The below article is from a fully qualified and registered interpreter, who wanted to share their views but asked for their identity to be hidden in order to protect their career. Posting this article does not reflect the views of the Editor or site as a whole. Read our disclaimer here.
Please read the comments below this article to get a sense of the range of views among sign language interpreters.
I am a qualified interpreter, I am freelance and own my own limited company.
As I see it I am free to accept jobs that I feel able to do and meet my skill set, I am free to set my own terms and conditions regarding hours, fees, booking conditions and so forth – as would be expected of any other business operating in a free market environment.
Except that I am not.
I want to be able to offer bookings for only one hour, accept two hour bookings and not have a three hour minimum but to do so would be career suicide.
Other interpreters have told me I’d be affecting them and that I’d be an outsider by not showing solidarity with the majority.
I would be ruining the likelihood of the other interpreters getting work if I accepted a one hour or two hour booking as the agencies would be putting pressure on them to accept reduced hours.
I appreciate that the whole system needs looking at, as the situation in Sheffield serves to highlight.
A small group of interpreters decided to encourage others to join their protest of Language Line as the agency were offering a 2 hour minimum booking and these interpreters felt they ‘deserved’ a minimum of three hours.
Where or how this three hour minimum first made its way into the interpreting world I do not know but I can only assume that interpreters were fed up of the fees some agencies charged and only receiving a fraction of the amount.
And here in lies the whole crux of the issue – greedy agencies charging exorbitant fees as well as interpreters feeling it is somehow their right to earn a fee for three hours – although in reality it could be as little as 20 minutes work.
I know not all agencies are charging ridiculously high fees but some do and it’s tarnished them all unfortunately, much akin to the Sheffield debacle.
This situation has entirely backfired as Sheffield Council have decided to use a remote online sign language service for all GP and hospital bookings thereby reducing the face to face interpreter bookings to almost nil.
What is so grossly unfair is that this affects ALL interpreters and not just the group who initiated the boycott. For those interpreters who continued to work with Language Line because they felt it was unfair to affect the deaf community in this way, it is a slap in the face.
We need to question our motives for becoming an interpreter. Is it a job in which we grab our cash and head home, each our for ourselves, or is it a vocation where our aim is to ensure everyone we meet has the best service even if that means going above and beyond our ‘role’ or using our time.
I want to be able to utilise the ‘free’ part of freelance to enable me to support deaf people as they wish to be supported whether that is for half an hour, one hour or eight hours and to be able to charge whatever I see fit for my service.
Perhaps I charge an old age pensioner nothing for helping him translate a 2 page letter but I charge a GP surgery a high fee for a one hour appointment.
Surely, as the owner and director of my own business I am within my right to do this?
It’s time we came together as interpreters to focus on the important parts of our job and to stop activities that I feel serve only to alienate the deaf community even further and as we’ve just seen, don’t actually work.
Response:
A comment from ‘Vicki’ posted this morning says:
As a freelance interpreter, you run a high outgoings business. Any basic analysis using the full cost recovery model will show this; travel, membership fees, training, use of home, computer equipment. Then there are the days you don’t get paid – bank holidays, sickness, annual leave, quiet periods like August and school half terms. When you work for yourself, a good rule of thumb is to assume that your take home pay will inevitably be around half of what your chargeable fee is. If you’re taking a booking for one hour at £30, congratulations, you’ve just made £15 profit.
All qualified interpreters hold postgraduate qualifications, or an equivalent. Some of us also have an undergraduate degree. Many interpreters also hold various other degree level qualifications – this is not a job that you can just walk into and expect to earn a living from. You study and develop your skills for a long time and you expect to earn a salary that you can live comfortably on – otherwise what is the point of training! If you are achieving a postgraduate qualification with the expectation that you will then earn less than minimum wage, which is what it often amounts to when you take one hour bookings and pro rata your salary over the year, then you are frankly not in a position to be running your own business and you should probably go and work for an agency and let them manage your finances for you.
Also, as an interpreter who charges a fair fee, I am then in a position to do pro bono work. I regularly do jobs where I don’t charge clients, there are various reasons for this, but it’s because I am able to sustain a living by charging a fair fee that I can offer to waive my fee elsewhere.
The use of remote services over face to face is not because of the boycott. If you even do a basic google search about the NHS and interpreting services you will see that NHS trusts across the country are all trying to reduce their costs related to face to face interpreting.
At the end of the day, how you run your business is at your discretion – the joys of the free market. But what we do a say professionals does have an impact on our colleagues, you can chose to bring them up or push them down. Inevitably, if you are accepting fees at unsustainable rates all you are saying to your colleagues and the deaf community is that you have so little confidence in your skills and abilities that you don’t feel you deserve to earn a fair wage.
Enjoying our eggs? Support The Limping Chicken:
The Limping Chicken is the world's most popular Deaf blog, and is edited by Deaf journalist, screenwriter and director Charlie Swinbourne.
Our posts represent the opinions of blog authors, they do not represent the site's views or those of the site's editor. Posting a blog does not imply agreement with a blog's content. Read our disclaimer here and read our privacy policy here.
Find out how to write for us by clicking here, and how to follow us by clicking here.
The site exists thanks to our supporters. Check them out below:
- BSL Zone: TV programmes in BSL for the Deaf community
- Deaf Umbrella: what support is available for deaf students?
- Bellman & Symfon: home alerting solutions, including the mobile phone transceiver!
- SignVideo: Instant BSL video interpreting online
- SignHealth: check out the BSL health library
- 999 BSL: call 999 in an emergency, in BSL
- Appa: Looking for RSLIs, TSLIs and CSWs, apply here!
- Signly: Adding BSL to websites
- Signworld: Learn BSL online!
- DCAL: world-class research into deafness, cognition and language
- Action Deafness: “A Deaf-Led Charity” – interpreting & community support services
- Sign Solutions: Instant access to Interpreters, training and BSL translation nationwide
- InterpretersLive: On demand BSL video interpretation
- Lipspeaker UK: specialist lipspeaking support
- BID: Deaf services, including advice and support, interpreting, employment and letters
- Performance Interpreting: BSL interpreting at concerts
- National Deaf Children's Society: The leading charity for deaf children
Vicki
February 10, 2017
As a freelance interpreter, you run a high outgoings business. Any basic analysis using the full cost recovery model will show this; travel, membership fees, training, use of home, computer equipment. Then there are the days you don’t get paid – bank holidays, sickness, annual leave, quiet periods like August and school half terms. When you work for yourself, a good rule of thumb is to assume that your take home pay will inevitably be around half of what your chargeable fee is. If you’re taking a booking for one hour at £30, congratulations, you’ve just made £15 profit.
All qualified interpreters hold postgraduate qualifications, or an equivalent. Some of us also have an undergraduate degree. Many interpreters also hold various other degree level qualifications – this is not a job that you can just walk into and expect to earn a living from. You study and develop your skills for a long time and you expect to earn a salary that you can live comfortably on – otherwise what is the point of training! If you are achieving a postgraduate qualification with the expectation that you will then earn less than minimum wage, which is what it often amounts to when you take one hour bookings and pro rata your salary over the year, then you are frankly not in a position to be running your own business and you should probably go and work for an agency and let them manage your finances for you.
Also, as an interpreter who charges a fair fee, I am then in a position to do pro bono work. I regularly do jobs where I don’t charge clients, there are various reasons for this, but it’s because I am able to sustain a living by charging a fair fee that I can offer to waive my fee elsewhere.
The use of remote services over face to face is not because of the boycott. If you even do a basic google search about the NHS and interpreting services you will see that NHS trusts across the country are all trying to reduce their costs related to face to face interpreting.
At the end of the day, how you run your business is at your discretion – the joys of the free market. But what we do a say professionals does have an impact on our colleagues, you can chose to bring them up or push them down. Inevitably, if you are accepting fees at unsustainable rates all you are saying to your colleagues and the deaf community is that you have so little confidence in your skills and abilities that you don’t feel you deserve to earn a fair wage.
A Deaf person
February 10, 2017
One thing I want to ask those freelance interpreters who talk about high outgoings ie training, membership, use of home, equipment and the need to cover this. Don’t you claim this back when you are doing your self assessment returns so this is covered anyway? Or have I got this wrong?
Vicki
February 10, 2017
As a taxable deduction, it reduces your tax bill at the end of the financial year, but you still have to pay for it. It’s still an outgoing expense that you have to factor into your business costs.
KT
February 10, 2017
When someone says they “claim something on taxes” that means that they tell the tax man they spent this money for something related to doing business, like training for example. The tax man says “ok then, I won’t ask you to pay tax on the money you spent on training.”
So, the tax bill reduces by a few pennies, that’s all.
It doesn’t mean you get the money you spent on training back.
Lael
February 10, 2017
You do not get the money back. It’s a tax deduction. What this means is that the government takes all your expenses off you gross earnings and then calculates your tax. So an interpreter that earns £30000 in a year before tax can deduct their expenses of say £5000 and then the governments taxes them on just £25000.
What this mean is you don’t get taxed on that £5000. It does save you £1500 in tax but it doesn’t give you the £5000 back that you spent to run you business. As a freelance interpreter you also don’t get sick pay, holiday pay, or pension. We have to do all of that privately. That is why our fees are “high”.
An example of a 1 hour booking: I travel 30 minutes to a job, pay for parking, the booking is an hour, go home. The fee earned for an hour is £30. Parking is £4.50, fuel is £5.00. Tax is %30. Or about £6 after the deductions of expenses. This leaves you with £14.50 for 2 hours of you time. I can theoretically fit in 4 booking like this per day. £58 for an entire days work and not just work but a nonstop slog. It’s not worth it. 1 hour bookings are not fancially viable.
The above is a VERY basic estimate but make the point I hope. Thank you for asking the question and hope this sheds a little light on things.
Darren Townsend-Handscomb
February 10, 2017
“We need to question our motives for becoming an interpreter. Is it a job in which we grab our cash and head home, each our for ourselves, or is it a vocation where our aim is to ensure everyone we meet has the best service even if that means going above and beyond our ‘role’ or using our time.”
You point out a real tension. As a self-employed interpreter I can charge whatever I want, but I’m also part of a profession where what I can charge is determined by what the market, often larger agencies through framework agreements, can pay.
And what the market will decide they can get away with paying, will be determined by the freelance individuals who charge the least.
Our work is decreasingly coordinated by small local agencies with an interest in quality over the longer term. Instead larger agencies are concerned with bums on seats. Cheapest interpreter who matches broad criteria.
In fact, I’d suggest these larger agencies are no longer agencies in the traditional sense. Rather they are like G4S. Run any service for a profit, quality and sustainability only relevant if it loses potential profit. Also think the gig economy. Cheapest person wins, till they’re not the cheapest, and then the bottom line is the minimum wage, except the larger companies get around that by calling them self-employed.
So where individual interpreters decide to charge less, as is their right being self-employed, because of whichever genuinely good reason they have, everyone, including Deaf people, potentially pays for that decision over the longer term.
Where this has taken many spoken language interpreters in health settings is £15 an hour, 1 hour minimum, 15 minutes increments, and no cancellation. £50 for a day’s work is a good day. That’s not a job, it’s a hobby.
And can it happen to us? In Scotland one area already has a contract with one hour minimum, and no travel. None of the local interpreters could afford to take the work. But someone is covering it.
Where did three hours come from? From the need for interpreters to be able to take two bookings a day and make a decent living from that. It would be better described as a minimum fee, which would cover up to half a days’ work. That’s how I work, so that I can earn a reasonable income, and ensure that other interpreters can too, in order to sustain the long term viability and quality of our work for me, us, and our customers.
Pain in the arse sometimes, turning down work that I’d like to do because the fees or terms are inappropriate, or not working for unethical agencies who have interesting contracts.
So, to answer your question, I’m an interpreter because I bloody love the job, love the people I work with, and after 30 years I still find most days interesting. I’m also an interpreter so that I can earn a good-enough income.
And I do a fair amount of voluntary or reduced rate interpreting. But never for the larger agencies, or where I create a precedent. You want to pay me £50 for interpreting at the GP surgery. I don’t think so. A tiny charity, with no government support, booking direct. We’ll talk about it.
Solidarity means looking at the bigger picture and choosing to work to support the profession for the long term benefit of your colleagues and customers (and ultimately yourself), even where that may limit your individual freedoms.
The retired one
February 10, 2017
Oh, I’m really pulled by this. We need to have a sustainable
income, pay our bills and support ourselves and our children. Charging £35 per hour is not a high price for the work, time, development and cost that I invested into my training and interpreting career. Call a plumber out and you’ll see! However, as a now ‘outsider’, interpreters are also an extremely weird breed. The infighting and focus on self is concerning. The Deaf community is small, but such a beautiful one, and many within it took me in unquestioningly. That’s a privilege. Now, how are they repaid for their kindness? Also, people are ‘training’ others in the field without qualifications, interpreters are ‘campaigning!’ because they feel they deserve to be compensated for their non-booking time- sorry,you only deserve to get paid for the work you do! If that means you can’t sustain yourself then work more or get a different job. Sub groups of sub groups that are splinter groups of something else are springing up all over he place too😒
Deaf people deserve so much better than what is offered. Standards are..I want to say dropping but to be honest I don’t believe there are any standards. Deaf people are not protected against poor practice-not at all. They are no longer given the same choices. They do not have the same quality that was once enforced and why? Because interpreters feel hard done by. There needs to be a serious shake up across the whole board. We don’t even have enough numbers to be a protected profession and yet the number of ‘professional bodies’ is laughable, all bowing to personality (I want to be more blatant- it’s largely due to self-serving and yet self-guarding against accountability) rather than cause; interpreting to the highest standard possible for the Deaf community should be the focus.
Yes, we need to make a living. We are not a charity nor should we work like one. Many have invested much money and time to be trained and that should be recognised – oh wait we get £35 per hour (give or take) so it is recognised! – however disregard for standards, hiding from accountability and also ignoring the numerous ‘professional’ bodies to set up splinter groups of splinter groups is all such playground mentality!! This achieves nothing. Absolutely nothing. These small groups have no power. They also feed into the ‘let’s slabber about what we feel we are entitled to without actually doing anything to fix it yet still avoid consequences to our poor service’ nonsense.
‘Vicki’ is right. We are a business and should have enough self respect and business savvy to treat outselves as one. However, as individual businesses we are all competing with the opposition- each other- so do whatever you want. Be left out in the cold by colleagues if you over or under charge, it’s really no one else’s business UNLESS, (and I need to do that again) UNLESS your reasons are that you can’t get work without undercutting, you are taking on work you are not skilled for and so are charging less(?!) or if you don’t understand the bigger picture your actions can have on the interpreter and Deaf communities. If you can justify your own actions based on informed choice and it does not negatively impact on others then go for it!
The Millennial One
February 10, 2017
Urgh.
This article is so misguided. And ignorant. And selfish. And divisive. And unnecessary- because if you want to charge unsustainable fees go ahead, there’s no reason to write an article justifying it yourself. Oh but your friends might be sad at you :'( because yeah- there’s consequences to your actions.
As Vicki rightly pointed out- the introduction of VRS has nothing to do with the boycott- and some Sheffield hospitals (I think) are bypassing LLS and booking through agencies that WILL offer sustainable fees, so there is evidence that this works.
Also- not loving the “things were so much better in my day” vibe that seems to around more *ahem* “established” interpreters atm.
Things were different, some were certainly better but some were probably, maybe, perhaps not as good. These rose tinted glasses do nothing for supporting the current profession or the deaf community.
Video Interpreting service provider
February 10, 2017
I’m coming at this from a different angle. As a video interpreting service provider, I would never agree to a blanket video interpreting contract. We have often been approached by both non-specialist language agencies and services such as NHS trusts asking for us to provide a video interpreting contracts as a “blanket” service, our response has always been that the deaf person should have a choice of the access channel preferred and that there are certain circumstances where we, as the experts, would NOT touch with a barge pole as these are best provided by a BSL interpreter on site.
ASLI has a policy on video interpreting and this should be supported as a standard of good practice.
Darren Townsend-Handscomb
February 10, 2017
A quick reply to Roger’s important point:
“Many have invested much money and time to be trained and that should be recognised – oh wait we get £35 per hour (give or take) so it is recognised!”
The hourly rate is almost irrelevant, and is not an indication of our recognition as skilled professionals. (I note Roger’s challenge that we are not all sufficiently skilled)
If the market is structured so that I get paid 1 hour for work that, with travel, takes me 4 hours, I’m actually getting £35 for half a days work, before paying travel costs, other business costs and tax. This is what has happened to spoken language interpreters.
As a business we have to do what all other businesses do, and work out what income we need, and what profit after expenses and tax, in order to be viable. (This is what Ben Phillips and I have been discussing in the What Are You Worth workshops for the last three years).
For most interpreters in practice we do two shorter or one longer booking a day, so appropriate financial recognition means paying those, and not trying to reduce my work to an hourly rate that bears no relationship to my income.
There are some professions who charge a very high hourly fee in order to cover for all the times they don’t work, are cancelled for work and can’t charge, spend preparing for work, etc.
Interpreting is not one of those professions. So thinking and talking about the hourly rate as if that means something in itself, whether as one, two or three hour minimums, is part of the problem that leads to reduced fees and terms.
Stephen
February 10, 2017
Interesting read. As a staff member of one of the NHS Trusts affected by this boycott it disappoints me the position a large number of interpreters have taken. Having researched the sign language union fee guidance the minimum call out fee (£100) is actual more than what the Trust is budgeted to pay the language agency per appointment. We’ve had interpreters saying to book them direct because it’d be cheaper – this appears to be a false claim.
Previously under the 3 hours we’ve had interpreters (on more than one occasion) on the ward booked for a patient then finished within an hour. We’ve then advised another Deaf patient is also on the ward so could they also interpret for them but the interpreter has advised we need to make another booking for the additional patient thus charging 6 hours for little more than an hour of interpreting. This is not sustainable under current budgets let alone fair on the patients.
Vicki
February 10, 2017
The reason it’s above your budget is because the agency has told you that they can provide the service at a low fee, without consultation with interpreters. The interpreting agencybclwarly either doesn’t understand the market and underbid to win the contract or they have tried to force market constraints and hoped that interpreters would break. They didn’t. Hopefully other agencies will use this as a model of how not to bid for contracts. It’s clearly not working.
Vicki
February 10, 2017
As for the latter part about rebooking, that is because the agency doesn’t wish to lose the administration fee. It’s not because the interpreter is unwilling, in is because they are contractually obliged to refer you back to the agency.
Maria Munro
February 10, 2017
No wonder we are all going out of business, with business acumen like yours! I can see why you chose to be anonymous, because you are doing a huge injustice to the profession and the community we serve.
Puzzled
February 10, 2017
Interpreters may charge silly prices and compare themselves to plumbers etc. A self employed social worker may earn up to £24 an hour. I know other professions that charge £15 etc. So I do not understand why £35 is ‘reasonable’ it’s much more than other professions but we adhere to the same professional standards, CPD, do not receive sick pay etc.
How is that interpreters claim poverty?
Puzzled
February 11, 2017
Further to your responses I will be unable to carry out my job in 2018 due to ATW cuts and effectively I will be deemed too ‘sick’ to do my job. Why is that? The charges that are imposed by interpreters and agencies. I actually think ATW has paid far too much to enable me to do my job it’s equalivent to 1.5 to 5 times a yearly salary. So I dont blame ATW.
The ‘I don’t know how many hours I will work tmw’ comment is rubbish the same applies for any other self employed person. The whole industry needs to step back and review the whole situation. Otherwise all fully fledged interpreters will be out of jobs.
Then Deaf people will be out of jobs due to inadequate communication support.
Welcome to the dark ages.
Cathy
February 10, 2017
This is an interesting thread, because I have tried to get hold of an interpreter I know well, but he claims he can’t even afford train fare, which amounts to about £20 return!! He is claiming absolute poverty!! Does this not suggest that £35 an hour is too expensive for Deaf people to afford, let alone the government or agencies!
Interpreters need to work entirely for themselves and get shot of agencies! Any Deaf person can then text to book them at a reasonable hourly rate or day rate depending on what the job is.
This profession is a joke when even the Police are trying to get out of paying for interpreters! We really are in a serious state of affairs and the real losers are the Deaf Community! After all interpreters could always find other work or careers, but Deaf people are reliant on interpreters for life! We have no choices……….!
iris6116
February 10, 2017
Because I don’t how many hours I work tomorrow or if I’ll get work at all.
iris6116
February 10, 2017
Sorry, I meant, I don’t know how many hours…
MissVery
February 10, 2017
Why is anyone comparing our rates to plumbers or other tradespeople (and btw my best friend is social worker self employed at £35/hr) What about solicitors and consultants who charge £100s per hour? Our profession is not of equal value? Why not question them? Why just question interpreting for the Deaf community- is it because you perceive it as a charitable service 1st profession 2nd? Your post suggests you “feel sorry” for your clients. I don’t. I respect my clients- while making money.
The retired one
February 11, 2017
I linked interpreting to plumbing as a way of highlighting that £35 is relatively low considering the knowledge we have to have, in many situations and domains and we pay for it year on year to ensure we maintain high standards. Others, plumbers for example, do a course for three years and charge more. We are misunderstood and undervalued because we are NOT a legitimate profession. We aren’t recognised as one because there are so few of us and we are not policed or controlled as one either. That is our biggest problem because we have so many routes in and everything is optional due to the lack of unrecognised professional status. I love your last sentence! Too many work in the ‘helper’ model of patronising/charity role. That weakens our public reputation and the Deaf communities and that’s sad. Other professionals do too though, but the overarching public understanding of their role overrides this. We are seen as nothing more than care workers many times (“Can you make sure he..”-eh? What? No. Can you Doc??) but we are on the front line of this and need to be careful that our reactions do not feed into this thinking but sadly that’s not always the case.
This isn’t directed entirely to you MissVery. I just wanted to clarify why I made the link with plumbers. Interpreting is so much more than it’s given credit for but until society changes how they see Deaf people, BSL and interpreters then this will unfortunately continue to be the case. We need to be a part of that change and the ‘I respect my clients while I make money’ is a clear display of the equality we strive for and mutual respect we need more of👍
Oh Dear
February 11, 2017
Vicki wrote, “the joys of the free market.”
Oh dear… When the government pays for the interpreter services and gets involved in awarding contracts – there is no free market. Free market = no government interferences.
Darren Townsend-Handscomb
February 11, 2017
I’d like to thank the anonymous interpreter for sharing their thoughts publicly about these issues.
It’s only by having discussions like this that we get to engage with and appreciate different perspectives, and hopefully through discussion learn something, if not persuade each other. And whilst it’s easy to be cross with each other, I’d suggest it’s more useful not to be.
I guarantee that the views expressed by this anonymous interpreter are shared by others. Who also won’t discuss them with colleagues because of the strong feelings on both sides. So views remain fixed.
I’d really like to see the anonymous interpreter’s thoughts on the discussions. Has your perspective or opinion shifted at all? Is there anything you think worth exploring or discussing more? How can we reconcile your views about freelance autonomy with other views on the wider earning potential of colleagues now and in the future?
The Anonymous one
February 19, 2017
Thank you all for taking an interest in the article and the time to respond. Darren, I welcome your question and request for my response. I apologise for the delay but I was on holiday for half-term.
I think a lot of the issues raised either implicitly or explicitly in the article are highly emotive and it has been really interesting to see a few assumptions being made. More than one person assumed that I want to lower my fees or accept one hour bookings at the current rate. I made no explicit comment about rates in the article yet I feel the reaction from many is concern that I’ll be undercutting people. I appreciate the comments about how this would lose us respect or impact negatively on our ‘profession’, which is why it was never my plan.
To the contrary I think that we need to be charging more for our services. At the moment we are expensive, by any standards, but are also inflexible with a 2 or 3 hr minimum, travel on top etc etc. Lael, I agree with you that accepting a one hour booking for £30 if you need to travel 30 mins each way is not financially viable hence I feel we should be charging more.
For example, a GP booking that should only take 20-30 mins is currently booked for a minimum of 2 hrs with at least one hour ‘wasted’. Would it not be better for us to work for £50-£60 an hour for LOCAL bookings thereby saving everyone money and being more flexible with our time. The key here is LOCAL bookings that are more or less guaranteed to take no more than an hour – GP, dentist, optician appointments NOT long hospital appointments or consultations. I am not at all trying to find a way to make more money but it would seem a win win situation for all parties in that it should increase flexibility and reduce costs for service providers and ensure that interpreters are booked more frequently thereby creating more work that ultimately benefits clients.
Further, the AtW hours do not always fall in nice 2 or 3 hr chunks which means that many people are left with wasted hours or unused hours especially if they are limited to the number of hours they can use in a week or month as they cannot save them for another time. Accepting one hour bookings would provide more flexibility for all concerned.
I think by accepting one hour bookings we will also be competitive with the VIS providers. Without changing our working practices I fear that in 5 years time face to face interpreting will not be viable for many services as Government cuts continue to eat away at all budgets. If we wait a few more years before adapting we will be forced into accepting lower rates including accepting one hour bookings. If we are proactive and able to show cost savings now then it will make the future better for all.
A few people have mentioned the impact the agencies, especially the large ones focussed on bums on seats, are having and it is they who are driving down fees. As you rightly point out Vicki they often bid for contracts hoping they can force interpreters to accept lower fees. That is why I feel I could not propose a one hour £50-£60 fee to a large agency as it would gall me to see them making even more profit. And this leads to the sense of frustration – although I am free to offer my services to whomever I choose I will impact on other interpreters and I will create more profit for an already large agency, which are both negatives, but I might improve the access for clients, which is obviously a positive. The decline of the smaller agencies is bad for everyone.
Miss Very, I hope you realise that I do not feel sorry for my clients in any way but I do feel frustration and anger when I see those clients having appointments cancelled left right and centre and witnessing their frustration and anger and inability to change anything. The majority are at the mercy of a system that we are part of and I for one would like to see the system improved. Moreover, owing to our hourly rates we are too expensive for most people to book us direct to ensure they have access and how many of us would consider working pro bono for a booking that should, by law (the new Accessible Information Standard), be covered. That would surely put the cat among the pigeons.
Apologies for the length of my reply and I hope it’s calmed any fears of bringing the ‘profession’ (have to agree with you Retired one) into disrepute. Darren, thank you for asking me to respond and I hope I have covered some of your questions. I think there is still much to explore but it would need face to face discussion with lots of tea and biscuits 🙂
Matt Brown
February 24, 2017
This is an interesting post, which makes it all the more depressing that it’s from an “anonymous professional”. This culture of hiding behind social media facades is absolutely pernicious and I urge Limping Chicken to stop publishing this kind of thing. Putting your own name on a “professional” opinion legitimises it. It keeps you honest and accountable. It also allows you to network and contact other professionals in order to further constructive dialogue. There are actually very, very few “life or death” situations where anonymous whistle-blowing is a requirement and this certainly is not one of those issues. What could be less “professional” than sniping from behind a safe mask of anonymity? While this article is fairly tempered and careful, there are other so-called “professional” anonymous interpreters who are little more than “trolls”, and Limping Chicken is feeding that tendency. If you’re going to go off-piste in the name of professionalism, at least have the common decency to put your name on it.
Editor
February 24, 2017
That’s one way of looking at it Matt, the other is that being anonymous enables people to say what they really think, without fear of jeopardising their career as a result.
I checked out the interpreter’s registration and background before agreeing to post the article. I don’t necessarily agree with her article but I did think it was an interesting viewpoint which would lead to further discussion, and that’s what this site is all about.
Thanks
Charlie
Matt Brown
February 24, 2017
Well, you just outed them as female. That’s another advantage to honesty – no leaks possible.
It’s still grossly unprofessional in my view and you should think twice before enabling it.
Editor
February 24, 2017
Well I guess that narrows your field by 50% – if indeed they are female.
Thanks for your view, you’re entitled to it.
I don’t think there was anything nasty about his article, it is a valid point of view and in a sense, your reaction to it shows that he or she or it was probably right to be cautious about identifying themselves.
Matt Brown
February 24, 2017
Nonsense. In fact I’d have got in touch with them as I mostly agree. We need more role models speaking out. Not trolls and vipers.
Editor
February 24, 2017
You used the word ‘sniping’ to describe their post though Matt?
Matt Brown
February 24, 2017
So?
Who am I even talking to?
Editor
February 24, 2017
I’m the Editor, Charlie Swinbourne. A he not a she – if that narrows it down.
Matt Brown
February 24, 2017
Thank you for that basic courtesy. Incidentally about 8 in 9 interpreters are female, not 50% – assuming they really are an interpreter and not someone completely made up – so it helps us even less, but nonetheless you did compromise their total anonymity, ever so slightly. Wouldn’t have happened if they’d put a name to their opinions in the first place.
I have to ask, what kind of world would it be where expressing an honest, considered, tempered opinion would open people up to attack, to “jeapordising their career” as you put it? What would that say about the profession as a whole? If what you have to say is honest and well-judged, who do you have to fear except scoundrels? Many other people in other professions have expressed the exact same feeling – doctors spring to mind. I can even Google it for you if you like.
We are in desperate need of authentic critical voices. Real voices of real people with names attached. It’s very simple – it’s called integrity. Part of that Code of Conduct or Ethics malarchy we all sign up to. No false advertising etc. etc. “Ensure that you uphold the best qualities of the profession at all times”. I don’t think Twitter trolling is what Hippocrates had in mind.
And yes, sniping, even though I actually agree with most of the sentiments expressed in this piece. As I say, that just makes it more disappointing, not less. If you want the actual lecture on semantics, the relevant dictionary definition of “to snipe” in this case is “to shoot at somebody from a hiding place”. Isn’t that what this is – a hiding place? It’s literally a matter of privilege, is it not? Being able to say whatever the hell you like with no fear of any lasting consequences, because someone has given you a platform to criticise others without anybody knowing that you are what you say you are. Having all the benefits of having a pop at something you don’t like without having to suffer a single negative consequence. How comfortable.
A wasted opportunity and a slippery slope. Try for better. Please.
Editor
February 24, 2017
I think you’re naive to think that an interpreter could be public about this kind of article without finding that attitudes towards them from some other interpreters would be changed for the rest of their working lives.
This would be a hindrance when co-working with other interpreters and in many other situations.
As for saying whatever they like, that’s not quite the case here. They couldn’t write whatever they liked because I would only post an article if I felt it had merit and was worthy of discussion. I’ve posted many articles I didn’t agree with, as well as those I do, because I think some views should be shared.
I would also add that as well as accepting some anonymous articles over the last five years, I have rejected a great many, it’s not the case that they all get waved through.
Those that have been rejected have in many cases been personal attacks on individuals. In many of those cases I really do believe it is unfair for the writer to be anonymous.
In this case however, the interpreter was writing broadly about how they felt about their profession. Being anonymous wasn’t about hiding but rather, not seriously harming their career.
If there are interpreters out there willing to be named and who want to say what they really think, naturally I would read what they have to say and consider it, but that has happened quite rarely so far – perhaps for the very same reason that this poster wanted to be anonymous. Fear and caution, due to the possible damage to their career.
Matt Brown
February 24, 2017
This incredibly mild piece was going to “seriously harm their career”? And *I’m* naive?
This kind of nonsense all started with that “anonymous interpreters” site, the one that eventually got threatened with legal action for their incredibly ill-advised “mystery shopper” activities. They were found out, and it was all the worse for being found out. Why those people were not struck off the NRCPD register says volumes about the inadequacies of that register. There’s another “anonymous interpreter” knocking around now on social media. They have the same sort of justifications, that they *have* to hide their name because when they say stupid, hurtful, unprofessional things to people face-to-face, they surprisingly get called out on it. What a mystery.
So which is it – are you filtering out the poison or not?
Editor
February 24, 2017
Yes I think you are being naive over this issue Matt, but that’s my view and you have a right to hold a view that differs.
The idea that an interpreter could write all about a view not shared by many of their peers and things carry on completely as normal, that’s just not realistic.
I’m not saying all other interpreters would react negatively to that person, but some would, and that would have an effect on their career.
Filtering out the poison… what’s your question exactly?
I agreed to publish this article, the other things you’ve spoken about aren’t things I’ve been involved in.
Not really sure what your final question was there, perhaps you could make it a bit clearer.
Matt Brown
February 24, 2017
Perhaps something worth saying is worth having an effect. No, you weren’t involved in Anonymous Interpreters, but this is a watered-down version of the same thing.
You said you don’t publish anonymous pieces that are “unfair”. But you do publish the ones which you think are click-worthy. The slightly titillating ones, no? The ones which make just enough of a ripple. You allow people to be just that tiny bit controversial without actually getting nasty, but you enable them to do it from behind a mask. Is that a value you want us to aspire to?
Editor
February 24, 2017
What I said specifically Matt was that regarding some of the articles I’ve been sent, I felt it would be (in my view) unfair for someone to attack an individual anonymously.
However when people are talking more generally about issues on a broader scale I feel in some situations that there is merit in posting an article that can lead to wider awareness of an issue or give a different viewpoint on an issue than the commonly known view, such as in this case.
I’m actually not very aware of Anonymous Interpreters at all, I’m not sure if I missed something or if I’ve forgotten but that’s not even something that’s been on my radar as far as I know (although I have been very busy so it’s possible I’ve forgotten).
In the latter part of your comment you are implying that I’m cynically posting articles in order to gain more clicks or attention for the site.
Naturally, as the Editor of the site I do want to post articles that people want to read and that have some impact or effect out there but I would hope and believe that most of this site’s readers know that I’m not cynically just trying to get clicks, based on how the site has been run for the last five years. As ever, people will have their own opinions.
My sense as this conversation continues is that it is becoming more of an attack on me and more broadly the site.
I’ve engaged with you this far but this is the end of this conversation and further comments from you on this thread will not be approved, because I really think we have covered enough ground now. You’ve said what you think, I’ve said what I think, and we clearly disagree. It’s up to people out there reading this (if anyone is) to decide what they think.
With thanks for sharing your viewpoint (even if I don’t agree),
Charlie
The Anonymous One
February 26, 2017
Hi Matt – I’d like to address your posts if I may. It is incredibly sad that I felt I needed to hide behind the anonymity that I asked for and the Limping Chicken kindly agreed to. I, like you, believe that if you have an opinion and you feel it’s justified then you should be prepared to put your name to it, however, and here’s the issue, I was being naive and I think, in this instance, that perhaps you are too.
I have long held this view and it wasn’t until I was mentioning my thoughts to some other interpreters that I realised the depth of feeling (mostly negative) out there. On further discussion with deaf colleagues it was they that suggested I should be anonymous given the damage it could or would do to my career. I decided to heed their advice and request that the article be published anonymously.
As you’ve seen from some of the responses many people felt threatened by my suggestion and I did not want this to harm my career but I felt that it was worthy of discussion. I believe from reading your blog, which I mostly agree with and think is great, that you are not in a position whereby the majority of your work comes through agencies. Sadly, for those of us who are there is a fine line to walk and it is an uncomfortable one. I could have simply said nothing but I hoped that by saying something however mild, it might provoke discussion and debate that may be constructive.
You say more role models who are prepared to speak out are needed but given the size of the community and ‘profession’ it’s not always feasible or advisable to do so.
Olga
March 3, 2017
Just out of curiosity, how much do agencies charge the NHS and how many hours minimum booking time do they have. I can see it being worth my while to travel somewhere ( I consider travel time as work time) for an hour there and hour back for an hour worth of interpreting only to get paid for an hour where to me I have been away from the comfort of my leisure for 3 hours. If you private self employed are invoicing around £30-35 and hour, how much are agencies charging the NHS?