel like I'm like the last 

               person on the bench.  And they're just like, "Yeah, 

               I'm not really going to respect you."  It's only 

               because when my personality comes out, they're 

               like, oh, I kind of like this guy, all right.  

                                MR. DAY:  Yeah.  

                                DIGITAL COURT REPORTER:  And then 

               they start treating me like a person.  But I have 

               to like infuse me in order for that to at least -- 

               at the very least have that conversation.  Normally 

               I'm just like an afterthought.  And that's probably 

               how you feel within, you know, the -- when you're 

               in the role.  But, you know, I'm looking to change 

               that.  I think that there should be representation.  

               I mean, we are there, right?  

                                MR. DAY:  Yeah.  

                                DIGITAL COURT REPORTER:  So why 
                                                         41



               shouldn't we have a voice?  I feel like that, you 

               know, obviously when you're doing the job, I think 

               you should be as professional as possible and then 

               -- and be accurate.  But you can still be you, 

               right?  I think there's nothing wrong with being 

               who you are at all times.  So that's my --

                                MR. DAY:  No, I --

                                DIGITAL COURT REPORTER:  -- that's 

               my final saying for today.  What were you going to 

               say?  

                                MR. DAY:  I was just going to say 

               I agree with you totally.  Never give up your 

               personality for any job, and that's for everybody 

               listening.  

                                DIGITAL COURT REPORTER:  Yeah, 

               man.  I'm looking forward to this journey.  

               Figuring out what the next episodes are.  But I 

               hope you enjoyed your experience on your first 

               podcast.  

                                MR. DAY:  Absolutely.  Like I 

               said, I got one of the best.  

                                DIGITAL COURT REPORTER:  Okay.  We 

               are now off the record at 12:14 p.m.

Explain Stenonymous Research in 60 Seconds.

Tomorrow I have a very serious post that I think I’ll be leaving up at least the entire week as the “most recent post.”

Today I have a new way of conceptualizing all the things I’ve written about.

Stenonymous.com shares image explaining the controversy with Speech-to-Text Institute in 60 seconds.

I read about how hardworking people like you don’t have time to read material like mine.

This means liars who have smooth, simple arguments can win you over faster than someone like me who spends time trying to explain the truth.

I lucked out. I have the time. With contributions from the community, I can expand operations until Stenonymous is able to incorporate and begin feeding money back into the field.

I will be working on a prettier image for you. But feel free to share this one. I need your help.

Divided, my research makes it clear that court reporter incomes will freeze or fall. Whatever your financial situation is, it will degrade if your income comes from being a working court reporter.

Together, we’ll make a difference.

You may not believe it. And that’s okay. Because I don’t always know what to believe either. We are human.

The truth remains the truth whether you believe it or not. Just one company stands to gain hundreds of millions of dollars if you don’t believe me. Consequently, many of them are working together to lie to you in violation of fraud, antitrust, and false advertising laws.

I was scared when I started down this road. Scared of what you might think of me. Scared of what the largest players in the game might try to do to me. I was loaded with so much fear that my health degraded.

I recovered because you stood with me.

I will stand up for you. Will you stand with me?

I will stand up for you. Will you stand with me?

I will stand up for you. Will you stand with me?

All rise.

Christopher Day addresses the audience for this blog post.

Addendum:

A reader stated “it reminds me of a business/professional form of the Margaret Mitchell Effect.” I thought this was brilliant, so it gets a home here. Just let me know if you want your name here, reader!

Words Per Minute Podcast Launch!

Writing is a dying medium in modern times. My stuff’s good at getting into search engines and warning consumers about Veritext et al., but it doesn’t capture all of the investment that it could.

So I’ve teamed up with a digital court reporter to produce the inaugural episode of our Words Per Minute podcast!

We go deep! He says upfront that for him making less pay is worth it for remote work. I hold a different view, but it was refreshing to hear a new opinion.

“If this deposition is $800, I’m making 75, [where’s the rest going?]”

Tell us what you want to hear about in the comments! Be nice!

Transcript pending.

Stenonymous reveals the Words Per Minute podcast

National Court Reporters Association Blasted for Platforming Insurrectionist Apologist & Failing to Fight for Criminal Court Officialships Protecting the Rights of the Indigent

(NOTE 1: Reading time is extended by the text preserved at the end of this writeup. The writeup is short-ish.)

(NOTE 2: I am told by several readers the first link is not working for them. I am not sure how to fix this. It was working for me last I checked on 2/13/24.)

A public post by Angela Sidener came to my attention. Though the post was made during National Court Reporters Association’s Court Reporting & Captioning Week 2024, the events described therein occurred at the organization’s Legislative Boot Camp 2023 (herein LBC), before my announced resignation from the National Court Reporters Association in August 2023.

In brief, NCRA’s LBC, though I have never attended, is a taste of lobbying and learning about the legislative process, particularly of the federal government. Many, many court reporters are ignorant with regard to how laws are passed, and the education truly is vital to our field.

But something reportedly happened that day. Disgraced Congressman Ed Whitfield was invited to speak, and therein he minimized the events of the January 6th occupation of the capitol by over 2,000 “mostly peaceful” protestors, also known as rioters. The event was referred to as a “demonstration” by Mr. Whitfield.

At this point, I have to say, NCRA has always portrayed itself as non-partisan to a fault. It avoids controversial topics even where the law and science is completely on the side of working court reporters. So to learn that very partisan viewpoints made their way into the Legislative Boot Camp is pretty disheartening. There are also allegations that NCRA Executive Director Dave Wenhold made a comment about Obama being against free speech. Being something of a free speech absolutist myself, I don’t fault him if that’s a genuine belief. But that’s not, in my view, in line with the whole “we are a non-partisan organization” thing if true. Most politicians are against free speech if it brings them closer to a goal.

Sidener goes on to mention NCRA’s freelance lean. And this is unreservedly true. We have been watching officialships get eaten up by Steve Townsend and the digital brigade for years. How interesting is it that for years, and years, and years we repeated the mantra “realtime is the future,” putting all our eggs into a single basket of the high-priced, low volume specialty? The idea of business diversification eluded all of the major players for well over half a decade, and that includes Wenhold, Stenograph, and beyond. In Stenograph’s case, the organization figured out what diversification was as soon as Anir Dutta took the helm and made friends with the STTI Bloc. Or they knew damn well and funneled all the eggs into one basket anyway. Choose one.

The impact of watching those officialships be eaten is palpable. As court reporters in New York fought to bring attention to the impact that the loss of stenographers might have on the indigent, particularly minority speakers, the National Court Reporters Association was mostly silent — though I personally give credit to the org for hooking me up with Vice News so many years ago, something that would not have been done if there was uniform overt hostility to egalitarianism I promote. The NCRA could not have known that Vice would go on to lie by omission.

The ultimate result of failing to fight for officials and leaving it to the state associations to figure out, as Sidener writes, is criminal court reporters crushed under the weight of their dockets. In my view, this will lead to more criminal matters rolling over to audio and digital court reporting, which has turnaround time issues and sometimes results in the record being lost, appeals being denied, or expensive reconstruction hearings. Through its “non-partisan” habitual inaction, NCRA indeed chooses a side. It chooses to allow the indigent to be plagued by subpar record quality and serious privacy issues rather than stand up and shout that every person appearing in a legal proceeding in this country deserves the gold standard of stenographic court reporting. Because THAT would be political! This is an organization devoted to stenographers, by the way. It shouldn’t be a hard choice.

Perhaps it is time for the NCRA Board to consider a change in leadership. As I mentioned in my corruption post, we do not have to keep using people from the association management industry. We can send stenographers to association management training. It’s become painfully clear to me that we need an executive director that has done what we do. We can no longer afford to have the staff wag the dog and glide by on pure charisma. We need results. And if the NCRA can’t deliver, it needs to dissolve.

National Court Reporters Association, the Association for Court Reporters and Captioners

———

Text preserved:

National Con Reporters & Captioners[sic] Week 2024

TLDR; I finally gave up my RPR and professional association. 😊

Many of my colleagues and friends are celebrating the court reporting profession this week. Unfortunately, this year I’m not joining in the festivities, even though the last two years I was responsible for getting Gov. Inslee to declare Court Reporting and Captioning Week statewide in an official proclamation.

A few things last year opened my eyes wide. I’m grateful and truly thankful for this experience and for those who have supported me. We organize for a better future.

In February 2023, I went to Washington, D.C., as vice president of my state court reporters association for a national legislative boot camp. I was excited for the mentorship opportunity, networking with colleagues, and meeting with legislators again. I caught a red-eye Friday night, Washington state to Washington, D.C., because, as an official reporter in superior court, I had a docket to cover. I work a full-time+ job in addition to all my volunteer activities, so my schedule was tight, but I was excited.

As a preface, I’m experienced in the nuances of politics, pay attention to current events, and have butted heads with the national organization on a few occasions over the years, but I was a loyal member. I disagreed with their anti-worker agenda that urged members to advocate against the PRO Act, various other pieces of independent contractor legislation they’ve opposed in the past, so I’m always weary of their politicking and pay close attention.

What I experienced at boot camp, and the aftermath, shook my world, both personally and professionally. There’s probably 60 people in attendance. Reading the room, I knew this wasn’t the most politically active crowd when they were impressed with the School House Rocks video on how to pass a bill. I noticed no one batted an eye when the national executive director was bragging about his role in suing the government, Citizens United, the most destructive ruling regarding money in politics in our Supreme Court history, telling the crowd President Obama was against free speech. Cringe.

To spare more details, I’m jumping right to the line crossed. Monday morning, a supposed impromptu speaker was introduced. Never mind the brag his sidekick quipped while introducing him about being from the home of Kevin McCarthy, fist pump, (cringe), they brought disgraced former Congressman Ed Whitfield, Republican from Kentucky that was forced to resign over ethics violations, to the mic to gaslight the crowd about January 6th and Democrats stealing elections. That’s all he talked about. He had nothing to add to our agenda, nothing to say about court reporting. This was a violation of our professional Code of Ethics, clearly extreme right-wing politicking at a nonpartisan organization’s event.

I was livid, but I sat in silence, only offering the word “insurrection” twice when Mr. Whitfield was stuttering around, trying to find what to call an attempted coup we all watched on TV. He settled on calling it a demonstration. I was texting my sister in shock. She advised I get up and leave, but I was there representing my state and I was fearful to make a scene. As he finished gaslighting, the entire room applauded, but me. Leadership gathered around him to shake hands and were all smiles and pictures. I looked around, still in shock, and said to my table, “I cannot believe NCRA gave that nazzzi a platform.”

A few in my group said, “Shhhh, you can’t be political here.” My eyes popped as I realized they must not have understood a word he was saying. (In full disclosure, I lived in Richmond when the nazzzi’s marched in Charlottesville in 2017, killed Heather Heyer, and they are politically active on the east coast as well as here in Spokane and Idaho, but maybe I should have said fascist? Big diff?)

I said, “I didn’t bring it up. He just gaslit this entire crowd. January 6th was an attack on our sitting government, not a demonstration. A confederate flag was flown in our Capitol building for the first time, and there’s African-Americans here,” like, “What?” End of discussion, I get up and walk out for the break.

I immediately meet up with a colleague and expressed my shock, disgust, and feelings of leaving immediately. She said she was surprised too and that someone from California at her table shared the same WTF comments, but they still all clapped along at the end. This was the last day before Hill Day, so I decided to stick with my group and keep my mouth shut about the incident. We all got along fine in our skits, discussion afterwards, and there wasn’t any drama. We also all chatted in group texts. There was no scene.

Hill Day comes and it’s an amazing day. My colleague and I scrap the 12-hour schedule given to us and just visit our reps and take in the experience. I had to fly back early to get back to work Wednesday, but we were able to catch some amazing events going on around The Hill. There was a large demonstration outside SCOTUS for student debt relief, Equal Rights Amendment demonstrations were happening, and we were able to listen in as other lobbyists met with our legislators. I have stories, but I won’t digress here. It was an amazing day brushing elbows in one of my favorite places.

I get home and try to process this experience after I’d gotten rest and wasn’t jetlagged. I’d been in communication with two members of the national association back in my state and shared what happened. They were shocked and expressed outrage they were told there was no room for them to speak, the NCRA STRONG committee, but they gave time to Mr. Whitfield. One was on our state legislative committee and the other was serving on the national board of directors. The director took my concerns to a meeting where it was discussed and decided no action would be taken to apologize to attendees for the lapse in ethical judgement that allowed such a presentation, nor would they make a statement in firm support of democracy, free and fair elections, just basic non-partisan American values.

On top of my full-time+ job and board service, committee assignments, I was also in the middle of teaching a national Intro to Steno A to Z program with active participants I’d recruited and mentored. I didn’t want to let them down with an immediate resignation, so I swept my personal feelings aside to get through this 6-week program. After it ended, I emailed the national board myself, as a dues-paying member, and asked for them to recognize Mr. Whitfield did not speak for the association, nor our values. I also asked how much of national’s money was paid to his lobbying firm, Farragut Group, to make these phone calls to set up our meetings. Simple requests, I thought.

The president of the association wrote me back. Nobody else on the board responded. The president’s response was a pathetic attempt at acknowledging the damage done and covering for the association, saying they were all shocked by his speech, and their executive director did bring it up and got an apology for Mr. Whitfield’s comments; it certainly won’t happen again, but . . . they wouldn’t be passing that apology along to those in attendance. It’s best if we just shhhh. I’ll attach my correspondence with the national president in the comments here for full disclosure.

After long and hard consideration, conversations with people I respect, I gave up my membership. It was hard!!! I gave up the initials I’d paid for, tested out, and earned because I’m ashamed and embarrassed to belong to such an organization. My friends and I joke about what those initials really stand for: National Corporate Reporters Association? National Con Reporters Association? National Clueless Reporters Association? If you attend their meetings, they’re actively anti-union and like to book venues for conventions without union representation for their events.

I’ve worked in the courts and covered the criminal docket. It’s THE most important work done on a daily basis, bar none. It’s the record on which appeals happen, laws are affirmed, challenged, and reviewed. It’s a court reporter’s job to make sure that record is preserved. I hope none of you ever find yourself in a seat as a victim or defendant in a courtroom with a clerk pushing a recording button, outsourcing transcribing to noncertified court reporters in a certification-required state. The joke is national and state organizations have let digital recorders come into the courts, and it’s okay with them if a digital recorder replaces an official reporter.

Out of 39 counties in Washington, only 13 jurisdictions have official reporters left, and they’re mostly understaffed, many retiring. This is a certification required state! I pay for a state license to do my job here. King County, which is Seattle, has only 3 to 4 official reporters for their entire superior court bench. Look up how many judges they have. Those officials left are struggling with the weight of their dockets. Many court admins keep reporters in trial/on the record M-F and mandate we do all our transcript work on nights, weekends, and vacations. Fact. I have that in writing from Spokane County court administration.

National, and many state organizations by proxy, are “fighting” to keep the digital recorders out of their deposition rooms and freelance field only. That’s where the money is made. Criminal indigent work is the lowest pay, and they don’t want to do it. But people’s liberty interests are at stake! No bigger threat in life than your loss of liberty. We’re “court” reporters, not “deposition” reporters, but national and state associations never seem to be able to organize to benefit working reporters and keep courts staffed to have an impartial, skilled guardian of the record writing and filing that transcript.

In my experience volunteering, outside of testing, which seems to be their loss-leader to maintain membership dues, national’s priority is big-box firm owners either chomping at the bit to or actively abusing the independent contractor laws. I witnessed it for years and pushed back, made many friends doing so. Hours of meetings and hundreds of emails voicing frustration at their misinformation and fear-mongering, the organization purposefully keeping reporters ignorant of their rights, advancements in technology, and current laws being made that affect our industry.

I resigned my membership after losing all trust and respect for the association. This machine fights fascism.

RIP RPR

#CRCW2024 #RIPRPR961249

Images attached:

Letter to the National Court Reporters Association from Angela Sidener over platforming of insurrection apologist and disgraced former congressman Ed Whitfield.
Response from then-NCRA President Jason Meadors to Angela Sidener over the platforming of insurrection apologist and disgraced former congressman Ed Whitfield
Reply to the then-NCRA President from Angela Sidener over the platforming of insurrection apologist and disgraced former congressman Ed Whitfield

February 2024 NYC Deposition Reporter Unionization Report

In my “Chaotic Good” post I floated the idea of unionization for “freelancers.” I also provided a form that people could sign up if they were interested in the idea, which I urge my fellow New Yorkers to share and sign on for.

After my post, someone I love very much urged me to seek guidance from a lawyer on this issue. If you want your name here, just let me know.

Another court reporter insisted that my “Chaotic Good” post was filled with supposition and put together by hope and duct tape. I have now spoken to a lawyer whose life mission is worker organization. Let’s just say my supposition, hope, and duct tape is more like the concrete foundation on which we build a better tomorrow for you and your families. Take it or leave it.

As it turns out, much of what I wrote in the aforementioned post is true. As told to me by the attorney:

  1. There are many factors balanced or viewed by a fact finder when deciding if someone is an independent contractor or misclassified employee. What the parties call the relationship does not matter. So, for example, Lexitas’s Independent Contractor Agreement means jack shit. I wonder who could have predicted that.
  2. There are two tracks reporters could take to push the issue. The first would be some kind of class action that could be pushed all the way to the Court of Appeals, New York State’s highest court. The second would be finding enough reporters from a specific New York City office and filing a petition with the National Labor Relations Board (NLRB).
  3. No matter what track is selected, the organizing workers would have to decide whether to form a new organization or form under an existing organization. It is probably better to go with an established union.
  4. Misclassification class action track. This option would take years and quite a lot of money in legal fees. Given the facts I expressed to the attorney, he commented that the misclassification route would probably be better.
  5. NLRB track. This option would be quicker and is more attractive in that sense. In the event of an NLRB petition, the employer will likely say that the petitioners are independent contractors and not employees. the NLRB will hold a hearing to decide the issue. The NLRB is more favorable to workers than many courts, including New York’s courts. The company being unionized may attempt to withhold work from the petitioners, but if it’s found that petitioners are employees (and there are good reasons to believe they would), such action would be illegal union busting, and those retaliated against could be compensated for it. The NLRB track would require dedicated campaigners. This would be smarter to do at a smaller agency first, because it requires a majority of workers at the agency.
  6. Digital court reporters and voice writers. Where agencies use a mix of court reporters, it would make sense to unionize all together. After unionization, a contract could be put in place that sets ratios of reporters, and that contract would have to be followed by law.
  7. Contracts generally. Anything that can be put inside an enforceable contract is fair game. So, again, the right to work from home and refuse jobs, some kind of system could be put in place to allow for that. Many of the “benefits” court reporters enjoy from being “freelancers” can be secured contractually. The lawyer noted something like “it sounds like you are all getting all the drawbacks of being an independent contractor with none of the benefits.” Meaning we take on the self-employment taxes and so forth, but we have little to no customer control or independent branding, and are generally not allowed to subcontract our jobs to others as we would be if we were true independent contractors.
  8. This will take a lot of perseverance no matter what. It may also take a lot of time. Organizers and campaigners must be ready for a fight.

I want to stop and pick on point 6 a little, because court reporters are probably like “no, no, no, no, no.” Let me give you reality. Veritext has been advertising for digital court reporters every day for years. The larger companies of our field are, without any doubt whatsoever, slowly siphoning us out for digital court reporters. If you do have any doubts about this, feel free to reach out to Jackie Mentecky and ask her how things are going in Florida. To summarize: Stenographers cannot get work and are having trouble affording their bills because digital court reporters are being sent on the jobs they would have had. I have personally corresponded with people that are having trouble paying their bills because of agency mistreatment. So if you do nothing, you will be replaced. And even if you are not replaced, the constant influx of court reporters from both our stenographic recruitment drive and Veritext’s cash-dump strategy will create a worker glut that will reduce or freeze your rates. To understand why this is, you have to look at supply and demand. Demand for court reporters is forecasted to pretty much remain the same, with 3% job growth currently forecasted by the Bureau of Labor Statistics. So if the demand is remaining the same, and the supply is going up, eventually our gentle shortage will become a deluge of workers who will all be competing to get the same jobs. This is why New York City is 30 years behind inflation. And that was with stenographers competing with each other, not with a combined workforce.

And if stenographers do not do this, then digital court reporters might do it after our numbers thin out a little more. Who do you think gets to set the ratio if that happens?

Special note to the rest of the country: What’s happening in New York City and Florida is just an accelerated version of what’s coming for you. I know you don’t like to read that, but this is the nature of corporate consolidation of the country. MEDICAL DOCTORS are having difficulty and pay disparity is causing massive worker shortages in pretty much every field. How long do you think your licenses are going to protect you? They barely do now.

I am taking steps to obtain records from the defunct Federation of Shorthand. If obtained, they will likely be shared with the lawyer, and may be shared with this audience. If anyone would like to assist me in this endeavor, please reach out to contact@stenonymous.com. It seems that either we will need to pay for reproduction of the records OR visit in person at 70 Washington Square South.

Real talk. I got mine. You can look my salary up online. I don’t need to help you. I don’t need to care about you. I don’t need to spend time writing blogs or publishing information for you. I didn’t need to save your job from the Speech-to-Text Institute propaganda machine. I didn’t need to make a forum where you could discuss rates freely. You can spend your days whining on Facebook about how the agency won’t pay your rates or you can unionize and lock them into a contract where they have to pay your rates from now until the end of time.

On one end, you have a guy who uses a considerable amount of his free time to help people he’ll never know. On the other end, you have corporations that are factually doing everything they can to create market conditions that reduce your income. I don’t think this is a difficult decision, but I’ve been wrong before.

The Speech-to-Text Institute is an organization that was accused of fraud and illegal anticompetitive conduct, was subsequently sued, and shut down its website in 2023.

Conclusion

Unionization for New York City deposition reporters is possible but will require action on the part of court reporters. You can use me as a shield to organize by filling out that form I linked at the top.

ADD-ONS

A union is not the only course of action that can be taken. We can also push for a New York City or New York State price transparency bill where companies would be required to tell court reporters what the consumer is being billed and tell the consumer what the court reporter is being paid. A second option, suggested by another lawyer, is creating something of a cooperative agency that competes directly with the big box brigade. All of these options are preferable to doing nothing. All of these options require organization, so quite frankly, if you’re interested in 1/3, you should still sign up on my link.

“In times of universal deceit, telling the truth will be a revolutionary act.” -George Orwell

Bulletin: Lawyers, This is How Some Court Reporting Companies Overcharge You

I’ve been on the consumer awareness game for a long time. But I realize my site’s hard to navigate for some. I’ll just put this on the front page. Hopefully it sums it up nicely.

The first game is that while companies grind down on the page rates — the primary income of the court reporter you’re working with — they come up with fees that most of us wouldn’t dream of charging. This has the effect of making what you’re actually paying more than what you would with a small business or sole proprietor while making it look like you’re getting a lower “price per unit.”

The second game is that they’ll send bills with no itemization so that you don’t even know what you’re paying for and have to interact with them to get it. This is a frustrating experience, so some of you will just pay it.

The third game is that they lie and bait and switch you, sending digital court reporters when you order stenographers and telling you stenographers aren’t available while telling stenographers their rates are too high or there’s not enough work. The nonprofit Protect Your Record Project was formed, in part, to educate about this one.

But to understand all this, you previously had to navigate my site and find articles like the ones I’m about to link. Now you can just read this. Hooray.

While court reporters in New York City are working for anything from $3.25 to $4.50 a page, here’s what’s happening around the country:

Page Padding

Lawyer effectively charged $10 a page.

Veritext effectively charged ~$11.47.

Companies may charge original rates for copy.

Word index rates same as transcribed pages.

Imagine effectively charges $9.44.

Paying for blatant inferior quality.

Huseby’s webconferencing charge rivals transcript.

Huseby effectively charges $8 a page.

Attorney says $4.20 charge unreasonable.

Published rates sole proprietors can beat.

Veritext effectively charged $37 a page.

FTR is paid $450 for a “deficit product.”

Satire about the government shirking its regulatory responsibilities when it comes to court reporting.

Basically the trust you have in us as guardians of the record and our whole “ethics culture” has been abused by some in the community taking you all for suckers.

And if you should happen to come across things on this site that make you question my mental state or personality, just remember that a large portion of it is a performative media style where I use propaganda techniques to tell the truth and educate people on those same techniques. I chose that because I detected that propaganda techniques and the Empty City Strategy were being used to bamboozle the women of court reporting and their clients — you. I did most of the zany stuff because it runs in stark contrast to the cottage industry of court reporting, where everything was (is?) molded to be our own mini-distortion of your ostensibly more conservative and “slow-to-change” legal world.

I played my part. It got people talking.

Now all of you have a choice. Share this with your fellow attorneys and play a part in shaping a more ethical world, or close me out and forget we had this moment together.

Just know that whatever you choose, I wish you the best.

KRORPS K- SHAEUR TAO FPLT

Addendum:

A reader felt my use of “women of court reporting” was cringe because there are many men in the field. This is true. No offense meant to anybody. I used the term because we’re 88% women and I thought some of my readers would appreciate it. If that’s not the case, I’m quite happy to not use it again.

The “Chaotic Good” of Court Reporting

I’m suspending most internet ops broadcasting the court reporter shortage fraud. It was a good year. My publications reached tens of thousands. Yet I can’t help but feel my energy is better spent elsewhere. I’m hopeful that, in time, the community comes to understand why I chose this method of telling the story and this iteration of the Stenonymous character. But I have to face certain realities. We’re in a period in history where companies can call fraud free speech and claim that the government should be barred from pursuing lies that have gone on for a long time. There are probably millions of scandals like ours or worse than ours, and not enough journalists in this country to cover even a healthy fraction of them.

As the multimillion dollar corporations let the one-year statute of limitations on defamation pass, I hope people start to question a bit. I was willing to put in print allegations of consumer fraud & name names in my own name without the privilege of anonymity. I retract nothing. This stuff will be searchable online pretty much forever. There’s certainly a cost to me. But what are consumers to think about a firm that can’t even do the bare minimum brand defense of dropping a comment to say “these allegations are false?”

I’ll still work on the community publicizing and publishing. I’ve got ideas. You’ve got ideas. Let’s put them in print!

First up, NYC “Freelancers,” if you’re interested in unionization, leave a contact email here. What I’ll do is I’ll collect these “pledges,” and at the point where we have a hundred or so we could pool money on real legal advice for implementing a deposition reporter union. My proposal would be to secure a contract that works out some kind of points system for refusing work and pay structure to stay by the page as we’ve always known it. Basic idea is that most of you wouldn’t be able to talk about this out of fear of blacklisting, so we use me as a go-between until the group is large enough to do what has to be done. Could take years, but let’s face it, I might be around another 30 years, so I’ve got time.

If you’re totally lost, let’s just say there are good arguments to be made that many of us meet the definition of common law employees, either commission-based or per diem. That means a whole heap of us are misclassified employees. That means that whatever you’re making now, there’s a good chance you could work out a better deal via collective bargaining. Similar to the concept of bulk buying power. Very pro-capitalism. All about charging what the market will bear. Bonus points if we get contractual provisions for the use of digital reporting, like a stenographer-to-digital ratio, which would guarantee, with the force of law behind it, that companies cannot just replace stenographers willy nilly.

And before somebody jumps in with “my skills earn me the top of the top, I don’t need no union, nope,” it’s cool, really. I get it. Some of you make hundreds of thousands of dollars a year. I would think I’m a nut too. But then you meet reporters who are like “my agency doesn’t want to give me more than $3.25 in 2022 during a time of unprecedented shortage,” when everyone and their mom knows some reporters were getting $3.25 in 1990, and you start to realize that maybe something is not quite right here.

I was never quite able to verify the truth, but I was told by another reporter that one of the killers of the Federation of Shorthand was Diamond Reporting. “You don’t need a union, we’ll pay you your rates.” How poetic if that’s true. That was the company that said no copy sales for New York “freelancers” prior to the Veritext takeover. That was the company that was paying many of you $3.25, a 1990 rate, in 2010. So I sure don’t know if they helped kill the union, but I know for a fact that they capitalized big time on its death. Great anecdote for how companies will actively push for things that hurt your wallet. And something you should keep in mind the next time someone is insisting that you don’t need a union, often using their age and presumed “wiseness” to give weight to halfhearted reasons for why something that’s not really been tried won’t work. “Ah yes, here was a thing so ineffective that companies campaigned against it, sued it, and did everything in their power to bring it down.” In reality, the knowledge that we are underpaid came from historical documents left behind by that union. How twisted is that? It defends us even in death. Sounds like a fantasy novel.

Imagine holding in your hand a tool that, on average, raises your pay, and that you have evidence that it raised pay for people that came before you. You look at the tool, snarl up your face, and go “I don’t like this tool because I feel like the work I do with my bare hands is more fulfilling!” You throw away the tool. The people that would’ve had to pay you more cheer and tell you what a good, hard worker you are, and everyone is happy. Especially you, the hard worker. This is pretty much what I envision every time someone gives me an anti-union excuse, and I have heard pretty much all of them:

“The top reporters get the top pay and jobs!” Not true. There was a certain point in my career where I was the second-most qualified of about a half dozen friends and making the least money — and we’re talking up to 25% less. One agency wouldn’t work with me because I wasn’t in the field long enough at the time. But they worked with someone I knew who just so happened to have less time in the field than I did. I later went on to place 14th in the state’s court reporter civil service exam. Most of us want to believe in meritocracy. I saw for myself things are anything but.

“The harder you work, the more your reward.” Nope. I busted my ass as a 20-something running around New York City. Yeah, I work hard. Pretty much everybody in this city works hard. But you know what? I work a whole lot less hard and make a whole lot more money than I ever did. And I know for a fact there are people out there busting their ass harder than I ever will that make less money than I do. So hard work doesn’t have a damn thing to do with it either. I can self-justify and say my hard work then is what laid the foundation for my success now, but it’s just not true. I gained no professional advantage from being underpaid. Saying otherwise would be delusional self-aggrandizement. I reject telling 20-somethings that hard work is the deciding factor in success. It is one of many.

“Unions are corrupt.” Oh, conceded, some are. Bad leadership can make union membership unbearable. Unthinkable. But in the end you have to decide whether it is better to reform the institution that is supposed to be protecting you, and that you can sue if it fails in its duty of equal representation, or do away with it completely. Think about it this way. The threat is that eventually the person paying you will come swinging the (1d20) axe of “I just need to lower your pay or adversely affect your working conditions.” Could be any reason. Maybe they just want to move their cousin into your seat. Would you prefer no shield or a busted shield that you have some time to fix up and make work for you if that threat comes your way?

“Unions only protect bad employees!” Bad management protects bad employees. Unions typically set up a disciplinary procedure. Managers typically don’t want to follow that disciplinary procedure. The result is non-performers get to endlessly offload their responsibilities on performers while the union takes the blame for “protecting bad employees.” And at the end of the day, this is a great deal for management, because if you get frustrated and dissolve your union because it only protects bad employees, management now has no impediment to firing any of you for any reason whenever they want. Any of you ever had the work from your agency mysteriously dry up after you did something minor to displease them? We could make that never happen again.

“Unions are only for people that benefit from the lowest common denominator.” I’ve taken classes in and done a lot of reading on unionization. You don’t have to structure a union where everyone gets paid the same. You can create tiers, or points, or basically anything you can dream up, put into words, and get people to agree to. Funny that the people that think they’re so far above everyone else can’t imagine improving the models of the past.

“Unions don’t do anything!” Unions are a legal vehicle that, through legal and/or social pressure, encapsulate the terms and conditions of employment in a contract and defend the interests of its members. If there’s something more that you want it to do, you put it into words, you run it by union leadership, and if you don’t like the response you get from leadership, you band together with more union members to push the change or even vote union leadership out. Put it this way, if you do not care enough about your idea to do that stuff, can you really blame leadership for not doing it? It’s like when people get upset with me for not covering every topic. I’m one guy and the community won’t fund me enough to hire help. My effectiveness is limited by the support I get. So too are your union leaders. (Corporate leaders too, but money buys a lot of support, as it turns out.)

In a rare, perhaps unforgivable moment, I’m going to betray my union a bit and put in print that there’s a faction that has an issue it wants addressed. There’s been plenty of haranguing and handwringing over it, but there hasn’t been a single serious attempt by the faction to address the issue. I’ve had hours of my time wasted listening to people talk about an issue that they don’t care enough about to formally address in any substantial manner and gotten a front row seat to the “unions don’t do anything” people complaining about matters they’ll lift not a finger to solve. But, who knows, maybe one of them reads the blog and will ask me how I’d handle it if I wanted them to win. Point is that initiative drives outcomes. If you have no initiative, your outcome is decided by people that do.

Union dues are a drain on your wallet!” I guess? But it’s been shown that on average unionized workers make more than their non-union counterparts, even factoring in union dues. Specifically in our field, we can study non-union deposition reporters with unionized officials, and we can see that, even going 20 years without a substantial change, the page rates are still higher than private sector rates on average. Meanwhile attorneys say their bills have never been higher. Where is all that extra money going if not to you? The agencies. What do you think would’ve been more of a drain on your wallet, union dues, or literally and demonstrably all of the price increases from 1990 to now going directly to the corporate owner’s pocket? We have this funny habit of considering union dues “our money,” and price increases the “employer’s money,” but y’know, if your “employer” is raising prices and never giving you a raise, you’re effectively paying dues to your employer for the privilege of working for them. You just don’t get to see those dues come out of your paycheck, so it feels much better and you don’t have the urge to complain or do anything about it.

If it was possible someone would’ve done it already to collect all those union dues!” Someone I genuinely love — in fact, one of the people that saved my career — loves this line. And it cuts me deep every time because I’ll never really know if they’ve fooled themselves into accepting this fallacy as truth or if they know damn well it’s a fallacy and choose to publish anti-union rhetoric again and again anyway. I’m too chicken to ask and I don’t even know if the answer I’d get would be the truth. Sad day for me.

Why is it a fallacy? Union structures, in my lived experience, are less about expanding the power and profitability of the union and more about safeguarding and managing what they have already. It would genuinely surprise me if, at any point in the last 50 years, any of the New York City unions seriously considered a campaign to bring the deposition reporters into the fold. It would surprise me if they even conceived that such a thing might be possible. To make the connection or assertion you’d have to read the highlights of various labor laws and apply them to the way the job is done in modern times. And even then, you’ll probably still get a patchwork of realities where some people would qualify and some would not.

There’s also the potential political cost of current union members taking offense and deciding to vote out a leader that spends too much time on such a campaign, even if it would ultimately strengthen the union. Add the fact that you would likely have to modify union constitutions to support and allow it. So it’s not a matter of “if there was money in it, they would do it.” It’s a matter of looking at all the obstacles and saying “yeah, this isn’t my fight, and my union doesn’t pay me more money to fight it, so good luck with that.” But if it happened in reverse, where a large group of “freelancers” established a union, or deposition reporters unionized several agencies and then asked to be folded in under —- whoever, let’s say the legal support workers union — I think the results would be quite different. That’s just assuming they’d want the protection of a larger, more-established entity.

Skilled jobs don’t need a union.” The iron workers, carpenters, and all manner of construction people seem pretty skilled to me. And I just told you there’s a legal services staff association, LSSA 2320, and they represent paralegals, social workers, and others. ASSCR, Local 1070, and several CSEA branches represent court reporters. The whole skilled/unskilled thing feels like a rumor that got started to keep workers divided. And it works really well. We squabble with each other about why Joe burger flipper shouldn’t make $xx.xx per hour while the people paying us get away with murder against everyone right up to and including some of the most educated people out there.

All this is to say that the road ahead is difficult. But if we do not even try, then we’re just going to continue this game where the corporations reduce stenographer positions in favor of digital, get them to fight each other for the work, causing even more of a rates freeze (or effective drop). Then this’ll force more people out of the market, particularly the smart ones that don’t want to work for peanuts. And ultimately the pool of stenographers from which the courts recruit will fall to a place of no return, leaving the private sector to pick up the pieces via recording and transcribing. Game, set, match. That’s competition, baby, and it’s on a level that most of us in the “accuracy and ethics” crowd don’t think about. It’s time to flip the script and win the competition.

So let’s take a crack at it. Leave your contact info. Best case scenario, we do something historic and create a model that leaders in every state can follow, as well as upping your paycheck and giving you more worker rights than you currently enjoy. Worst case scenario, it doesn’t work out and everyone has a big laugh at my expense.

If you’re tired of being underpaid during a time of “unprecedented” shortage, it’s time to take a stand!

Addendum:

Even doctors are unionizing due to the corporate consolidation of America. I’m willing to put down at least $1,000 to help all of you with the legal fees.

There’s also the “unfortunate” truth that if we make an active effort to do this, agencies might raise rates just to avoid having to deal with a union for the rest of their existence.

1/11/24 update:

Court Reporters, the Department of Labor’s New Interpretation of the Fair Labor Standards Act Classification Clause Probably Means You’re An Employee.

Veritext “Allegedly” Gives Scripts to Digital Reporters

Alleged Veritext script provided to digital court reporters.

I really need to take you on a quick time machine ride. It’s 2010. New stenographers are graduating in New York City, and many of us are told there are too many reporters and not enough work. When we do get work with an agency, we’re thrown into whatever job regardless of skill level. A true trial by fire. I lucked out, my first was an interpreter job. One acquaintance of mine was put on a med mal or something beyond her skill level and immediately quit the field to become a dental technician. We were also, by any sane metric, being underpaid. When I write about this stuff, I do it with all those memories in my heart. We fought hard through school, and a lot of us didn’t make it in the working world. I know the knee-jerk reaction of reporters is to play into survivorship bias and say “well, others made it, they could have too!” Congratulations! Some of us made it through a rigged game! Good for us! It’s time to use our position as survivors of the rigged game to unrig it so that we’re not chuckle-fucks telling students what a great field this is only to have the income drop through the floor.

These companies did everything in their power to drive us out and drive sole proprietors under, running down the page rates and running up other costs to siphon more and more of the money in this field away from the reporter and into their pockets under the guise of “competition.” Now they’re doing everything in their power to build digital. According to multiple sources I’ve talked to in the last few years, they’re told to say digital is the future or something similar when questioned about steno v digital.

Digital reporters, I know this sounds like good news because some stenographers have been nasty to some of you. The reason it’s bad is they’re pushing all this recruitment and holding your hands through the early stages so they can “diversify” the worker pool and pit us against each other, decreasing rates across the board. The companies would rather let me call them frauds than defend their reputation. That’s how much money is at stake here. It’s fairly easy to come to this conclusion. Company executives have a duty to make decisions that make companies more profitable. Their compensation is often tied to company performance in some way. The finance guys think digital is like 50% more profitable. Supply and demand, supply of reporters goes up, demand stays about the same, price goes down. That price is your income, just so we’re clear. Even if you don’t buy into believing it’s fraud, you have to see the clear money incentive these companies have.

Consumers, if you’re reading, this pretty much demonstrates why stenographers are making all this noise. You’re comparing a workforce of people that had to self-teach anything the 2-year education didn’t cover with people that are scripted after whatever the training program time is (6 weeks?) And they are pretty much going to charge you the same prices for both while pocketing, allegedly, 50% more profit. I get that everyone thinks our steno lobbying is the only thing that keeps us afloat, but I gotta be honest, our associations would find it difficult to be less effective. I’m not saying it’s all their fault, but let’s look at the reality: We’re losing jobs even in states with heavy licensing requirements like California and Texas. Digital has come into play even where it’s illegal. If our lobby can’t combat illegal activity, it’s pretty fucking weak. For contrast, your organizations kill robot lawyers with zeal and efficiency.

If it’s not our lobby keeping us afloat, what could it be, I wonder? Could it be that even in 2023 modern stenography is more efficient than the other methods? Hmm…