Re: [NIDG] Whither RID?

[Terri Hayes]

Laurie
>> When you assume some interpreters can't get better, you leave us stuck with them."

The fact is, we *are* kind of suck with them.

On the RID front, I have watched for many years, while RID has
produced test after test professing the goal of identifying the
"minimal" requirements to Do this job... even while we look at what
comes out of the tests and scratch our heads... if what we see there
is the "minimal" - then why are we requiring a BA degree? because the
signing competence is not much better than it was on those who came
out of the 10 week ITP so many years ago.
(oh - of course... its because regardless the person's ability to sign
- the BA means these people have Information to rely on to help them
interpret)...
but you cannot interpret if you do not have the language - no matter
how familiar you are with any given topic
and the standards of formal education today do not require or even
inspire "learning".. but rather it is merely "exposure" to topics and
ideas. Sad for the new BA interpreter who walks into a classroom, of a
class they have Taken - only to find that they are unable to deliver
the information in any language other than word for word English.

The interpreters out there are not happy about this - but there are no
resources after formal education that will show them what they're
supposed to be doing.

yes - I hear some of you saying, Oh but there are all those video
tapes and online workshops (and the whole capitalistic infrastructure
that came out of RID's CEU edict)... but learning about - and learning
to do are two very different things - and those online "opportunities"
are not exactly designed to improve interpreters SKILLS. These study
materials cannot improve anyone's skills without some kind of outside
intervention to show the younger interpreter where they're supposed to
be going. What is the GOAL? (and so far RID has completely refrained
from giving any clear and visual example of
1)what minimal looks/sounds like
2) what better than minimal looks and sounds like
3) what excellent looks and sounds like

For an organization who is professing to test and qualify interpreters
(and who is proudly pointing at their psychometrician (and their very
shoddy Repeatablity and Reliablity - if you ask ANYONE who actually
works in the field of test design) - they are completely reticent to
provide images/examples of just exactly What they are testing for.
I personally do not understand why the membership is so complacent
about demanding Images, Examples - and NAMES of people who represent
the "standards" that RID is targeting in their tests... especially
when we have so much video/audio technology at our Easy and Cheap
disposal.

I wonder (often in fact) if the reason RID is so reticent to put
Images out there representing "good" vs "good enough" might be because
their defintion of "good enough" - might not be "good enough" to the
Deaf people who are looking at certfication as a true measure of
readiness to work.
I wonder if the reason RID will not give visual examples of
"sufficient" vs "excellent" - is perhaps because - they do not know
and they are afraid of the firestorm that will happen when they name
some interpreter as "excellent" when the majority of the profession
looks back and gasps -
and if they do not know - how in God's name are they professing to Test us?
and if there are documented standards by which all these tests are
being evaluated - then lets see some living examples of what those
standards look like (and it shoudn't matter who the person is - either
they Exhibit the standards in competency - or they dont... in which
case, we wont see them)
I wonder - if the reason RID does not show us examples of their target
competencies - is because to do that, would be to give all of us here
on the outside - the ability to SEE if someone who just passed the
test - Meets with what RID is professing to measure -
and just what would happen if we discovered (as we, historically,
Always have anyway) that a great number of interpreters being passed -
are not actually at the level of competence that RID is proposing be
the standard - AND that a certain number of those being Failed - Are.

I suspect that the whole "get ethical" thing so popular in our field
right now is an effective diversion from attention being put on
competency.
RID is changing the defintion of "good" from one of competency -to
one of morality.

In short, I do not believe RID will change - and I do not try to
change it. I watch - while people like this group or that individual,
tries... and I have pretty much resigned myself to the understanding
that IF RID is to change - its not going to happen in my lifetime.
There are too many people invested in "fixing" the broken car over
buying a new one. So its very unlikely that we will ever see any
substantial changes.. just because the whole idea behind "fix" is to
maintain the original construction...
and part of the original construction, in this case, is the desire to fix it.

So a few years ago, I decided to try to do my own kind of "fix" - and
I started teaching interpreters. Its been 10 years - and I have been
teaching interpreters - one by one... It takes time to develop skills
(time - and drills - and practice... which you can then apply to
work)... It takes hours and hours and hours of on the ground work.
Hours of investment by me, hours of investment by them.
So some interpreters out there are better now than they were (either
by my teaching or yours) but we are so few - and despite that
interpreters CAN get better... the fact is that none of them NEED to
get better.

It is almost certain, that once you get your first job/assignment as
an interpreter - whether you are good enough or not
you *will* be working as an interpreter.

RID is not a policing agency. It has no control over any interpreters
who do not subject themselves to the organization. (a fact which many
Deaf and apparently many Interpreters are unaware) The Code of Conduct
only applies to interpreters who call themselves RID interpreters and
who subject themselves to the dictates of RID. But the fact is, (and
more and more now that we have spoken language interpreting referral
businesses getting into the game), not all interpreters are RID
members/associates/affiliates and they do not need to be - and there
is Nothing RID can do about that. And as long as they are not RID -
they dont have to follow *any* thing that comes out of RID.

There is nothing Deaf people can do about that.
There is nothing Interpreters (of the dedicated RID variety) can do about that.
There is nothing that anyone can do about that.

Once someone starts to sign for money - they Are an interpreer - and
there is enough demand that they can work in that capacity for years
and years and years, sometimes never ever meeting a real life -
RID-type interpreter.

So its not that some interpreters dont want to get better - its that
ALL interpreters Dont Have to.
And why would any interpreter spend time working hard to learn to do
well what you can do NOW (well or not) and get paid just as much for
it as if you had.
The interpreters who are working to get better - are going to be the
"best" we have (perhaps - as of right now - there is no measure for
"best")... they're the one's trying anyway - but they are competing
with the cheapest bidder - and at some point, it becomes very much
less cost effective to work so hard for no great return.

Terri Hayes

----- Original Message -----
From: "Laurie Meyer" <lmnhinte...@gmail.com>
To: NI...@googlegroups.com
Date: Mon, Apr 22, 2013 at 11:28 PM
Subject: [NIDG] Whither RID?

> I am no great fan of RID.
>
> - I enthusiastically participated in those early meetings for establishing AAEI (Association of ASL/English Interpreters…I think), and count myself among those who wonder how long it would take to recover if another organization follows the rapid demise of AAEI. The caliber and competence of the people who tried the last time were among the best and brightest in our field.
>
> - I have tried, like so many others who have tried longer, and perhaps more creatively, to work within RID to create an organization that I could feel good about.  I gave up.
>
> -I fight fiercely (and not always successfully) to create a local chapter that has values that support me and my colleagues in learning to be allies.
>
> Like so many of us, I hold my nose and pay my dues.
>
> It's not without thought (and some concern about the backlash here) that I worry about abandoning RID.  I have no illusions.  Recreating RID in the context of 2013-thinking is not for the feint of heart.
>
> Yet, Alec Naiman's words from Allies '95 are a constant reminder.  "Don't", he said, "make bad interpreters our problem."  He enjoined us, "This is your profession.  When you assume some interpreters can't get better, you leave us stuck with them."  In short, when we don't float all boats, Deaf people, particularly less powerful Deaf people, are profoundly impacted.
>
> As we look at the ever increasing '9 to 5ing' of our profession, the voices that delight those who read this site and Street Leverage go completely unheard by nearly 15,000 members of RID.  That's a lot of interpreters.
>
> So I offer for consideration: Is anyone truly untrainable?  Is it privilege to give up on them?  Could we consider a powerful, sustained and organized effort to re-create our national organization as one that recognizes that Deaf-heart is not an optional way of doing our work?  Can we afford to wait until they are “ready”?  Could we reframe our perspective to assume that many, if not most, are neither indifferent nor ill-willed, but rather haven't been exposed to this information in a way that makes sense to them?
>
> Two quotes that inform this discussion:
>
> - “ When you are figthing with a guerrilla, you don’t stop fighting when you are tired.  You stop fighting when the guerilla is tired.”
>
> -  Thanks to an amazing Deaf woman nearby, I remember this too, “The problem is that there are so many guerrillas and so few of us (Deaf people).”
>
> A band of Ally-guerrillas.  Has a nice ring to it.
>
>
>
> Laurie Meyer
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "National Interpreter Discussion Group" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to NIDG+uns...@googlegroups.com.
> To post to this group, send email to NI...@googlegroups.com.
> Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/NIDG?hl=en.
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
>
>
>

[beth...@gmail.com]

Terri,

I am so thankful that you put your post so eloquently. These have my concerns and many of my colleagues concerns for years with RID. It is a travesty at what we ( as interpreters) define as good, better, best by the label of test proficiency.

At some point someone woke up and said " lets make RID the umbrella to rule it all" and then we all just go along with it since there are no other options. We accept policies/ procedures, test standards and rules that they (RID) put out there, simply based on the fact that there are no other options. It's sad that interpreters have gotten to this point.

I have seen it with my own eyes and I am sure others have as well, that the standards are not all the same. I see interpreters who are not the least bit qualified to be interpreting out in the community while others who seem qualified unable to pass the test. So who ultimately makes that decision? One person? Two people? And of those what are they basing their decisions on?

We have all just gotten to the point that we accept it and move on with our lives. No changes are being made to remedy the situation and I, like yourself, don't see it happening any time soon.

Thank you for writing the words that I have been thinking and feeling these past few years with RID.

If there is one thing that I can say, it is really nice to know that I am not alone in my thoughts and good to know others are feeling the same way and have been feeling this way far longer than I have.

Beth Brown
"Decisions Determine Destiny"
AZ Provisional State B
EIPA 4.0
Sent from my iPhone

[Bill Moody]

For the historical record, Beth, it is not really true that:

 

"At some point someone woke up and said " lets make RID the umbrella to rule it all" and then we all just go along with it since there are no other options. We accept policies/ procedures, test standards and rules that they (RID) put out there, simply based on the fact that there are no other options. It's sad that interpreters have gotten to this point."

 

In 1964, we established RID, we the early pioneer interpreters, the Codas, the religious interpreters and dorm counselors and rehab workers who lived in/with the Deaf community (I was not part of that "we", but my teacher/mentor Lillian Beard was...).  Nobody else could do it, so the old-time community interpreters, in conjunction with the NAD, tried to improve a situation where the few interpreters in the community usually worked alone and many Deaf people couldn't even find interpreters because there was no organization and no registry. Three decades later, RID had grown so much, and there had been enough mismanagement of funds and mistakes in organization, that the volunteer Board (of interpreters, of course, not administrators) decided to "professionalize" the association.  They hired a certified professional manager of non-profit associations to lead us into the future.  He knew nothing about the Deaf world and never became fluent in ASL.  He lead the association for almost 2 decades.  He cleaned up our finances and put the association on a more stable footing.  But the influence of his kind of management style took us into a professionalism that was too alienated from the Deaf community.  Successive Boards in his tenure could not overcome his drive to maximize the number of dues-paying members and take the RID in a direction that satisfied our needs to stabilize the finances of the association but that neglected our core mission of service.  The influx of new interpreters who graduated from Interpreter Education Programs without much experience in the Deaf community was overwhelmingly in support of an association that just provided them with a job and a certification.

 

That's my view of where we find ourselves today.  The overwhelming majority of RID members just want a good job.  They don't bother to vote on the issues facing the association.  They don’t come to conferences.  Most don't even hone their skills through continuing contacts in the Deaf community to keep up with the evolution of the language and the evolution of Deaf people's various beliefs and lifestyles.  (There are notable exceptions, of course, proving the rule...)

 

That is, I think, the crux of the problems we are discussing.  RID was us.  How do we make it us again?  Is the new “us” the majority of interpreters who only want a job and don’t care about the profession, or can the new “us” be the ones who believe in our original mission of service with a heart?  (I hesitate to even say Deaf-heart any more, since it seems to be divisive and misused…)

Bill.

[E J Cohen]

Bless you, Bill.  Your clarity and eloquence help me remember what was...and why. 
See you in Indiana!

ej

 

EJ Cohen, M.A., M.Ed., CI, CT

Certified ASL Interpreter/Educator

Judaic Educator

Skype: ejc2323

---

From: Bill Moody <bill...@nyc.rr.com>
To: NI...@googlegroups.com
Sent: Wednesday, April 24, 2013 10:19 AM
Subject: RE: [NIDG] Whither RID?

[beth...@gmail.com]

Bill, 

Thank you so much for sharing your point if view on the history and your experience with RID. 

I seems as though I have misspoke, however I have only been with RID for the past 4 years and I don't know the real history here. I know what I have experienced and have gone through. 

I feel as though those who are compassionate about the situation are from the early years of RID and know what it can do for the industry. If that is the case, then we have strayed far from what once was.  Your experiences are far different from mine. I think that it has just been frustration since I have joined and don't understand how it got to this point. I am starting to see that there needs to be more change than I once realized. It just makes me feel more and more anxious for the profession and where it is headed. 

You are right about the past. How do we get back to that so we can all experience and feel supported once again? 

Beth Brown 

"Decisions Determine Destiny"

AZ Provisional State B

EIPA 3.9

Sent from my iPhone

[Laurie Meyer]

I'm an unlikely candidate to have my finger in the RID dike.

Bashing RID is a bit too easy, and, I submit, let's us off the hook.  

Sure there are some of us who don't sign well...but Marie Philip made it clear in the late 80's.  It's not just about signing skills.  

And, just sayin', I've rarely have seen an interpreter coming out of training who doesn't have A LOT left to learn.  More interpreters than I can count actually begin getting better when they get certified.  I'm not taking a stand either way here, I'm just saying virtually all non-native interpreters (and even some natives) begin their interpreting careers with a lot left to learn.  And any interpreter worth their salt has a lifetime of learning to do.

So, I think we need to consider the mote in our own eyes.  And, a little bit of there-but-for-the-grace-of-god-go-I.   How much opening do we create for interpreters when we label them as hopeless our sucking? Most people don't learn well in that kind of environment.  

I am not defending the status quo, or the test, or recent decisions, or why we couldn't create a powerful enough movement to say farewell to our previous Executive Director.  Many tried.  I didn't work.  Last I checked, there is no changing the past.

But we can change the future...not easily, and not cuz no one tried.  I just had an interaction with one of THOSE interpreters.  After a huge amount of effort on both of our parts, she asked me, "what made you invest in me". I said, "because you let me.".  And she's well on her way to being on the path to become an Ally.  How can we create an environment where people feel safe enough to learn?  

I just submit that doing anything less might take our right to be holier than thou. 

I have a specific suggestion.  We just had a phenomenal weekend here with Ryan Commerson and Alison Aubrecht from Facundo Element.  Our RID chapter subsidized it. and 18 interpreters spent 2 days with 18 Deaf community members hearing each other.  The result, for us, is WALQ (working alliance for language quality).  Did every interpreter come?  No.  Did the ones who "needed it" come?  No.  But we started.  And people who were THAT kind of interpreter are becoming a new kind of interpreter.  And we're all talking about it.

It's possible.  With the experience and the heart and the brain power of those who participate here and in Street Leverage, it's just possible we could.  

Interpreters...'them' and 'us' have worked hard to know what they know.  The fact that I tripped over the right logs to hear the things I needed to hear are no credit to me.  I got lucky....and battered and bruised...and lucky.

There is more time say, and not more time to say it.  

For me, the most salient thing...if we don't fight for all interpreters to be the best they can...then who will?  If not now, when?

Laurie

[Laurie Meyer]

Sorry for the typos.  See below with corrections.

 

I'm an unlikely candidate to have my finger in the RID dike.

Bashing RID is a bit too easy, and, I submit, let's us off the hook.  

Sure there are some of us who don't sign well...but Marie Philip made it clear in the late 80's.  It's not just about signing skills.  

And, just sayin', I've rarely have seen an interpreter coming out of training who doesn't have A LOT left to learn.  More interpreters than I can count actually started getting better when they get certified.  I'm not taking a stand either way here, I'm just saying virtually all non-native interpreters (and even some natives) begin their interpreting careers with a lot left to learn.  And any interpreter worth their salt has a lifetime of learning to do.

So, I think we need to consider the mote in our own eyes.  And, a little bit of there-but-for-the-grace-of-god-go-I.   How much opening do we create for interpreters when we label them as hopeless or sucking? Most people don't learn well in that kind of environment.  

I am not defending the status quo, or the test, or recent decisions, or why we couldn't create a powerful enough movement to say farewell to our previous Executive Director.  Many tried.  It didn't work.  Last I checked, there is no changing the past.

But we can change the future...not easily, but we can.  I just had an interaction with one of THOSE interpreters.  After a huge amount of effort on both of our parts, she asked me, "what made you invest in me". I said, "because you let me.".  And she's well on her way to being on the path to become an Ally.  How can we create an environment where people feel safe enough to learn?  

I just submit that doing anything less is contributing to the community's experience of oppression from interpreters.

 

I have a specific suggestion.  We just had a phenomenal weekend here with Ryan Commerson and Alison Aubrecht from Facundo Element.  Our RID chapter subsidized it. and 18 interpreters spent 2 days with 18 Deaf community members hearing each other.  The result, for us, is WALQ (Working Alliance for Language Quality).  Did every interpreter come?  No.  Did all the ones who "needed it" come?  No.  But we started.  And people who were THAT kind of interpreter are becoming a new kind of interpreter.  And we're all talking about it.

It's possible.  With the experience and the heart and the brain power of those who participate here and in Street Leverage, it's just possible we could.  

Interpreters...'them' and 'us' have worked hard to know what they know.  The fact that I tripped over the right logs to hear the things I needed to hear are no credit to me.  I got lucky....and battered and bruised...and lucky.

There is more to say, and not more time to say it.  

[Terri Hayes]

I'd like to take a closer look at a couple things Bill recently said
in one of his replies... I'm not really intending to make a public
note of disagreement, I just want to put another perspective out there
on some of the things that were said...

>>The influx of new interpreters who graduated from Interpreter Education Programs without much experience in the Deaf community was overwhelmingly in support of an association that just provided them with a job and a certification.

I personally have never found this to be true. The interpreters coming
out of the ITPs are in the majority - highly desirous of being
involved with a viable professional organization. In fact, when they
graduate - they pretty universally Believe RID *is* a viable
professional organization. The disillusion begins almost immediately.

The problem is RID doesn't really Do anything for its members. Oh yea,
it gives us reading materials (Views and the Journal ?? are they still
sending us a journal?) but mostly it creates requirements for us, we
pay them our dues and they monitor the correctness of our behavior and
more recently our ethics... (guilty before charged)

They encourage us to strive to sit for an ill-defined test for which
no one has enough information to self assess their readiness, and
which, after having taken the test, there is really no way to know Why
we either passed or failed.
and then, if we do pass (or not) we get to prove our willingness to be
life-long learners by paying (more) for and sitting in on regular
informational sessions - very few of which are of sufficient duration
to actually teach and instill a new or desired skill but rather just
enough to introduce the idea that I'm not so good at something -and I
should get better... . (something that most if not all of these new
interpreters want... SKILLS - not information... they want to be able
to do the work better - but who is showing anyone what Better looks
like?
(not RID... "better" is Secret... shhhh - tell anyone anything about
"better" and you might compromise the test!)

As far as I'm concerned - and I suspect there are quite a few others
of the same mind - Discounts - are not Benefits. Discounts, in our
commerical capitalistic culture are the "standard price".. with those
few who dont know - dont get. (as for me - if its not discounted
already -I dont buy it... I wait for the discount.)... and in 30+
years of RID membership - I have never in my recollection actually
bought anything from RID. So 30+ years of a benefit that I have chosen
not to pay more for -(after having bought the right to pay more - with
my membership dues).

I also believe that voting privileges are not a benefit - they are (or
should be) an Assumption. I'm a Member - of Course I can vote! (in a
Member driven organization...) What do you mean that's a benefit?
and Leadership opportunities to help shape RID and the interpreting
profession by serving on committees and task forces means - come work
for us - for free. (and for a goal that is undefined and which you may
never see anything come out of). I dont know if I would call that a
benefit worth paying for either.
So we come into the professional organziation and immediately find out
that we're paying for the right to be managed... (poorly managed)...
and that we have no choice but to participate if we are to remain in
the profession... (as a professional RID interpreter... which actually
still does have meaning out in the world)

>They don't bother to vote on the issues facing the association. They don’t come to conferences.

They dont vote - because they dont know who is running. How do you
vote for a person you've never met, you've never heard - and on issues
that you do not see in your everyday working life? These new
interpreters dont know what the issues are (on a personal - "how is
this effecting me" level) - and whatever the issues are - that RID
place is far far away from what I am facing here and now in my working
world - who has the time to worry about what's going on in DC when I'm
out here in Arizona, Oregon, Alaska) and whoever is running, I'm quite
sure that both of them are going to do something (or nothing)... and
they'll take care of it just fine.
The lack of votes for a person is not necessarily apathy as much as a
not personally effected by the "issues" and therefore whoever gets it
- is good enough.

and they dont go to conferences - for two reasons - 1) it costs money
- and often - more money than they can afford to lose (by missed work)
and spend. (although - the pull for CEUs has been a nice ploy - my
understanding from those who have gone for that reason - have returned
angry and frustrated - they spent a lot of money, they lost a lot of
work hours, and they got far fewer CEUs than they expected they'd get
from the investment...
and the overall conference experience (unless you brought someone you
know) was a lot like watching people at someone elses reunion.
2) they dont know anyone there.

when you and I go to a conference - we can expect to see interpreters
that we've not seen for years - we can expect to see old friends - or
at least people we've worked with who've moved away or back and away
again...
but the interpreters coming out of school dont have a pre-existing
relationship with any of the interpreters they will go and brush
shoulders with...
and the message of the organizaiton - is not one of optimism... its
one of angry, frustrated, need to FIX this Damn Organization.

why go?

>>Most don't even hone their skills through continuing contacts in the Deaf community to keep up with the evolution of the language and the evolution of Deaf people's various beliefs and lifestyles.

and finally - I dont believe this is true either. What I hear
interpreters saying - over and over (and one thing I'll give a good
firm nod and tip of my hat to the ITPs for) is that these young
interpreters are coming out WANTING to socialize with Deaf... they
WANT to hone their skills - they Want to learn to be better (almost
universally)...
but making friends with the Deaf community is not a real concept - you
cannot make friends with a community. Making friends In the Deaf
community is not a real concept either - you cant just go and walk up
to someone and say, "hi, wanna be my friend?" and voila - you are
friends.
Making friends, and socializing - requires that you develop
relationships with individuals... and finding the right individual is
kind of like finding a life partner...
Usually - people become friends becasue they are forced (through class
or work) into the same space day in and day out - and they become
familiar and they have "trapped" opporunities to figure out if they
like each other - or not...
and if the only thing the hearing person can bring is the fact that
they like sign and they have been told to "socialize" with Deaf...
well - there's not much there to base a friendship on -
the Deaf are like, "uh.. yeah - but no.. I dont need to socialize with
you because I'm not here to teach you to sign - and we really dont
have anything to talk about... (and you are culturally inappropriate -
and I'm not here to teach you about That either)"

These new ITP students want what we want for them.. but there is no
stable place where the Deaf MUST be and the Hearing Interpreters MUST
be (except on jobs... where the ITPs are studiously teaching the
interpeters that they Must Not be friends with the Deaf they're
working for)...
so When and How can these relationships be developed?

Not a mentorship - oh god please no...
you cannot 'can' a good relationship... good relationships develop...
but like I said - they develope out of an "enforced" (and continous)
shared space...
without that - there is almost no possiblity for the interpreters to
do what we want them to do...
and so they do what they're left with
the get up - they go out and interpret.. and they wish it was different
but they dont know how to change it.

said too much again
hmph.

Terri Hayes

----- Original Message -----

From: "Bill Moody" <bill...@nyc.rr.com>
To: NI...@googlegroups.com
Date: Wed, Apr 24, 2013 at 10:19 AM
Subject: RE: [NIDG] Whither RID?

[Bill Moody]

It's clear that neither the Board nor Lewis nor Naomi think it is prudent to
share details of the break between them to the members...
Shane, I suppose, as an employee of the Board, is also not able to share
such details...

[Jonathan Webb]

Bill, while holding you and your work in high esteem I must respectfully disagree. While the executive director was clearly audiologically and culturally hearing, had minimal fluency in ASL, and was interested in growing the profession, I must argue the point that he was all powerful as portrayed. I have seen many of my colleagues that I truly respect express disdain for this man. What has always been incredible to me is that he had a boss and requirements to answer to that higher authority- the Board of Directors that we vote/accept in. So while the ED might have notions and aspirations for this or that, the idea that he simply did what he wanted isn't completely accurate. His initiatives had to be approved by the BoD. And, if he was implementing major changes without approval from the BoD then the Board held the right to release him from employment.

I just have to say- WE...all of us, have created this mess. WE all have allowed it to go on for as long as it has, and WE are ultimately responsible for what WE have allowed. What is incredibly unfortunate is that we interpreters are not the only ones to suffer the consequences of our action (or inaction), but the bulk of suffering falls on the community we purport to serve. Once again we have proved, "the field of interpreting is phenomenal...well, except for the interpreters."

And again, I look at the nominations and see that only one person outside of the current BoD fulfilled the requirements for nomination. We could do better. We could be better.

Jonathan

[Bill Moody]

The Exec Director is, of course, not all powerful – sorry if I gave the impression that I believe that.  But the position can be very influential.  And successive Boards of Directors didn’t challenge him in the ways that I would have wanted.  But you’re right, we ALL have let this go too far, and throwing stones is easy.  I can’t go to Atlanta, but hold out hope that some positive ideas may come out of it.  I will be at the Community Forum in Indy.  I like our new ED, Shane Feldman, and have high hopes for him as he settles into the position.  Who our ED is, and what he/she represents, is really crucial to the operations of the Association.  It is the person who is in the national office every day and oversees the daily operations of the Association.

 

We still need to determine who the WE is.  Is it all members, and if so, how do we get the non-voters involved?  Is that even possible with 15,000 members?  Even half would be good…

Bill.

 

 

From: NI...@googlegroups.com [mailto:NI...@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of Jonathan Webb
Sent: Thursday, April 25, 2013 9:34 AM
To: NI...@googlegroups.com
Cc: lmnhinte...@gmail.com
Subject: Re: [NIDG] Whither RID?

 

Bill, while holding you and your work in high esteem I must respectfully disagree. While the executive director was clearly audiologically and culturally hearing, had minimal fluency in ASL, and was interested in growing the profession, I must argue the point that he was all powerful as portrayed. I have seen many of my colleagues that I truly respect express disdain for this man. What has always been incredible to me is that he had a boss and requirements to answer to that higher authority- the Board of Directors that we vote/accept in. So while the ED might have notions and aspirations for this or that, the idea that he simply did what he wanted isn't completely accurate. His initiatives had to be approved by the BoD. And, if he was implementing major changes without approval from the BoD then the Board held the right to release him from employment.

[Jonathan Webb]

I would agree- the position of ED is of course powerful and influential.

I would also readily agree that we have not determined the WE, which is why we are all in this mess together. Who does RID serve? And, if serving whatever group they serve does it mean that they are in disservice to another group?

When I was on the BoD there was a motion that came forth from Amy Seiberlich and myself instituting a committee to review the Philosophy, Mission, and Goals of RID. We began to work on this, and for a variety of reasons both Amy and I resigned from the board. My understanding, which may not be fully accurate, was that this committee was then immediately disbanded with the notion that RID had a very clear Philosophy, Mission, and Goal. This history is fuzzy, so I very much welcome any corrections or clarifications.

What I will also say is that the rational for the motion was this very issue. We are a conglomerate of competing interests.The heart of the motion was that it might prove healthy for the organization to actually explore who our members are- as a "member driven organization". In the end, I can't help but believe that there are a few groups who are competing for control of the steering wheel, while the vast majority sleeps in the backseat. And I wholeheartedly agree with the cookie monster analogy used earlier; RID in an effort to gain power and control (i.e. monopoly) has determined to absorb anything it can. The cookie-monster mentality came to a head for me in 2011 when the conference theme was "Growing Globally".  http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4bshBsVchhM 

I very much value Street Leverage, Brandon's work and everyone who has supported it. I too can't make it to Atlanta. I imagine the whole event will be quite productive and I can't wait to hear more about it.

Jonathan

[Jessica Bentley]

Hello

I am unable to make it to RID this year as my expected due date is shortly after the conference. I read trhough each of the motions and I would very much like to vote on them. http://rid.org/content/index.cfm/AID/248/content/#MotionA

 

Does anyone know if there is electronic pre-voting that can be done by members who cannot make the RID conference? Or can I somehow get a proxy vote?

 

Thank you

 

Jessica Bentley-Sassaman Ed.D.

CI & CT,SC:L, Ed:K-12

 

   

[Phlip]

I have the same question. I would like to send a proxy if at all possible.

--

[Robin Dragoo]

It's in the Bylaws somewhere, but there are no proxies at the business meeting.

You must be in attendance to vote at the business meeting.

Robin Dragoo

[Dan Parvaz]

Hm. In this age of streaming video, Twitter, and online voting, we STILL need to be physically present? Surely Robert's Rules could use some tweaking.

[Ej Cohen]

My understanding is it's not so much Robert's Rules of Order, but proxies were misused (only certified members can vote with certified and/or associate members'  proxies; associate members can hold associate members' proxies only. My recollection is that it is difficult to monitor who is really holding what-- and so it was suspended. But I might have dreamt this whole thing. 

EJ Cohen (certified, NH) 

Sent from my iPhone

ej cohen

[tracy....@gmail.com]

I remember I asked a few years ago about online voting and RID said that there was a motion to allow online voting but it failed.

[Jessica Bentley]

Perhaps we should bring that back up for online voting as I would very much like to cast a vote.

 

Jessica Bentley-Sassaman

[Phlip]

Does anyone know: if I could make it in on even just that Sunday, could I vote without paying full freight for the whole conference, or does RID require a buy-in to vote?

I will be at a wedding the night prior up near Illinois and flying out the next day, but if I could borrow a car and do this efficiently and without breaking the bank, I would, but there is no way I can afford the conference dues this year.

[Ej Cohen]

I think there's always the option of a day rate. You'd have to get there early enough to be counted in the quorum. 

Sent from my iPhone

ej cohen

[Maria Micioni]

I am attending the conference solely for the Community Forum and the Business Meetings. I am not registering.

Even though common sense dictates a certified member in good standing can attend and vote at the Business Meetings without registering, with RID's track record of sensical decision making as of late - I decided to call the national office to make sure this is the case. 

Confirmed. I was told by RID staff that registration is NOT a requirement for business meeting attendance and voting. 

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "National Interpreter Discussion Group" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to NIDG+uns...@googlegroups.com.
To post to this group, send email to NI...@googlegroups.com.
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/NIDG?hl=en.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
 
 

--
Maria M. Micioni
Sign Language Interpreter
Nationally Certified CI, CT, NIC-Adv

Email: MMM...@gmail.com
Phone: (917) 353-3242

VP: (347) 269-1975

[Debbie]

Yes EJ, right again. Your membership in good standing allows you to vote at any meeting (assuming you are a member in a voting category). I would underscore arriving early so that you can get a voting card. Maybe Maria's call will prompt them to be ready for people attending only the business meetings. There are several member that have gone to just the meetings for a number of years.

Debbie Matthews Arment

[Judith A Kroeger]

No charge for the business meeting!

Judith

Judith A Kroeger, MA, RID Certified

Sent from my iPhone

[Denise Safranec]

I don't see why, as a member in good standing, I would have to pay anything to attend a business meeting of an organization. I would not care about anything else, including CEU's or any other part of the conference. Doesn't seem right.

 

Perhaps we should inquire....

 

Denise

[Denise Safranec]

Thank you....I should have read your message first...

 

Denise Safranec

[Debbie]

Denise,

If you have paid your dues (member in good standing), you are entitled to be at and vote at the business meeting. No additional charges.