The National Union of British Sign Language Interpreters (NUBSLI) has expressed concern that video relay services (VRS) may become the ‘new’ normal for interpreters and deaf people after the coronavirus pandemic.
Their new campaign, called #RightsReclaim, comes as the union was made aware of agencies planning to move half of their service onto VRS in the long term, after the current health crisis.
NUBSLI Branch Secretary Samantha Riddle told The Limping Chicken: “We have to be realistic because society has changed. More work is happening online.
“That’s fine if it’s appropriate. We’re not saying online interpreting is bad; we’re saying online interpreting has to be appropriate.
“The interpreter has to be paid a fair wage. Importantly, the person using the interpreter has to agree and has to choose – it has to be their choice, rather than something imposed on deaf people.”
Samantha continued to warn of a “big risk” of language agencies, including those from America, “monopolising” the UK’s interpreting service by driving down standards in an effort offer the cheapest service.
She added that she feels it is people’s responsibility to challenge such a move.
“We’ve known about this for a long time – the system is broken. What’s happening now is only highlighting its failings.
“We need to reimagine interpreting provision. What do we replace it with that meets everybody’s needs, that means that the profession is sustainable and that deaf people have a high quality service, but also hearing people?
“We need to make sure the interpreting is improved for everyone involved,” she said.
What could a BSL cooperative have done differently through Covid? #PlatformCoop #UserWorkerOwned #COVID19 #Deaf pic.twitter.com/N5RWg7kJIZ
— Signalise (@SignaliseCoop) August 24, 2020
Criticism of the current system has also come from Signalise, a co-operative which aims to “revolutionise” the booking of interpreters by creating “an online system designed by its users”.
A statement on their website reads: “The current procurement model is failing. It has led to a decline in quality and poor access for the Deaf community and interpreters.
“Agencies who are awarded contracts by government often have no knowledge or understanding of the Deaf community or its needs, cannot provide a service and interpreters do not like to work for them.
“A co-operative model where members have a vested interest will drive up standards and can offer social benefits to the Deaf and interpreting communities, as well as offer services who need to book interpreters a better standard and value for money,” it says.
Last month, over £8,000 was raised in a crowdfunder to set up the co-operative, with Labour MPs John McDonnell and Nadia Whittome lending their vocal support.
When asked what NUBSLI made of the organisation’s approach, Samantha said: “Cooperatives such as Signalise offer an alternative to the huge multi-lingual agencies commoditising sign language interpreting, as well as being an example of interpreters and deaf people coming together – creating a co-designed service with the purpose of providing access, rather than generating profit for shareholders.
“Cooperatives on a national level, or a network of cooperatives, are possible solutions to the current threat we’re experiencing, however we need an immediate response to fight back against agencies capitalising on the pandemic.
“That’s why we’re asking everyone who wants fair and high quality interpreting to support our campaign,” she said.
Following the release of an open letter at the start of the month, NUBSLI now aim to educate hearing-led unions about interpreting as part of the #RightsReclaim campaign.
In January, the union will send its open letter to agencies, and meet with its members to create a manifesto with aims for the campaign going forward.
Samantha added: “This campaign is about protecting everyone’s rights – deaf peoples’ right to access and to remain safe, and interpreters’ rights to be treated fairly as workers and professionals.
“We hope that deaf communities and all users of interpreting services will help us by supporting the campaign, as it is only by working together that will we protect and reclaim our rights.”
People interested in supporting the campaign are encouraged to sign the open letter, and email Samantha at Branch-secretary@nubsli.com.
By Liam O’Dell. Liam is a mildly deaf freelance journalist and campaigner from Bedfordshire. He wears bilateral hearing aids and can be found talking about disability, theatre, politics and more on Twitter and on his website.
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
Hartmut
November 23, 2020
Is NUBSLI equivalent to the US national organization of Sign Language Interpreters? How many members out of currently SL interpreters does it have?
Liam seems to be confused between VRS (video relay service) and VRI (video remote interpreting).
VRS is constrained to the telephonic interpretation between a sign language user and a hearing person. VRS is legally funded by a law of the US Congress which levies a small surcharge on every landline and mobile telephone bill, currently about 50 cents, The surcharge also funds Telephone Relay Service (TRS) for those who relies on the speech to written communication, as well as for respeaking services for those cerebral palsied persons whose speech is incomprehensible to the public. The surcharge is administered by the Federal Commission of Communication (FCC). There is a handful of companes in contract with FCC in heated competition. It does NOT provide, nor is allowed to provide interpreting service between a hearing and deaf person in a face-to-face meetings, group meetings that involve a deaf member. I use the VRS to order a pizza or make a medical appointment, or call a customer support service on my computer or make inquiries on an automobile insurance, or even chat with my relatives in Germany, of course in English. Translating services between two spoken languages are generally not permitted, except in rare circumstances between Deaf persons conversing in ASL and his monolingually Spanish speaking relatives, for which some VRS outfits have tri-lingal interpreters parat. Also for French speakers in bordering Vermont and Maine portions to Quebec. I can call my family in Germany via VRS when I know they can understand English and the interpreter can handle broken English with heavy accent. My interpreter hearing wife has done this sometimes.
The VRI on the other hand is done entirely over the Ineternet and are paid by the service providers, not by the deaf consumers. It only concerns face-to-face encounters between hearing providers and deaf consumers. It is entirely within the business world, outside of government. The VRI business is operated by cooperatives of independent interpreters. For example, the financial adviser of my investment company uses a VRI to discuss my of investment portfolio. The investment company pays a VRI company at a per minute rate, a couple of dollars per minute. I work as a Deaf Iterpreter in medical situations. The doctor’s practice uses the VRI who serves as my team to conduct communication between the medical practitioers and deaf patient. For the individual doctor it is just a business expense. But when I wanted to discuss with my doctor about the symptoms, I use a VRS, because this goes usually per phone. Some VRI outfits also provides translation services between two spoken languages.
In short, VRS enables communication with hearing people over the phone, while VRI provides communication access to and from hearing people on site.
Of course, both VRS and VRI operations must provide interpreters of high calibre. In my experience that has happened in most cases in my uses of their services.
But lately sadly, the procurement of interpreting services has been polluted by interpreting agencies specialising in mediating between spoken languages. They bid to governments and large corporations, and then try to recruit sign language interpreters, because they could charge higher fees than usually for spoken language interpreters and pay them less. They have not given back their profits to the Deaf Community in comparison to cooperatives of sign language interpreters who often helps funding national and international deaf.conferences.
I hope Signalise is not of this corrupt nature. The video is quite impressive to render trust, but remain on the guard.
MW
November 23, 2020
Dear NUBSLI,
Without Prejudice
Thank you for campaigning on behalf of d/Deaf people on the rights to good quality service and to ensure that d/Deaf people’s voices are part of the procurement process currently lacking in their co-productive manner- mainly able-led agencies (possible using d/Deaf people within as a tokenistic input) and also deaf org able – led too! It is the agency fees that are exorbitant and not the interpreter fees. I am a great believer in the booking of my own interpreter directly. I do hope one day that the Personal Health Budget (PHB) enables me to do so but this is currently not available to me because I do not see anyone canvassing on this matter. I have tried and it was proving to be very top heavy bureaucracy.
I wish to share with you my personal struggle for access to a sign language interpreter (I use this word because I am not a BSL user and I am different from the norm using a sign language interpreter, nevertheless I still have needs). I feel that I am neglected with not having a choice to which interpreter I wish to have working with me. I.e. I am a male and I require a male interpreter and I need this in medical settings. I also want the same named interpreter for ALL medical settings. I continue to fight for this right with ALL NHS providers in my locality and it often affects my mental well-being, trying to keep sane dealing with people who are ignorant or choose not to work with my needs. I have a sense of being stigmatised and I am classed as a difficult client because I dared to make formal complaints. The NHS are notoriously bad in the management of complaints (no agenda, no minutes and no formal expected outcome/resolution are written) and often they make long delays and refused to abide by the NHS guidance in communicating with d/Deaf people. I have an outstanding complaint that has been on their desk for 2 years and I have still not received a resolution. Currently, I am getting my own named interpreter but the problem is trying to get the interpreter to fit into the appointment system and it is often a nightmare and more so has delayed my appointments. This is because AIS (Accessible Information Standard) has failed in their database system to ensure that when making an appointment an interpreter is checked out for availability but because it goes through third party communication (Agencies) this breaks down. I often have to step in and sort it out.
I still insist using a “live” interpreter rather than VRS system. However during the pandemic I was fortunate to use Zoom and MIcrosoft Team to communicate with my consultant and GP – my GP however is bounded by CCG and had to use a Sign Health Interpreter now VRS system Interpreter (bearing in mind it is free to CCG because the charity is paying for it and that is not good). I challenged my GP to allow me to access using Microsoft Team and it was successful but only with me. I will not use VRS with my GP appointment.
Clinical Commissioning Service in Camden are now consulting with d/Deaf service users how they wish to procure the service. Sadly the way this is carried out is unfortunate. The decision has already been made at the back door citing cost as their main concern and they wish to go down the VRS system. They present the case to d/Deaf service users in just under 2 hours without giving out the papers in advance and many d/Deaf people in my area did not understand clearly what was happening because there is a lack of d/Deaf peer support. As the previous Vice Chair at CCG once said to me “to put disability into the strategy is expensive.” A complaint was made but it was buried in a denial of this inappropriateness and behaviour. I felt disempowered and angry.
I have reservations as to how the consultation took place and in the manner how it was controlled. I am disempowered to challenged them. I do find them to be “hands off” and “we know best”..
Now that we are in a stage using Microsoft Team and Zoom I have found these to be much better services than the current services like Sign Video, Interpreter Now and Interpreter Live.
I like to explain why and I hope I don’t give cause to offend those agencies but they do need to modernise their services. Currently using the VRS system I can only see the interpreter and not the person to whom I am speaking and they too will not see me.- this I feel makes me more vulnerable. Some interpreters are good and some are poor and lazy and the work they do on the VRS system is not effectively vetted. I had a very bad experience using NHS 111 and I will never use it again. It is not a reliable and safe service in comparison to using Microsoft Team or Zoom.
I have signed the letter in support.
What would be useful and more engaging if Signalise and NUBSLI do try and set up a Zoom conference where all d/Deaf people with different forms of communication needs are given the chance to be parts of this development/campaigning in the making their contribution, their thoughts and life experience, with suggestion as part of evidence gathering. It would also be good to have BSL interpreter as well as speech to text (transcript). It needs to be an integrated and inclusive service designed for All d/Deaf people and it should not be “one size fit all”. We have different form of coping strategy and this needs to be respected since we are also part of “Deaf Culture” and some of us have been robbed of this during their childhood.
I am also like you concerned in how our government agencies and NHS trust are not being truthful in all this including the agencies having a vested interest at being at the front line and we are sidelined as a matter of inconvenience.
I could go on but I think my email is very long winded and my apology.
Do keep up the good fight and good luck.