A mentor can help you grow and develop your knowledge and skills. Unfortunately, in the real estate industry, “being thrown into the deep end”, without proper mentoring, has become the norm. For years, we’ve said this shouldn’t be the case and those realtors should be mentored so they can be set up for success. Now, the National Association of Realtors® has finally heard our cry for mentorship.

The NAR has launched a mentorship program that is “designed to help budding professionals in underserved areas thrive in a real estate career”. Named NAR Spire, the program will match mentees from “historically marginalized communities” with seasoned Realtors.

Those in the program will not just be exposed to the day-to-day business operations, but will also receive insights into marketing, appraisal, IT, and financing aspects of real estate. Along with that, they will be given educational opportunities, be able to attend business-related events, have one-on-one mentorship meetings, and have access to an online platform designed specifically for the program.

“NAR Spire is a groundbreaking new initiative designed and developed to drive inclusivity in the real estate industry,” said NAR CEO Bob Goldberg in a press release. “We’ve reached beyond NAR’s walls to collaborate with partners across a number of industries, and we’re confident this program will help Realtors® enhance their reputation as invested, engaged and integral members of every U.S. community.”

How do I apply for the program?
You can join the program by completing an application form to become either a Mentor or Mentee.

After you’ve submitted your form, a program coordinator will evaluate your information to conduct a matching process. Your educational and professional background, experience, time availability, and location will all be taken into account to make a match.

When a match has been made, the Program Coordinator will provide you with your mentor/mentee contact details and make an introduction. Then, you will fill out an agreement, review guidelines, and complete an action plan. Afterward, it’s up to the mentor and mentee to start the mentoring process.

2021 Participating state/local associations
So far, the mentorship program has been launched in nine pilot regions across the country, but they are planning on expanding.

Chicago, IL – Chicago Association of REALTORS®
Durham, NC – Durham Regional Association of REALTORS®
Maryland – Maryland REALTORS®
Memphis, TN – Memphis Area Association of REALTORS®
Raleigh, NC – Raleigh Regional Association of REALTORS®
Rochester, NY – Greater Rochester Association of REALTORS®
Seattle, WA – Seattle-King County Association of REALTORS®
Trenton, NJ– New Jersey REALTORS®; CORE Association of REALTORS®
Washington, D.C. – DC Association of REALTORS®

According to the NAR website, the mentorship experience provides opportunities for both the mentor and the mentee, and I think we can agree that is true. For mentors, they will have the opportunity to coach the new kids to help them reach their full potential and also learn a thing or two in the process. For mentees, well, they will finally get the guidance they need to learn the ropes and thrive in their careers.

Would you know housing discrimination if you saw it?

Are you sure?

And what would you do about it?

If you’re a real estate agent, broker or Realtor, you’ve had a fair amount of training on fair housing laws. But discrimination can sometimes creep in in subtle ways – from which listings you offer a client to which clients you decide to work with to just an offhand remark about a neighborhood.

What if you’ve been part of the problem – and you didn’t even realize it?

Now you can test yourself while sharpening your understanding of housing discrimination to ensure you’re offering all clients a fair, equitable, and positive experience.

This week the National Association of Realtors (NAR) launched an online interactive training tool – Fairhaven.realtor – to let you do just that.

In the fictional town of Fairhaven, you work against the clock to close four different transactions that involve some kind of discrimination. You must choose how to respond, and those responses determine your journey through the simulations. Built-in feedback along the way illustrates how you could avoid the fair housing pitfalls in each situation.

To deepen the impact, the course puts you in the role of a client experiencing discrimination and pairs that with testimonials from real people whose lives have been impacted by it.

“Fairhaven uses the immersive power of storytelling to deliver powerful lessons that will help promote equity in our nation’s housing market,” said Charlie Oppler, CEO of Prominent Properties Sotheby’s International Realty, NAR’s incoming president for 2021. “NAR will continue our work to create innovative anti-discrimination training and to champion efforts that encourage diversity, fight racial bias and build more inclusive communities.”

The online platform is free to real estate professionals and doesn’t require NAR membership to use. NAR will also offer Fairhaven as a software package for brokerages and associations to incorporate into their learning management systems. It was developed in partnership with global professional services firm Ernst and Young.

Fairhaven.realtor is the latest resource offered to realtors as part of its Accountability, Culture Change and Training (ACT!) initiative designed to promote equal opportunity in real estate.

At the Nov. 19 Diversity and Inclusion virtual summit hosted by The Hill, Oppler offered a formal apology for the role realtors have played in the history of housing discrimination, including the practices of redlining and blockbusting.

“We can’t go back to fix the mistakes of the past, but we can look at this problem squarely in the eye,” Oppler said. “And, on behalf of our industry, we can say that what Realtors did was shameful, and we are sorry.”

Bryan Greene, NAR’s director of fair housing policy, discussed the effects of housing discrimination, including creating disparities in wealth. Discrimination denied Black families the same opportunities to build wealth through home ownership, Greene said, adding that white Americans own 10 times the wealth of African-Americans.

“Realtors have an admittedly tough history,” Greene said. “But we have turned the corner and now have emerged as leaders on these important issues.”

I am a member of NAR, and for full disclosure, I am not an attorney. I reviewed the various complaints and performed research, discovering information that could aid in the defense. In my view, Plaintiff (Conti-CA) makes misleading claims and adds assertions to muddy the waters in this class-action suit.

For example:

“Requiring every seller‐broker, when listing a property on an MLS, to make a “blanket unilateral offer […] of compensation” to any buyer agent who may find a buyer for the home;”

This is misleading; compensation is not paid to agents who “find a buyer for the home.” Commissions are earned upon an Agent procuring a client who successfully closes on a transaction that includes mutually agreed terms and conditions. This is not an adversarial transaction, despite how Attorneys try to frame it. Sellers want to sell; Buyers want to acquire, and Agents facilitate.

Moreover: “Requiring that the offer of compensation to the buyer agent be a blanket offer — i.e., the exact same compensation terms must be simultaneously offered to every buyer agent without regard to their experience, the services they are providing to the buyer, or the financial arrangement they have made with the buyer;”

If a Buyer’s Agent procures a Buyer who successfully acquires a residence at a price and terms agreeable to the Seller, then “compensation terms must be simultaneously offered to every buyer agent without regard to their experience” is irrelevant.

Furthermore, I challenge these “high power” law firms to name a profession where compensation is not established upfront.

Additionally, they claim “NAR’s requirement that offers of compensation be expressed in specific dollar or percentage terms enable buyer agents to easily compare the financial compensation offered to them by home sellers and steer their clients to higher commission homes.”

Would the Plaintiff’s Counsel share an alternative method for conveying compensation? Maybe the Peso so Agents would take extra steps using currency converters?

In the same complaint, Plaintiffs assert, “According to data from the NAR, many homebuyers no longer locate prospective homes with the assistance of a broker, but rather independently through online services. Buyer agents increasingly have been retained after their client has already found the home the client wishes to buy.”

These assertions obliterate the Plaintiffs’ allegations of massive steering. If a Consumer finds a home, and a Realtor refuses to show the house, the Consumer will find another Agent. Zillow had 9.8 billion page views in 2020.

Conspiracy

The most significant allegation is that a conspiracy exists between NAR members to use the MLS to create a supra-competitive pricing scheme, and decoupling agent commissions (each Consumer pays their agent) would result in a significant decline in commission structures.

This claim fails.

1st Plaintiffs attempt to frame the argument based on the percentage of the sale price when the fees to transact are a superior factor. Consumers bank dollars, not percentages. Moreover, they cherry-pick a few markets with an emphasis on Singapore as examples of lower commission percentages.

In a three-minute discovery session, I researched the US v Singapore markets, and these are my findings.

• The average price of a US residence totaled $389,400 (based on 2019 data.)
• The commission paid, based on the US average of 4.94%, totaled $19,236
• The average price of a Singapore residence totaled $874,372 USD.
• The commission paid, based on the Singapore average of 3%, totaled $26,231 USD.

Moreover, some publications suggest there is commission sharing between Buyer/Seller Agents in Singapore. Again, Consumer’s bank dollars, not percentages, it appears that the Plaintiff’s counsel is oblivious to this variable.

It is MORE expensive to transact in Singapore.

Decoupling Commissions

I have found no evidence that decoupling reduces commissions. As shown in the following images, I discovered the opposite based on a 2015 study by the Wall Street Journal. The WSJ articles display in the first position when performing a simple Google search; however, I have yet to see WSJ commission studies cited in any complaints. Alternatively, they cite studies from 2002. Furthermore, the US average rate is only slightly higher than the 10-Country average.

Data | WSJ

Counterclaims Against Plaintiffs

In my view, a reasonable person would conclude Plaintiffs used irrelevant data and omitted material information. Most purchase agreements include language similar to “ATTORNEY FEES: In any action, proceeding, or arbitration between Buyer and Seller arising out of this Agreement, the prevailing Buyer or Seller shall be entitled to reasonable attorney fees and costs from the non-prevailing Buyer or Seller.”

Considering Plaintiffs are suing NAR, the four largest Brokerages, the MLS system, and smaller Brokers as co-conspirators, these misleading claims impact 1000’s firms, so I suggest counterclaiming Plaintiffs for $5,000,000 and publicize it.

This may deter Consumers from engaging with ambulance-chasing law firms.

The issue of who pays commissions is irrelevant and undeterminable because Sellers will claim they are deducted from net proceeds while Buyers will claim it is baked into the purchase price, thus commissions are paid by Buyers. Even the various class-action claims conflict related to the party paying commissions.

In reality, the commission percentage assertions are a feeble attempt by parties to create an apples-to-apples comparison to other markets, however the information included in this opinion makes these claims defective.

It is time to inflict an overwhelming response.