Self-Notice of Meetings Published!
RID has been embroiled in multiple public "scandals" for many many years, involving its board, headquarters, conferences, and controversial decisions. This means a few things:
1. The members who have been following this series of scandals are tired and confused due to conflicting information and lack of transparency.
2. The members who recently got involved - the "new blood" - quickly realized they have so much to learn and became overwhelmed which then leads to them sharing in the paralysis along with the members in the #1 group.
3. Alienation has occurred among key stakeholders (including but not limited to Deaf Interpreters, Deaf Community, Educational Interpreters). Those stakeholders are disengaged even more than the membership and make up a tiny portion of the 14,000+ members.
4. The members who have been involved and actually know what's up cannot say anything because... [see next reason].
All volunteers who have been directly involved with RID have signed a Non-Disclosure Agreement (NDA) which is found within their Volunteer Leadership Agreement (VLA). As a result, many people feel like they cannot say anything.
RID has a Volunteer Leadership Manual with the Confidentiality section as shown below:
Each board member, permanent staff member and volunteer, (i.e., all authorized agents of RID), sign an acknowledgement agreement that notes, in part, that the information they learn during their time with the association is owned as a proprietary right by RID and is of a confidential and sensitive nature. This agreement continues after the person completes their association with RID. (Volunteer Leadership Manual Revised, 2019)
The NDA provisions are very unusual because it has no expiration date. This means so many people think they cannot say anything. This is probably untrue. Here's why...
Some people who signed RID's Voluntary Leadership Agreement (which includes a Non-Disclosure Agreement, or NDA) may feel they are not allowed to speak out about concerns with how the organization is run. But there are several strong reasons why this agreement likely does not prevent you from raising issues publicly, especially around governance, ethics, or misconduct.
Here's why:
RID's Ethics and Professional Standards (EPS) process is not a tool that can be used by the Board of Directors (BOD) to punish people for speaking out. The EPS handles ethical concerns related to the business of interpreting and professional conduct, not internal disagreements or leadership disputes. This is also defined in their EPS Policy document (p. 5-6).
Legal experts advising the Board have made clear that trying to use this process for Board-related conflicts would be a legal mess. So, speaking up won't put your certification at risk.
Lawsuits cost a lot of money and time. RID is not in a strong financial position to take legal action against people who speak out — and certainly not against many people at once. The organization is highly unlikely to pursue lawsuits over public comments about governance.
In the U.S., there are laws that protect people who report wrongdoing — whether it's breaking the law or violating an organization's own rules. These laws exist to protect individuals from retaliation.
RID also has a Whistleblower Policy found in their Policy and Procedure Manual:
Whistleblower Policy
RID requires members of the Board of Directors, appointed volunteers, and employees to observe standards of business ethics in the conduct of their duties and responsibilities. As representatives of RID, honesty, integrity and compliance with applicable laws and regulations is required.
Reporting Responsibility
The Whistleblower Policy is intended to encourage and enable representatives of the RID to raise serious concerns internally so that RID can address and correct inappropriate conduct and actions. It is the responsibility of all board members, appointed volunteers, and employees to report concerns about violations or suspected violations of law or regulations that govern RID’s operations.
No Retaliation
It is contrary to the values of RID for anyone to retaliate against any member of the Board of Directors, appointed volunteer, or employee who, in good faith, reports an ethics violation, or a suspected violation of law, such as:
Complaint of discrimination; Suspected fraud; Suspected violation of any regulation governing the operations of RID.
Acting in Good Faith
Anyone filing a written complaint concerning a violation or suspected violation must be acting in good faith and have reasonable grounds for believing the information disclosed indicates a violation. Any unsubstantiated allegations or allegations made maliciously or knowingly to be false will be viewed as a disciplinary offence.
Speaking up about serious problems within an organization is your right.
It's too vague. It doesn't clearly say what information is actually confidential.
It has no expiration date, which is unusual and often not enforceable.
RID doesn't have a system to label information as "confidential," so people can't tell what they're supposed to keep private.
Most of the information people are discussing has already been disclosed by RID itself through public Board meetings, official communications, or documents made available to the membership — which means it's no longer truly "confidential." The key legal principle here is that information loses its confidential status when the organization that owns it has already made it public.
If you signed RID's leadership NDA and are worried about speaking up — especially about governance problems — there are strong reasons to believe you are legally safe to do so. The agreement likely doesn't apply to the types of concerns people want to raise, and even if challenged, it likely wouldn't stand up legally.
Remember: This analysis is not legal advice. Each person's situation is different, and you should consult with a qualified attorney if you have specific legal concerns about your individual circumstances.
RID has been embroiled in multiple public "scandals" for many many years, involving its board, headquarters, conferences, and various controversial decisions. I argue that all the names involved in the recent issues are irrelevant. The root of the problem is the bylaws. There has been efforts in the recent years to revise and reform the RID. The current board has issues but we have seen similar issues in the previous boards. We must recognize that the board, committees, task forces, and headquarter staff are from inside the system and their solutions are based on that system. The problem is that the system is broken.
What then? We, the membership, must fix the system once and for all.
The system begins with RID's Bylaws which is like RID's Constitution that the RID's Board must follow. It was not well written and has many problems that makes reform much more difficult. Boards in the past have tried to fix this but it has not been easy.
One thing that makes it hard to make change is that the Robert's Rules of Order (RRO) is the bylaws-mandated parliamentary process. All meetings must be run using this process. Unfortunately, few people are familiar with this and very few people are sufficiently skilled to run a Board meeting using the RRO. It is not user-friendly and many complete manuals are 800+ pages...!!! If it is not properly followed, whatever is done is invalid.
The other thing that makes this ongoing governance issue confusing is RID -like most organizations - also follows its own Policy and Procedure Manual (PPM) which lists the details of HOW RID would follow the bylaws and other things on how they would do things.
So why haven't we, the members, fixed the system yet?
Three more reasons:
Apathy: People often talk about how volunteerism is at an all-time low nationwide. RID has a reasonably high level of activity with multiple volunteer opportunities at the state level with some states having more than one affiliate chapter!! There are also various committees and taskforces. So I sincerely believe that many more people will be eager to support a revitalized RID.
Fear: What does fear do? It numbs our nerves. It fogs the mind. It paralyzes the body. What is this fear? We fear that by speaking out and taking action we will harm RID, leading potentially to its downfall. If this happens, we would be directly taking away access from Deaf community. It's ironic because inaction is also a decision and only delays its downfall... and here we are today.
Identity Politics: RID has struggled in recent years about who to elevate. Here are the facts:
- The majority of the members are white hearing women.
- The majority of the Presidents and Vice Presidents at the AC and national level have been men.
- Then there has been multiple conflicts over the past decade or two around hearing status (Deaf/Hearing), cultural identity (Deaf/Hearing/CODAs), and ethnicity (BIPOCs). As a result, intentional and unintentional harm has occurred both at the organizational and individual level.
The short answer: Yes!!!
The long answer:
Certification:
- RID is the only national certification and the only one that is psychometrically valid by an independent third party with a shelf life of 5 years before the next refresh.
- BEI has not refreshed its certification in a long time and only recognized in a limited number of states.
- EIPA is an assessment, not a certification.
State Laws: Many state laws specifically say "RID" and/or "national certification." Non-certified interpreters cannot work in those states. It can be very hard to change a law. If RID is no longer an organization, the Deaf community will not be able to get an interpreter at all in those states.