Insight: Why do some interpreters charge 3 hours for a 10 minute appointment? (BSL)

As a BSL user I have an Access to Work agreement in place for an interpreter to support me in my workplace. I use an interpreter for varied jobs such as interpreting meetings, making phone calls, translating heavy English text and relaying instructions in team briefings.

We all know how difficult it can be to obtain an agreement with Access to Work and how strict they can be at making use of the hours awarded. They also ask me for regular reports as to how I’m using the hours and if they’re being utilised well.

This is why I have an issue with interpreters overcharging me for hours that they have not worked with me.

For example, once when texting an interpreter to arrange a remote video call at the end of the working day that lasted under 15 minutes, I was issued an invoice that charged me for three whole hours of work.

This booking took three hours out of my 15 hour a week agreement.

I normally do try to “work smart” with my interpreters and by this I mean utilising them well, booking them for whole mornings or afternoons and arranging meetings and phone calls around the times that they are with me.

But last minute requests do fly in and calls can be requested after 5pm too, which I am told certain interpreters will charge a time and half for because it’s “out of hours.”

All of these varying terms and rates are costing me valuable time from my Access to Work agreement and after chatting to other deaf friends I have discovered that I am not alone.

A deaf colleague told me how she once cancelled an interpreter because a meeting was called off. This interpreter then knowingly went to another job and was therefore paid twice for the same hour – whilst claiming six hours in total.

You could say business is business, but how is this ethical?

Another friend booked an interpreter clearly stating it was a very short job – only ten minutes maximum, only to be told the interpreter would still be charging a half day rate, regardless of the fact no travel was involved.

Interpreters will say it’s down to travel time, not being able to book other work, preparation time or translation and I appreciate the times that these reasons are all very valid.

I also understand the need to have fixed rates. But is there no space for negotiation or reasonable agreements between a client and interpreter?

Interpreters who work at Universities for example, translating lectures, often have to spend extra time preparing and researching, understanding jargon and terminology.

Also if there are last minute requests for interpreters to travel across the country for an urgent one hour job – it is understandable that they would charge a half day or full day if the job is so far away.

But charging three hours for a remote call from the comfort of your home that doesn’t even take 15 minutes – how can you justify this rate?

An interpreter once said their high rates were valid because of the high cost they spent training and gaining qualifications. Whilst I don’t dispute this, I know several professionals in other fields of work who charge equally high rates but wouldn’t ask to be reimbursed for time that they didn’t work.

I have found that some interpreters are happy to agree on a fixed rate for regular short duration jobs, yet others will not get out of bed for less than a full days rate.

When there is a national shortage of interpreters and deaf employees are working hard to keep and justify their Access to Work agreement – what more can be done?

How can interpreters say they have the deaf community’s interests at heart when they do as much as they can to squeeze as much out of our access agreements whilst doing the bare minimum or double charging.

Most interpreters are hard working and genuine people who I’ve been so grateful to work with, but there are still the odd cases as explained above that make me question why some people really go into interpreting in the first place.

Friends in the deaf community often tease interpreting friends for being “rich” or “money grabbers” and whilst I know this is only jest, I do wonder where this stereotype comes from if not from real experience.

It does not ethically make sense to me for a professional to be paid twice for the same hour, or be paid six hours of work when only two were carried out.

I also do not find it fair that some interpreters can charge half day rates for remote work that lasts under an hour.

All of the disparity of interpreters terms and conditions and varying fees makes me question whether there is a way to make things fairer.

How do we call out bad practice? How do we praise those interpreters who are fair and reasonable and ensure they are put on top of the booking list?

Interpreting is a well paid job and no doubt this attracts people to the profession, but I do worry that for some people – not the majority but the few – they value this over the service they’re giving to the deaf clients that keep them in work in the first place.

This blog has been written anonymously as part of the Insight series – where readers are invited to share their story or news about their interesting job with The Limping Chicken. If you have a story to share please email rebecca@rawithey.com 

Image courtesy of i-stock photos.