Hello! Is there not a scopists' discussion section?

I have a question for my fellow scopists out there. I have taken on a client whose transcripts end up growing about ten pages after I'm through scoping. I was sent 263 pages to scope a few days ago and I'm on Page 129 and it has already grown 12 pages. Now, this reporter is not a bad writer, per se, and I feel much of this is due to paragraphing or colloquy, but I know that by the time I'm through, it will have grown an extra 20 pages, which means I've typed all of that in.

Now to my question. What do other scopists charge for job growth? And what number of pages of growth should be allowed before charging the client for my time spent transcribing and not scoping.

Thank you!


Views: 745

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

Well, I've never heard of anyone charging extra because the transcript grew, other than the fact that you're getting paid for each page that it grows by. I think that's just part of the job. Now, if you're doing something that's growing because the reporter is just horrible and you're filling in every other word, I think you could raise your page rate on future jobs as the work is harder. I always apologize to my scoper when I'm having a bad day and she has to do more fill-in, but she always tells me she loves to type and that's actually more "fun" for her than just reading along an easy, almost perfect transcript.
Deborah, I believe that it is common practice to charge for transcript growth since we are scopists, not typists/transcriptionists. I do feel it is part of my job to type in some missing text, but when a 260-page job grows by 30 pages (at the rate this job is going), that is really being more of a typist than a scopist. I would never consider charging for pages that grow due to paragraphing or colloquy, but that cannot account for this many extra pages.

I was a court reporter for 11 years, and I would never expect a scopist to fill in this many pages without paying her a certain rate for "typing" for me. I just need to figure out a fair rate. I am always fair with my clients. I have scoped several jobs for this client without mentioning this because she is a friend and because I wanted to make sure it wasn't just a one-time occurrence.

Thanks for your input!

Thanks for that, Kara. I guess I will need to add something to my rate sheet too. Yeah, it's all about being paid for time spent. :)

That does help!

You said the reporter is not a bad writer; said it was growing because of paragraphing and colloquy. Now, is that colloquy you are having to actually type in or colloquy that she was just hitting the Q and A instead of speaker ID (or maybe neither, sacrificed just to keep up)? If the latter, that's an easy fix; doesn't take much time.

If you are actually having to fill in the blanks to that extent--the reporter just dropped like crazy--yes, charge more for that typing. If it's just growing because of paragraphing and changing Q and As to speaker IDs or adding speaker IDs, then no extra charge--count yourself lucky for the easy extra pages.

again, I am amazed to hear such numbers.  I have never considered myself a super talented CR but even on my worst jobs or back early in my career it would never approach these numbers of added pages.   WOW is all I can say.

Well, this is the kind of depo that makes a scopist an absolute necessity.

I've read that they charge transcription rates for anything OVER 10%.  That means that your transcription rates are about, what, 4 pages?  Take a break, it sounds like you're tired.

You need to come up with a fair standard for growth due to paragraphing and colloquy.  I'm not sure what that is though. Judy is saying 10%. Tell your clients you charge a transcription rate for any pages over that 10%. I think that is fair.

Paragraphing does not constitute billable growth, IMO.  I think if you figure it out by extra time spent, that might be the way to go.  Actually, if we paid scopists by the hour instead of by the page, it might be a better system.

Amanda, that's how it started, by the hour.  I started almost right out of the gate on CAT in '81 and the only ones that had edit stations were the reporters and agencies, so the scopists would come in and work on your jobs on the agency's computers (although I did have one gal coming to the house after a while).  But unless the scopist is sitting in your office on your computer, you'll never be able to tell how much of the time is spent scoping vs. surfing on the 'net, playing Candy Crush, talking on the phone. 

Yes, there'd have to be a high degree of trust.

Like you, when I first started out, the agency I worked for had an in-house scopist, Trish--was also the agency office manager and paid a salary.  Trish would try to dictate to me, the reporter (okay, I wasn't your average newb--had worked for two court reporting agencies when in school and did two years of WQs and could run circles around nursing-school-dropout Trish) -- but I digress.  Anyway, Trish tried to dictate to me how I was going to certify my transcripts.  It came to a head one morning on her office floor...then I got up, straightened my grey wool pencil skirt and jacket, smoothed my hair, and went to my Railroad Commission hearing with dignity.  We did my transcripts my way -_-.

There could be a minimum set up per hour, too, to combat Candy Crush.


© 2024   Created by Kelli Combs (admin).   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service