VOTE IN OPPOSITION TO HB 2802. They want unqualified interpreters for Deaf people !!!

Heath · 06-30-2006, 09:33 PM

The PSEA wants to not have Educational Interpreters follow Act 57. This will
make deaf children in mainstreams schools have unqualified interpreters.

Please go to the PA Senate website now and e-mail your Senator this message
Please take a minute to go to this website

http://www.legis.state.pa.us/cfdocs/legis/home/find.cfm

find your Senator and write him a 1 line e-mail saying

Senator Jane Orie was unable to amend HB 2802 to add requirements that would protect deaf children. I implore you to VOTE IN OPPOSITION TO HB 2802.

Thank you,

Sign your name, address and phone number
PLEASE DO IT NOW!!

Reba · 07-01-2006, 01:40 PM

This is for Pennsylvania residents only, right?

Heath · 07-01-2006, 02:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Reba

This is for Pennsylvania residents only, right?

Hi Reba, it certainly does not hurt to have someone from another state weigh in on the issue. Sometimes I do sign petitions from another states especially in Texas even though I was born in Texas, I don't live in Texas but I keep up with Texas State Legislative and Senate breifings and petitions. I just say I was born in Texas and now live in Pennsylvania and Texas will always be my home away from home. Here is what I think .... and that certainly catches their attention especially when they know that after graduating from college that I will move back to Texas and I want to see that Texas is now in a better state than what Texas used to be and bring back the old fashioned hard working values in with some good conservative ideas or something that will affect the Deaf community in Texas then I sign the petitions, things like that. You could say you are from South Carolina if I remember it right then say that you are an interpreter for Deaf people and here is what you think and they will see that another interpreters from another states are supporting and backing Deaf people 100% so that is a very good incentive for them to pass a good law to protect Deaf people. I also hope that politicans will put old fashioned moral values first than the money or the polls etc. Thank you and God Bless !!!!!

Pacman · 07-01-2006, 04:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Heath

The PSEA wants to not have Educational Interpreters follow Act 57. This will
make deaf children in mainstreams schools have unqualified interpreters.

Please go to the PA Senate website now and e-mail your Senator this message
Please take a minute to go to this website

http://www.legis.state.pa.us/cfdocs/legis/home/find.cfm

find your Senator and write him a 1 line e-mail saying

Senator Jane Orie was unable to amend HB 2802 to add requirements that would protect deaf children. I implore you to VOTE IN OPPOSITION TO HB 2802.

Thank you,

Sign your name, address and phone number
PLEASE DO IT NOW!!

I'm glad that I'm not from PA.

You need move down to Texas or other states if PA get screw up...

07-01-2006, 04:58 PM

Heath, you may need to contact your state lawmakers to accept people without any college degree or state teacher cerfiications to teach at public school. That may work....

Heath · 07-01-2006, 06:58 PM

Act 57 Amendment (HB2802) Passed

Dear PARID Member,

HB2802 passed in both Houses of the legislature as proposed with no
amendments. Here is the history of what happened.

Tuesday June 27, 2006 - final passage in the House of Representatives
(199-0). There was no discussion.
Friday June 30, 2006 - final passage in the Senate as sent from the House
without amendment (49-0). Note, Senator Orie, did try to submit an
amendment to the bill that would have returned the 3.5 score on the EIPA to
exemption #7 and add a 1-year extension for individuals to earn the
credential. However, she was told that there was not enough time left in
the session to do so. She then went on the record stating her intention to
add the amendment and why it was not happening. There was at least one
other Senator who read comments on the Senate floor that he received from an
interpreter regarding this bill. If you are interested in seeing exactly
what the discussion was, it can be found in the Senate Journal. It takes
approximately one month for this publication to become available. Contact
your Senator to obtain a copy.

This bill now goes to Governor Rendell for his signature. If he signs it,
it becomes law.

If the Governor signs it, I will call the Pennsylvania Board of Education
and ask to be put on the "interested parties" list so that PARID is informed
of any action or meetings regarding the regulations that will be written.
If you are interested in receiving this information directly, contact the
Board of Education and ask to be added to the "interested parties" list as
well.

I have spoken with Dr. Linda Rhen, from the Bureau of Special Education.
She has assured me that the Department of Education intends to include PARID
and the other stakeholders in the process of writing the regulations. I
have already been invited to a meeting regarding this issue. Understand
that writing regulations is a lengthy process. You will be updated on the
progress of these regulations in the PARID newsletter.

PARID still has the comments and feedback that were collected from members
during the Act 57 Forums held around the state in Dec 2005 - Jan 2006. This
information will be shared with the stakeholders.

Remember, this amendment to Act 57 only affects Exemption #7 (educational
interpreters). The Pennsylvania Board of Education is only writing the
regulations for educational interpreters. ODHH is still responsible for the
administration of Act 57 as it pertains to interpreters in all other
settings in the Commonwealth.

Thank you for your interest in this matter.

Sincerely,
Cindi Brown
PARID President

Heath · 07-01-2006, 07:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Mookie

Heath, you may need to contact your state lawmakers to accept people without any college degree or state teacher cerfiications to teach at public school. That may work....

No, Mookie and I would want to see that teachers are properly trained to teach the kids the solid educational needs that they have and teachers do need to be certified. We can't just let anybody teach the kids especially these days. There are some people that will be very sick and dangerous towards children and we don't need that either. We need many layers of protections, make sure the teacher has no bad background towards children then check to make sure the teacher actually went to college to learn how to teach and things like that. I mean it adds up but in the end we all want a very good quality education for the kids as well as for ourselves too so we should except the same from the ASL interpreters with the quality of ASL as well as sign language that can really affect Deaf children's future education needs too. That is something to think about.

webexplorer · 07-01-2006, 08:01 PM

My sister used to be an interpeter for three years at high school. She does not have a certification. Her sign is clear, and most deaf students understood her without any problem. They loved her and missed her. She owns a farm business that she loves to work outside.

It is not a good idea to become a new law because there are not many certificated interpreters provide in their area. I learned that some interpreters have to drive far away to inteprete deaf students for a summer school or training class programs.

My interpreter drove his car for 1 1/2 hour to come to my class for two weeks. He has two jobs. He is great and very smart man.

I appreciate that they should accept both certification and non-certificated interpreters.

If an interpreter does not finish his/her ASL class in order to receive a certification for a good reason, he/she should be allowed to be an interpreter as long as he/she knows how to sign language.

I think that it is fair that certificated interpreters should receive a better salary than non-certificated intepreters. Just let's say that a certificated interpeter makes 8 dollars per hour. For non-ceritificated interpreter, that would be 6 dollars per hour. Isn't that make a sense to you?

Reba · 07-01-2006, 09:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Heath

Hi Reba, it certainly does not hurt to have someone from another state weigh in on the issue.

I just meant that people who aren't residents of a state can't sign petitions for that state's legislation. It's not legal.

State legislators don't care what people from other states think because they don't vote in that state.

Pacman · 07-01-2006, 11:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Reba

I just meant that people who aren't residents of a state can't sign petitions for that state's legislation. It's not legal.

State legislators don't care what people from other states think because they don't vote in that state.

Yea, you are right.

Thanks!!
Volcomskatz

pek1 · 07-01-2006, 11:34 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by webexplorer

I think that it is fair that certificated interpreters should receive a better salary than non-certificated intepreters. Just let's say that a certificated interpeter makes 8 dollars per hour. For non-ceritificated interpreter, that would be 6 dollars per hour. Isn't that make a sense to you?

Those are awfully low wages for the amount of time they spend learning asl, they should be paid in the neighborhood of $20/hour with a two-hour minimum.

Nesmuth · 07-02-2006, 09:34 AM

RID has been making it expensive to access communication services. It's very natural that entities would want to be given the right to access similar services without the cost burden.

Richard

webexplorer · 07-02-2006, 01:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by pek1

Those are awfully low wages for the amount of time they spend learning asl, they should be paid in the neighborhood of $20/hour with a two-hour minimum.

Yes, I know. I am just showing the example. Actually, I don't know what is their salary.

pek1 · 07-03-2006, 09:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by webexplorer

Yes, I know. I am just showing the example. Actually, I don't know what is their salary.

Understood and no offense taken.

em20003 · 07-06-2006, 12:59 PM

Nothing like being deaf and having to learn 12 th grade english through an interpreter that only uses 3rd grade sign language.

BearBeauty · 09-29-2006, 09:34 PM

I happen to know that most interpreting services charge about 40 to 60 dollars per hour for interpreters, and they pay their interpreters about 7 to 8 dollars per hour depending on certification or how long you've been with the company.

While I don't mind uncertified interpreters, I'd like to see more companies hire interpreters without going through interpreting services.. since most companies don't want to spend the 40 to 60 an hour on interpreters... when they could be paying 10 bucks an hour for one.

webexplorer · 09-29-2006, 09:51 PM

I think that the certificated interpreters should accept the price what the company wants so we, deafies, would be willing to give the intepreters some money like 1/4. Is that illegal?

If it is a big company, then it should pay more for the interpreters no matter what.

SxyPorkie · 09-29-2006, 10:29 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Nesmuth

RID has been making it expensive to access communication services. It's very natural that entities would want to be given the right to access similar services without the cost burden.

Richard

Yeah... in order to get certain certification... you have to pay lots of money to take tests.... my daughter had to pay 500 bucks to take test...

06-30-2006, 09:33 PM	#1 (permalink)
Heath Banned Join Date: May 2005 Posts: 7,959	VOTE IN OPPOSITION TO HB 2802. They want unqualified interpreters for Deaf people !!! The PSEA wants to not have Educational Interpreters follow Act 57. This will make deaf children in mainstreams schools have unqualified interpreters. Please go to the PA Senate website now and e-mail your Senator this message Please take a minute to go to this website http://www.legis.state.pa.us/cfdocs/legis/home/find.cfm find your Senator and write him a 1 line e-mail saying Senator Jane Orie was unable to amend HB 2802 to add requirements that would protect deaf children. I implore you to VOTE IN OPPOSITION TO HB 2802. Thank you, Sign your name, address and phone number PLEASE DO IT NOW!!

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

Today
Deafness	Sponsored Links __________________ This advertising will not be shown in this way to registered members. Register your free account today and become a member on AllDeaf.com

07-01-2006, 01:40 PM	#2 (permalink)
Reba Premium Member Join Date: Jun 2004 Posts: 15,641	This is for Pennsylvania residents only, right?

07-01-2006, 04:58 PM	#5 (permalink)
Mookie Guest Posts: n/a	Heath, you may need to contact your state lawmakers to accept people without any college degree or state teacher cerfiications to teach at public school. That may work....

07-01-2006, 06:58 PM	#6 (permalink)
Heath Banned Join Date: May 2005 Posts: 7,959	Act 57 Amendment (HB2802) Passed Dear PARID Member, HB2802 passed in both Houses of the legislature as proposed with no amendments. Here is the history of what happened. Tuesday June 27, 2006 - final passage in the House of Representatives (199-0). There was no discussion. Friday June 30, 2006 - final passage in the Senate as sent from the House without amendment (49-0). Note, Senator Orie, did try to submit an amendment to the bill that would have returned the 3.5 score on the EIPA to exemption #7 and add a 1-year extension for individuals to earn the credential. However, she was told that there was not enough time left in the session to do so. She then went on the record stating her intention to add the amendment and why it was not happening. There was at least one other Senator who read comments on the Senate floor that he received from an interpreter regarding this bill. If you are interested in seeing exactly what the discussion was, it can be found in the Senate Journal. It takes approximately one month for this publication to become available. Contact your Senator to obtain a copy. This bill now goes to Governor Rendell for his signature. If he signs it, it becomes law. If the Governor signs it, I will call the Pennsylvania Board of Education and ask to be put on the "interested parties" list so that PARID is informed of any action or meetings regarding the regulations that will be written. If you are interested in receiving this information directly, contact the Board of Education and ask to be added to the "interested parties" list as well. I have spoken with Dr. Linda Rhen, from the Bureau of Special Education. She has assured me that the Department of Education intends to include PARID and the other stakeholders in the process of writing the regulations. I have already been invited to a meeting regarding this issue. Understand that writing regulations is a lengthy process. You will be updated on the progress of these regulations in the PARID newsletter. PARID still has the comments and feedback that were collected from members during the Act 57 Forums held around the state in Dec 2005 - Jan 2006. This information will be shared with the stakeholders. Remember, this amendment to Act 57 only affects Exemption #7 (educational interpreters). The Pennsylvania Board of Education is only writing the regulations for educational interpreters. ODHH is still responsible for the administration of Act 57 as it pertains to interpreters in all other settings in the Commonwealth. Thank you for your interest in this matter. Sincerely, Cindi Brown PARID President

07-01-2006, 08:01 PM	#8 (permalink)
webexplorer I'm listening to everyone Join Date: Jun 2003 Location: New England Posts: 3,140	My sister used to be an interpeter for three years at high school. She does not have a certification. Her sign is clear, and most deaf students understood her without any problem. They loved her and missed her. She owns a farm business that she loves to work outside. It is not a good idea to become a new law because there are not many certificated interpreters provide in their area. I learned that some interpreters have to drive far away to inteprete deaf students for a summer school or training class programs. My interpreter drove his car for 1 1/2 hour to come to my class for two weeks. He has two jobs. He is great and very smart man. I appreciate that they should accept both certification and non-certificated interpreters. If an interpreter does not finish his/her ASL class in order to receive a certification for a good reason, he/she should be allowed to be an interpreter as long as he/she knows how to sign language. I think that it is fair that certificated interpreters should receive a better salary than non-certificated intepreters. Just let's say that a certificated interpeter makes 8 dollars per hour. For non-ceritificated interpreter, that would be 6 dollars per hour. Isn't that make a sense to you?

07-02-2006, 09:34 AM	#12 (permalink)
Nesmuth Banned Join Date: Jun 2004 Location: The Southland of California Posts: 3,199	RID has been making it expensive to access communication services. It's very natural that entities would want to be given the right to access similar services without the cost burden. Richard

07-06-2006, 12:59 PM	#15 (permalink)
em20003 Registered User Join Date: Jun 2006 Posts: 30	Nothing like being deaf and having to learn 12 th grade english through an interpreter that only uses 3rd grade sign language.

09-29-2006, 09:34 PM	#16 (permalink)
BearBeauty Registered User Join Date: Sep 2006 Posts: 817	I happen to know that most interpreting services charge about 40 to 60 dollars per hour for interpreters, and they pay their interpreters about 7 to 8 dollars per hour depending on certification or how long you've been with the company. While I don't mind uncertified interpreters, I'd like to see more companies hire interpreters without going through interpreting services.. since most companies don't want to spend the 40 to 60 an hour on interpreters... when they could be paying 10 bucks an hour for one.

09-29-2006, 09:51 PM	#17 (permalink)
webexplorer I'm listening to everyone Join Date: Jun 2003 Location: New England Posts: 3,140	I think that the certificated interpreters should accept the price what the company wants so we, deafies, would be willing to give the intepreters some money like 1/4. Is that illegal? If it is a big company, then it should pay more for the interpreters no matter what.