Juggling

As mentioned in the last blog entry, time management is an essential skill for any successful court reporter. The question becomes, how do we juggle ALL of the high-priority cases that land in our laps?

For example... I'm currently in a private-pay only situation - which means technically no appellate deadlines. That's good. But I'm also trying to meet self-imposed ones; I want to provide good service to the captive audience that are the parties to any cases an official reporter takes down.

To my mind, the best way to handle any situation is to write it down. When you can visualize where you are, you can project out to where you need to be.

I have a white board. It lists the cases, when taken, when ordered, how many pages - and who's handling it. I have a scopist and two proofreaders, so I can tell where they are at certain stages. It's very helpful.

Be realistic in your time estimates. I like to be "Scotty" from StarTrek. I estimate long - most of the cases I have now I estimated five weeks on (I was in trial for two - see my last post) and I just didn't see myself getting them done faster - and then if I come in early, I've "worked a miracle" just like Scotty did.

And now there's some good news. One of the files is in final edit stage already. Another of the files (the long one) is already off to the proofer on volume one, my scopist has the last day, and I'm working on the middle. Things are progressing nicely. Of course, today I got a call for another transcript.

Where are those white board pens??

Time Management

It's a skill that's so important, and so many of us just don't have. In court reporting, a profession defined by deadlines, we really need to have a better handle on our time - and a keen understanding of our personal abilities.

Speaking from the standpoint of a working official reporter now, if you're in court all day, the last thing you want to do is come home and transcribe. ANYTHING. I would strongly suggest you find someone to scope for you. Doesn't matter how bad you think you wrote; your concentration at the end of a long day is shot, which means your editing skills will more than likely suffer. If you hand it off to a scopist, they can take the time to listen to your audio (all the way through, if you like) and give you a pretty clean document to proofread. They can check your case cites for you. Look up funny words. Run spell check. Think of all the things that you could do in the time that they're working for you!

The best thing that a scopist can do for you, though, is keep you on task. Meeting those deadlines is of paramount importance. Our legal system depends on us to do our part to keep the train running along smoothly. Too many extensions, by too many people, slow the wheels of justice and in the end make us look bad.

We must, both for our sanity and for our profession, learn to delegate some of our transcription duties so that we can actually have free time to relax and so that we can better manage the other aspects of our lives.

Don't Procrastinate

Just because you have 60 days (or however many) doesn't mean you have to use them all. There's nothing worse than having something looming over your head; it puts a damper on everything else you're doing.

I spent last weekend producing a transcript for which I'd requested not only a 30-day extension, but an additional 30-day extension from the Court of Appeals. The notice of appeal came in right before Thanksgiving, and then there was not only that holiday, but the Christmas season as well (with the attendant company). By the time I could start working on it, I only had two weeks to produce. So I asked for an extension. Then because of my court scheduling, I realized that was going to need another.

Finally I buckled down and got the majority of the pages done and off to proofreaders (yes, that is plural) and produced the final pages with nary a day to spare. I feel so relieved. And exhausted. But now I don't have anything hanging over my head saying, "You should be working on me instead of (insert activity here)" anymore. There is nothing better than that feeling of accomplishment.

Aaaaaaahhhhhhhh. Now I may enjoy the spring weather in NC.

Be Careful What You Wish For.

My happiness in being nominated to the board has been tarnished. Because of my current method of reporting, my fitness is being called in to question. Additionally, there are questions about a so-called 'umbrella' organization.

Man. Now I'm being asked to make a decision on a hypothetical situation that may or may not occur.

NCRA is a stenographic reporting organization. I consider myself a stenographic reporter by training, and a voice writer through injury (but am good at both). The bylaws specifically state that the association is to focus on the advancement of steno reporting. How does one answer but to say, "I will follow the constitution and bylaws"? Unless and until they change, it's a moot point. Isn't it?

I'm not even sitting - and the election is in August - and it's starting already?
Apparently I live in interesting times.

Being Active

So this career field can cause a bit of spread, if you know what I mean. We sit all day doing our jobs and then we sit some more in front of a computer to produce our work. It's imperative to move around a bit. I will admit that I'm not much of an athlete. Strike that. I'm NOT an athlete at all. I'm a musician, but not even that much anymore.

You read my New Year's Resolutions - one was to work out four days a week (not doing too well with that, but I have had injuries/illness) and to take one class per semester. Well, I'm trying to get really focused. I'm healthy again. AND I registered for an eight-week dance class. Yes, I of the two left feet, have decided to learn how to line dance. First class was Tuesday, March 9. It was a lot of fun, and I don't think I did too poorly. Of course, next week will be the test.

The good news is I was out there, working up a sweat for over 90 minutes. I was moving. I was having fun. Find your fun, get out there, and move! Don't sit at your computer all day.

On being myself

I got an email today. The email congratulated me for being placed on the slate for the national association's board of directors. I had a nice interview with the nominating committee on Saturday up in the DC area. It only lasted an hour. It was pretty relaxed - more of a conversation than an interview, per se. The nice thing was I knew everyone in the room. Hopefully, that meant they knew me too.

My resume was sent in previously, as was a fairly comprehensive questionnaire. The conversation was pretty generic, but it made me think a little more clearly about where I stand about our profession. What I believe. What I see as our future in this ever-changing world of technology and declining budgets.

In other words, I grew. It felt really good, when our time was up, to realize that I hadn't been nervous. I had just been me. If the me that I am was what they wanted for the leadership of the association, then all well and good; if not, so be it. Either way, I was true to myself and learned a lot more about what I think about our profession.

To get the email today was humbling. It was an honor, too. To know that they had chosen me from a group of truly outstanding individuals was simply stunning. But challenging too. I wonder what they have in mind for me.

Please let me know how I can help YOU while I serve the membership and the reporting profession. I love my profession and my career. I want you to succeed as well.

It's going to be an interesting three years and I hope I can meet the challenges and live up to your expectations.

Taking part in history

One of the great joys of the profession of court reporting is being present and recording the events of history. I had the privilege of doing just that in February 2010 when I was the official reporter for the three-judge review of the case of Gregory Flynt Taylor, a man convicted of first-degree murder of a woman in 1991 (conviction 1993).

The case was brought before the Innocence Inquiry Commission, the only state-run agency in the country set up to review claims of actual innocence, and they in turn recommended review by the panel. After five days of evidentiary hearing, the judges returned with their opinion.

Based on new evidence brought to light (which is the only way the review could have proceeded, with NEW evidence), they found by clear and convincing evidence (the standard of review) that Mr. Taylor was innocent of the crime for which he had been convicted.

Mr. Taylor spent 17 years in prison. The judges overturned the verdict of a 12-member jury panel. It, I have no doubt, was a very difficult prospect and, in the end, it seems that justice has prevailed.

Court Reporters, the scribes of humanity, are the silent note takers that preserve history. What a fabulous profession. I feel blessed to be part of it.