Talk:Court reporter/Archives/2014

Electronic Composition?

I know next to nothing about court reporting, but was curious: due to the advent of modern voice recording technology (voice recorders, for example), are court reporters less in demand than they were before? There must be a reason why this industry is still so high-paying. If anyone can answer this question, I'd request that they include a section in the article. KBurchfiel (talk) 03:33, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

>>"High-paying" is subjective. There is feast and famine, and there is a greater risk of return. Most reporters carry uncollectable debts on the books. Also, reporters still have to pay subcontractors despite not getting paid. Aside from that, the human brain is still the most sophisticated computer. Because people have horrible speech patterns -- do not speak clearly, speak on top of each other, have differing accents, differing dialects, incorporate slang, etcetera -- there is no computer that can interpret the spoken word as accurately as the human brain. Advocates of computerized methods of interpreting speech can only boast an 80 percent accuracy rate, which is unacceptable in the legal arena. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.177.25.216 (talk) 05:13, 9 May 2010 (UTC)

Court reporters often command earnings which rival those of the attorneys whose speech they transcribe.

What is this supposed to mean? (Ok, I am not native English speaker, but still...) saigon_from_europe

Basically, it just says that court reporters can earn as much or more than attorneys when they are working steadily. The pay rate is divided between 'appearance fees' which are payments for simply showing up and taking a deposition, and 'page rates' which means that a court reporter can charge a certain amount per page when an attorney orders a transcript. This 'page rate' can vary depending on where a transcript was taken. -Heidi from Idaho

In which case, let's just say "can" - certainly outside the US it is rare for court reporters to earn anything near what lawyers earn. ~~LP

I have been a freelance court reporter for several years in New York City, and I have consistently earned more than most of the attorneys that hire me for depositions. Talk about envy! I wish I had the education of an attorney, and they wish they made my salary. There's something to be said about someone who goes to law school for four-plus years, graduates almost $100K in debt, then goes to work for a firm that starts them out at around $50K. That is after working almost 70 hours a week, and not being able to try any cases. Just depositions and Conferences, motions, and the like. I, on the other hand, went to a specialized school for stenography for two and a half years for about $20K, and now I command up to $125K per year, working an average of 30 hours a week.

>>This is not a correct statement above. A few court reporters can earn up to $250,000 a year, but these reporters have very specialized skills that take decades to develop; however -- and where the above statement is preposterous -- it is impossible to earn a decent living as a court reporter at only 30 hours a week, certainly no 125k figure. This poster is most certainly referring to 30 hours of on-the-record time, which does not take into account the three to four times that amount of time that is actually required to produce the transcript. In other words, if a deposition lasts one hour, it takes four to five hours beyond that time to actually produce the transcript, taking into account printing and delivery. Also, if a reporter is taking 30 hours of actual testimony, there are not enough hours in the week for one person to go take the job and then produce that amount of testimony; therefore, scopists need to be hired. A decent scopist can earn up to 50k a year. In light of the scopist expense, a proofreader expense, as well as educational, travel expenses, equipment expenses, and double the taxes that attorneys have to pay, it is easy for anyone to see that attorneys do make out far better. Just a note, a court reporter would be trained to not capitalize the word "conference."—Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.177.25.216 (talk) 04:47, 9 May 2010 (UTC)

<<<Looks like you got him (or her) there "unsigned." By capitalizing "Conference," it proves the author is either dishonest or exaggerating. No court reporter would ever make such an insignificant typo.

On the other hand, what do *you* know? How do you know how many years this reporter has been working and how much he or she is making per page? And by stating that one must "take into account printing and delivery," shows you pretty much know nothing at all. The reporter doesn't print or deliver anything. The agency takes care of that end. You just email it to them and they do their part. Plus, if you're a clean reporter, you won't need "four to five" hours for every on-site hour of writing. Good reporters can scope their own work in an hour to hour ratio, easy. Proofreaders can be hired to do the rest and they don't cost as much as scopists. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 108.27.132.103 (talk) 02:06, 6 March 2011 (UTC)

---

When the person above says they make $125,000 a year for working 30 hours per week, that is quite accurate. If they were speaking of 30 hours of taking down testimony (machine time), that 30 hours would translate to 1500 pages per week (50 pages an hour is average). At $4.00 per page, which averages out to what I myself earn as a NYC reporter, that would come out to over $300,000 a year. And $4.00 per page is regular rate, not daily copy, nor expedited copy. No one could consistently work as a court reporter 30 hours a week machine time. They would be burned out within no time. I don't have any sources to cite. Other than myself, that is - a NYC freelance reporter with 35 years experience. -------

I added a link to the BLS about pay.

Can anyone clarify what happens to the transcripts? I understand that the reporter generally notarizes their validity, may keep back-up records, etc. Are transcripts for depositions or transcripts entered into court records now public? Under license?

I deleted the sentence on court reporters receiving personal gratification for doing closed captioning work, because that is purely speculative (they do get paid).

____________ I'm currently in school to become a court reporter in New York City. It states in the article "Nine to Eleven Years" to become a court reporter. I think the writer may have meant nine to eleven months to learn the basic skills...

The salary write of "about 30,000 a year" is also quite a low estimate. (though it does say 30 to 60,000, which is closer to what I've heard. ) I don't know much about court reporting in other countries and can't comment there, but I think this page needs to be done justice. If I get some time I'll see if I can gather actual facts. __________________________ —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.168.126.147 (talk) 18:26, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

American style

This entire article (except for the link to Hansard) seems to reflect only the American experience. Court reporting in Canada, for instance, has somewhat different requirements for education, experience, etc. I'm making a note to come back and see if I can make this somewhat less US-centric. Accounting4Taste 22:54, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

Hi I would appreciate if you could do this. I work as one over here in England and it is a different reality altogether, not to mention that it is probably much more different for court reporters around other parts of the world. Perhaps a country categorisation and explanation of the use of court reporters in different countries might be of some use? Just a thought - Sayem —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.110.248.146 (talk) 14:01, 4 October 2007 (UTC) I have attempted to address this issue generally by adding salaries of court reporters in Canada and England, two countries outside the U.S. that the services of court reporters are also utilized. I also addressed the change in court reporting from the court system in the U.S. where court reporters are no longer employed as much in the court system because of economic cutbacks and now are utilized through court reporting companies and brought into the court by law firms. Mary Jo Saul