Relay Rates
6 07 2009All..
Some of these are old news, but wanted to share FCC’s Public Notice and Notice of Proposed Rulemaking and subsequent responses by VRS providers:
Above link was FCC asking for comments on possible changing relay rates – especially for VRS. This link also showed in 2008 the average actual cost of providing VRS was $4.18 per min.
Extension of Replying Comments
Above simply extended the comments to July 6 and replies to July 20.
SnapVRS believes any changes to VRS rates will cause a few VRS providers to bankrupt. Read on – well thought out.
Check out VRS pricing portion. It is also well thought out.
Sorenson explains how chaning VRS rates may affect VRS industry in a negative way.
Above was interesting in the sense FCC adopted NECA’s recommendation for all relay rates including VRS, but with a statement that FCC still can change VRS rates pending the outcome of VRS rates.
TDI says revising the VRS rates is not a good idea at this time. TDI mentions a few items that VRS providers may not be comfortable with. It has to do with VRS industry share the cost issues with public (?)
Sorenson’s counter to TDI’s a few items.
Folks, there are more..but you get the idea this is a tough issue.
eyes open & thumbs up,
Ed
You being an owner of a VRS business, I think that it is time for you to stop talking about other VRS business because it will be all biased.
It is interesting that some VRS companies think they are entitled to get whatever they want from the TRS Fund to meet their bottom line, regardless of the bad decisions they’ve made in the past, how bloated and/or inefficient they are, et cetera.
Competition has always been one of the arguments they’ve used in the past to justify various actions and decisions and now it appears it’s being turned around on its head. Further subsidization beyond efficient use just because they employ deaf individuals and other ‘public interest’ rationales are really a stretch here as what they are asking here is very much anti-competitive. Furthermore, the FCC has no obligation to take any of these so-called public interest arguments into consideration… the only thing that matters here is the efficient use for the provision of relay services that meets all of the minimum standards. Nothing more…
If several VRS companies have to go bankrupt, so be it. It would be no one else’s fault but their own. And, this certainly will not have an impact on the quality of VRS. In fact, it may make it better with the increased pool of interpreters and better utilization of technology in addition to allocation of resources.
Creative destruction is a great thing. I mean, when the automotive industry was in its infancy during the early 1900s, there were over a thousand companies in the industry. Now, there are only 10-20 in the US, and that certainly did not have an impact on the quality of automobiles nowadays. May the best VRS providers survive and the FCC has no obligation to support the inefficient ones.
That said, I agree with the VRS providers that the rates should stay the same until 2010. In the meantime, the FCC needs to undergo a vigorous review of the rates and the funding mechanisms and it appears to be doing just that. The FCC needs to reward efficiency and wise business decisions–after all, we’ve all said that competition is great for the VRS industry all along. In other words, there is no reason for VRS providers to maintain bloated workforces, inane marketing practices, hiring of too many middle-level executives, and what not just because it provides employment to deaf individuals.
The gravy train is going to end, and I’m glad that the FCC is taking a serious look at this.
CNW,
Even as a VRS owner, I agree with most of what you said. Dignity needs to be back into VRS industry.
Ed
VRS and TRS are a great boon to the Deaf Community….please do not do anything to destroy it…do the right thing to keep it running for us.
Anonymous,
Well, even though I’m now part of VRS I will let my history speak for itself. I do not plan to change; that is, as ethical as much as possible, follow relay regulations as much as possible.
If you know me personally and over time, I honestly believe you’ll sing a different tune. However, I thank you for ur comment.
I’ve talked with a few management folks from a couple of VRS providers; they encouraged me to continue Edsalert as it provides much needed information for the deaf/hoh communities.
So I will continue. I hope majority of edsalert readers agree.
eyes open & thumbs up,
Ed B
Alice,
I agree with you! VRS and TRS are very important services for the deaf/hoh. FCC just needs to clean it up and preserve the right way to provide the relay services for the deaf/hoh. Because if FCC does not clean them up, then there is a real possiblity of VRS/TRS being minimized – by the Congress or even courts.
eyes open & thumbs up..
Huh? Someone called Ed “biased”?
ha ha ha ha ha …
Yep. Biased FOR ethics.
Biased FOR Deaf consumers.
Biased FOR balance, equity, fairness.
Maybe biased against the “gimme free” attitude…
I read often dialogs in regards to the rates and the costs of running VRS. I feel as a vrs interpreter that its the most physically challenging assignment i have ever had. an expectation of logg in at 50 minutes per hour? and if you work for sorenson.. (which i no longer) being logged in that long means your processing that many minutes. Now community interpreting I have an extra set of eyes, ears and hands.. to assure effective interpretation
I went through the cuts of interpreters pay once.. and it was quite an event giving interpreters some security and then ripping it from them. We as interpreters hussle and bussle every day to make our lives somewhat secure. VRS has been a blessing and a curse.. It has been a blessing to serve our population of consumers and being an interpreter that works hard on continued development and assuring that my product is at its best for the moment im in.. its been wonderful to connect familys.. communicate information so a user can have a job interview.. to check funding in a bank or be part of a group via conference technology… but it also has been a curse as we do not feel valued as a whole..our companies are pushing us as though we are machines and trying to get the top performance out of us.
If you run us this much.. our career will be short lived. and for those of us who love what we do.. we dont want to end it after 10 years.. PLUS our profession cannot afford to lose skilled interpreters after 10 years .. not enough of us already.
SOO.. when we talk about cuts to the vrs spending.. where is that going to happen? well it has shown itself with hiring lesser skilled interpreters and giving them no mentoring.. just plopping them on the phone.. it means that those that are needed.. for the hightened calls.. of higher skills needed.. are not able to afford to work for vrs as well.
how are we working towards a wholistic answer? listen to the inteterpreters that WORK vrs.. we dont really feel we are part of the solution.. not because we are complacent.. but we are not being listened too.
My point is.. I feel that every highly skilled interpreter that is able or willing to work vrs. should .. but not full time.. max 20 hours a week (for example) but pay them damn good. this is incentive .. for our novice terps.. to 1) develope them selves to be part of that job corp.. 2) have an abundance of skilled workers in the vrs industry and 3) have a balance in the community as these interpreters will be out working to accomodate our local consumers needs. we love our community.
We are no longer civil servants. we train, work hard, and sweat to be the interpreters needed in our community. (and if you. are an interpreter reading this and you DON’T train, work hard and sweat… shame on you.. get up or get out!!)
if we cut our costs.. and those that are greedy and have banked on vrs in the past.. are still working at this.. the rate cut will effect performance of vrs along with the technology.. !!
thanks
NS