CoPTIC - Coalition of Practicing Translators and Interpreters of California
Mathew Call
Shelby Helms
On Nov 25, 2019, at 9:37 AM, Mathew Call <call.tr...@gmail.com> wrote:
--
Please post only appropriate messages to this group. Messages should relate to events of interest to the Deaf and Interpreting communities, nearby workshops or conferences, job opportunities, and news of importance to our communities.
Do not advertise or market products here. Inappropriate use of this group may result in expulsion from the group.
---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "SaVRIDcommunity" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to savridcommuni...@savrid.org.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/a/savrid.org/d/msgid/savridcommunity/CAHYzcXdPZ%2BdDuceLEmjoK9U-6x_qpR1gMLeVafxzTtdrQ3OC8Q%40mail.gmail.com.
judyviera
President, SCRID
I appreciate seeing this discussion starting to rise in Northern California. However I was added to this email list, thank you!
Shelby, I'm glad to hear you're aware of at least one of the town halls SCRID has held. We've done a lot more and would welcome others' involvement! Back in August AB5 was brought to our attention. Soon afterward, following initial research and personal discussions, we began attempting to sound the alarm on AB5. We’ve been talking with the community in Southern California, attempting to educate, encourage self-education, assess community response (thus far overall in support of an exemption), and formulate responsive action. Aside from local interpreters and agencies, we’ve been reaching out to Deaf organizations, each Affiliate Chapter President in the state, and RID, seeking collective action.
RID is very supportive of us all getting involved in the discussion and taking whatever action will be most appropriate in serving the betterment of Deaf people. I've attached here the letter submitted by Jonathan Webb, RID President, to the bill author prior to it's signing. As for legislative actions, we're within our realm in working toward legislative action. All such action must be documented and included in the Affiliate Chapter Annual Report that is submitted to RID in the fall.
Here’s a list of what we've done thus far and what we’re currently working on. It's a lot, and we’d love to work with more people throughout the state in response to AB5. The broader the reach and more people involved, the more efficient, effective and impactful we can be. If you individually and/or SaVRID as a whole is interested in taking an active role and assisting in the process we welcome it!
Informational Actions:
Webpage developed in English & ASL: www.scrid.org/AB5;
Attempts to begin and maintain online discussions via social media;
Town Hall meetings (3), each live-streamed to our Facebook page (slides included on the webpage);
Agency Response Questionnaire sent to provide a more clear basis for discussion of impacts (live results included on the webpage);
Service Provider and Consumer Questionnaires developed and ready to send;
Working with CAD to further community reach via their platform;
Seeking legal advice from a CA attorney specializing in labor law and hopefully familiar to some extent with our field.
Legislative Actions:
Submitted a formal SCRID letter requesting a professional exemption to Assembly Person Gonzalez prior to the signing of the bill;
Submitted a formal RID letter requesting a professional exemption to Assembly Person Gonzalez prior to the signing of the bill;
Developed letter templates for agencies, service providers, and consumers requesting a professional exemption to Assembly Person Gonzalez prior to the signing of the bill;
Working with a group of realtime captionists in a collective response to ensure both sign language interpreters and captioners are considered for an exemption to AB5;
Have contacted and met with multiple legislators re: sponsorship of an exemption bill for Sign Language Interpreters and Realtime Captionists;
Collecting data on numbers of Deaf people, Deaf k-12 students, interpreters, captionists, etc throughout CA;
Developing language for this exemption;
Developing a petition to be sent to stakeholders;
Requesting impact statements from consumers and service providers, to be sent to us in order to present to legislators the collective desire for an exemption, as well as sent to their local senators and assembly people;
Collective website developed at www.ab5info.com (in need of further development).
As a side note, while we are aware of the CoPTIC site, we haven’t yet reached out to work in conjunction with them. In our meetings with legislators we’ve been told that because the spoken language union came out against an exemption to AB5 legislators would not be receptive to seeking an exemption for all interpreters. We have instead been focusing on sign language interpreters and realtime captionists due to the impact AB5 will have on the Deaf communities as a federally protected class of peoples under the ADA. If anyone has different information please let us know.
Thanks again for the discussion. I look forward to growing the reach and impact of this and seeking a resolution that will best support the experience of Deaf people. Please let us know how we can work together.
Best,
Stephanie
Pronouns: she, her, hers
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/a/savrid.org/d/msgid/savridcommunity/4B9CC879-AE1F-4C67-AAC2-E4B37F67D6FD%40savrid.org.
Mathew Call
https://slator.com/industry-news/we-are-not-gig-workers-interpreter-associations-fight-californias-ab5/
https://www.atanet.org/pressroom/statement_ATA_position_on_California_AB5.pdf
https://www.change.org/p/governor-gavin-newsom-veto-ab5-it-must-be-amended-to-exempt-interpreters-and-translators
As you can see, AIIC, TAALS, ATA, AIJIC, NAJIT, and CFI are all in favor of an exemption. Perhaps we could benefit from joining forces since both sides want the same outcome. That would certainly give us greater numbers. However, it could also turn out to be a better strategy to fight separately from two different angles. I reached out to Katharine Allen to see what her thoughts on the matter were. What do you all think?
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/a/savrid.org/d/msgid/savridcommunity/CAEOSsWgDzQVPuNbx56D8J5Q%2BPZjbqLK2DeREkCn%3D7xf-aCnr9g%40mail.gmail.com.
President, SCRID
Thanks for the links Matthew. If we're able to take a two pronged approach that won't weaken our position I think that's great.
I checked on the spoken language union and was told it's the CA Federation of Interpreters, a division of the Communications Workers of America Union. The reference was found in the following article:
Mathew Call
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/a/savrid.org/d/msgid/savridcommunity/CAEOSsWjY5qqJ5a%3DEuCECjdYc95%2BPgVspp1KwhRcrhws%3DTyNEEA%40mail.gmail.com.