The Best Court Reporter Chair I’ve Ever Owned – the Herman Miller Embody

Posted bystenoimperiumPosted inUncategorized

I have worked in the court reporting profession since 2003. Over the course of my career, I have reported trials, depositions, hearings, arbitrations, and proceedings in both traditional courtrooms and modern remote platforms. Court reporting is a profession that demands sustained focus, precise motor control, and physical stillness for long periods of time. The ergonomics of that reality are not widely understood. Most people assume court reporters simply “sit and type.” Those who have done the job know that the act of holding concentrated, immobile posture for hours at a time places consistent strain on the back, shoulders, hips, neck, and hands. The chair we sit in is not incidental to the job. It is central to our ability to perform it.

Throughout my career, I have encountered a recurring and universally familiar experience among reporters: courtroom chair roulette. Unlike clerks, judicial assistants, and other courtroom personnel, who typically have the opportunity to select or request supportive seating, court reporters often end up with whatever chair remains after everyone else has chosen. I have been assigned chairs with no functioning height adjustment, chairs whose backs either leaned permanently backward or provided no resistance at all, chairs with stiff or intrusive armrests that restricted positioning at the stenographic machine, and chairs pulled from storage that appeared to have outlived multiple office renovations. In proceedings that last six hours or more without meaningful movement, the consequences of a poorly suited chair are not minor. They manifest in fatigue and discomfort that continue long after the courtroom session ends, often during transcript production later in the day.

After enough years of this, I made the decision to take the question of seating into my own hands. I invested in a Herman Miller Embody chair—an investment I made more than eleven years ago. It remains the best equipment purchase I have made in my career.

The Embody is distinct from many other chairs marketed as ergonomic. Rather than holding the user in a fixed alignment, the chair is designed around the movement of the spine. The backrest incorporates a flexible support structure that responds to shifts in posture, distributing pressure evenly rather than concentrating it in the lower back or shoulders. This matters specifically for court reporters, who typically sit in a slightly forward position at their machines rather than in a reclined, keyboard-oriented posture. The Embody supports that forward orientation without collapsing, slouching, or encouraging compensation elsewhere in the body.

One of the first modifications I made to my chair was removing the armrests. For stenographic work, armrests are more hindrance than assistance. Removing them on many chairs results in a loss of balance or stability. The Embody remains structurally sound and fully supportive without them, which underscores the integrity of the design.

The most remarkable feature of this chair, however, is not evident in the first month of use but rather over time. After more than 11 years of daily sitting—often for extended transcript production sessions of ten, twelve, or even eighteen hours—the chair has not deteriorated. The cushioning has not compressed. The backrest has not loosened. The tilt and tension mechanisms operate with the same smooth responsiveness they did when it arrived. The fabric has held up, and the overall structure is unchanged. In an era where most office chairs last three to five years before replacement becomes necessary, the Embody’s longevity is significant. When considered on a year-by-year basis, the cost of the chair becomes comparable to or lower than many consumer office chairs that wear out and need replacement on a regular cycle.

An unexpected cultural footnote to the Embody arrived in 2014, when the chair appeared in the film Lucy, in a scene featuring Scarlett Johansson. The movie’s portrayal of heightened cognitive ability and advanced awareness lent the chair a distinct visual association: efficient, purposeful, and modern. While cinematic appearance is not a factor in ergonomic performance, the visual recognition underscores a point about design. This is not a chair that resembles traditional office seating. It looks contemporary because it is engineered differently. It was not designed to fit into an office—it was designed to support the human body at work.

For court reporters, the implications of ergonomics are not abstract. Our longevity in the profession is directly related to how well we care for our musculoskeletal health. Repetitive stress injuries, nerve compression, shoulder and neck tension, and lower back strain are all risks that grow over time if posture and seated support are not managed intentionally. The Embody has allowed me to work long days during trials and extended transcript production periods without the physical exhaustion I experienced earlier in my career. The absence of pain is not just comfort—it is an extension of career viability.

The decision to invest in supportive seating is often postponed because chairs are not perceived as essential equipment. Yet for court reporters, the chair is the environment in which the entirety of our work is performed. It is the foundation upon which our physical endurance rests. The Herman Miller Embody has proven, over more than a decade of daily use, that it is not simply a comfortable chair. It is a functional asset that protects the body required to perform this profession.

For those entering the field or those who have been in it as long as I have, my recommendation is direct: invest in the chair that will sustain your work and preserve your physical well-being over time. For me, that chair is the Herman Miller Embody. It has served me longer, and more reliably, than any other piece of equipment I own.

A Note on Timing – The Chair Is Currently Discounted

The Herman Miller Embody is not inexpensive, and it is rarely discounted. At the time of this writing, the chair is being offered at approximately 25% off for the Thanksgiving and Black Friday sales period, reducing the price from about $2,045 to roughly $1,533. The Embody is a product that does not cycle through aggressive promotions, so reductions of this kind are notable. For court reporters who have considered investing in supportive seating but have postponed the purchase due to cost, this may represent an advantageous moment. A chair that will be used daily for the next decade or more is not comparable to a typical holiday sale item. It is, in this case, the one purchase that has the potential to materially influence long-term physical health and professional sustainability.

StenoImperium
Court Reporting. Unfiltered. Unafraid.

Disclaimer

This article reflects my perspective and analysis as a court reporter and eyewitness. It is not legal advice, nor is it intended to substitute for the advice of an attorney.

This article includes analysis and commentary based on observed events, public records, and legal statutes.

The content of this post is intended for informational and discussion purposes only. All opinions expressed herein are those of the author and are based on publicly available information, industry standards, and good-faith concerns about nonprofit governance and professional ethics. No part of this article is intended to defame, accuse, or misrepresent any individual or organization. Readers are encouraged to verify facts independently and to engage constructively in dialogue about leadership, transparency, and accountability in the court reporting profession.

  • The content on this blog represents the personal opinions, observations, and commentary of the author. It is intended for editorial and journalistic purposes and is protected under the First Amendment of the United States Constitution.
  • Nothing here constitutes legal advice. Readers are encouraged to review the facts and form independent conclusions.

***To unsubscribe, just smash that UNSUBSCRIBE button below — yes, the one that’s universally glued to the bottom of every newsletter ever created. It’s basically the “Exit” sign of the email world. You can’t miss it. It looks like this (brace yourself for the excitement):

Published by stenoimperium

We exist to facilitate the fortifying of the Stenography profession and ensure its survival for the next hundred years! As court reporters, we've handed the relationship role with our customers, or attorneys, over to the agencies and their sales reps.  This has done a lot of damage to our industry.  It has taken away our ability to have those relationships, the ability to be humanized and valued.  We've become a replaceable commodity. Merely saying we are the “Gold Standard” tells them that we’re the best, but there are alternatives.  Who we are though, is much, much more powerful than that!  We are the Responsible Charge.  “Responsible Charge” means responsibility for the direction, control, supervision, and possession of stenographic & transcription work, as the case may be, to assure that the work product has been critically examined and evaluated for compliance with appropriate professional standards by a licensee in the profession, and by sealing and signing the documents, the professional stenographer accepts responsibility for the stenographic or transcription work, respectively, represented by the documents and that applicable stenographic and professional standards have been met.  This designation exists in other professions, such as engineering, land surveying, public water works, landscape architects, land surveyors, fire preventionists, geologists, architects, and more.  In the case of professional engineers, the engineering association adopted a Responsible Charge position statement that says, “A professional engineer is only considered to be in responsible charge of an engineering work if the professional engineer makes independent professional decisions regarding the engineering work without requiring instruction or approval from another authority and maintains control over those decisions by the professional engineer’s physical presence at the location where the engineering work is performed or by electronic communication with the individual executing the engineering work.” If we were to adopt a Responsible Charge position statement for our industry, we could start with a draft that looks something like this: "A professional court reporter, or stenographer, is only considered to be in responsible charge of court reporting work if the professional court reporter makes independent professional decisions regarding the court reporting work without requiring instruction or approval from another authority and maintains control over those decisions by the professional court reporter’s physical presence at the location where the court reporting work is performed or by electronic communication with the individual executing the court reporting work.” Shared purpose The cornerstone of a strategic narrative is a shared purpose. This shared purpose is the outcome that you and your customer are working toward together. It’s more than a value proposition of what you deliver to them. Or a mission of what you do for the world. It’s the journey that you are on with them. By having a shared purpose, the relationship shifts from consumer to co-creator. In court reporting, our mission is “to bring justice to every litigant in the U.S.”  That purpose is shared by all involved in the litigation process – judges, attorneys, everyone.  Who we are is the Responsible Charge.  How we do that is by Protecting the Record.

Leave a comment