Renata Atkins – Written evidence (ITS0071)
Current level of Interpreting and Translation Services in terms of the TheBigWord (further as “Contractor”) point of view is inadequate, nothing short of shambolic. It does not meet the needs of the stakeholders of the Justice system, and if yes, this is in very limited number of overall cases. The issue is extensively problematic and cannot be resolved in one government inquiry. This calls for more robust investigation.
Exploitative rates paid to highly qualified professional interpreters (specialised in UK or Scottish law) resulted in many leaving the profession over the years. Those few who remained take fewer assignments than there are actually generated, due to poor Terms and Conditions imposed, causing delays and causing miscarriages of justice. The Contractor then reaches out to subcontract the assignments further to other agencies, such as Prestige Network, UKLST or Debonaire Languages (now bankrupt interpreting agency owing countless interpreters thousands of pounds) and the likes, who have even fewer registered qualified interpreters on their books and therefore assign the jobs to unqualified interpreters who are willing to work for pittance. “Unqualified interpreter” is an interpreter with qualifications that are lower than Level 6 HND or Undergraduate Degree in Interpreting and Translation in given language pair. Unqualified interpreters do not have the language and practical skills to convey the message accurately without errors, causing misinterpretation, change of evidence, in effect, obstructing the fair hearing/trial, putting lives in jeopardy. At loss are mainly the defendants, witnesses, legal representatives and court staff, judges, members of the jury and ultimately the tax payer, as the government treasury has covered the costs of the hearing and the next hearing.
I had stopped counting occasions when I turned up at my local courts (Sheffield Magistrate’s Court o Sheffield Crown Court) to be told by the defendant that their case has been adjourned more than two times due to lack of interpreters. Whilst I had to take whatever was available and filled up my diary in advance so that I could secure a mere income, in comparison to income I received in 2008 when I initially started my career as a court and police interpreter.
In simplest terms, the profession has become in the UK as a sweatshop and it is a race to the bottom introduced by the government officials, decision makers who initially introduced the idea of outsourcing the Interpreting Services to profit-seeking intermediaries. This sweatshop is now being ran by the current Contractor and will continue to be ran by next one if the outsourcing is be a preferred mode of MOJ to manage the Interpreting Services.
I have joined this profession in 2008. At that time, I was fully aware about the standard rates which were mutually acceptable and fixed at £85 per 3 hour Interpreting session, this would cover 10am to 1pm hearings or 2pm to 5pm hearings. I attended and stayed till 1pm and assisted for more than 1 defendant if there happened to be more cases listed for that morning. This meant the cases did not have to be adjourned to a later date. I received travel cost remuneration of £15 per hour and 25p per mile calculated from my home address, parking costs were also reimbursed. Earliest records for these rates, I have been able to access, were from 2005. The booking was done by a court staff member from the listings office, who knew the court building, area, the case details and the charge. They were able to provide me with information necessary to prepare myself for the session. The payment was processed swiftly and if there were any discrepancies with the payments, I was able to communicate with the person from the court who processed my Interpreter Claim Form. For one session I was able to earn in the range £90-£100 for a local court just for turning up. Regardless how long I was needed for.
In 2011 the services were outsourced to Applied Language Solutions (ALS) at which point I boycotted the contract as it was introducing up to 70% income cut!!! The National Agreement has been thrown out of the picture and hourly rates were set in at extortionate level. I was contacted by the ALS on numerous occasions, last time being told that without registering with them I will have not be able to interpret in court. Which actually happened. It was only in 2017, when I decided to register with the current Contractor, as they were the ones contracted by MOJ at the time. This was due to the local police force choosing the same path of outsourcing the Interpreting Services to a profit-seeking agency that has taken a lion share of my income stream and I was left to scramble left right and centre.
Current payment terms with the Contractor are still at extremely low rates, in comparison to other highly qualified professions. Current pay is only at hourly rate £20 or £26 per hour (previously £18 and £24) only 1 hour guaranteed payment for multiple hour bookings. No travel time and something short of 20p per mile. Considering there was 25p per mile 19 years ago when the cost of fuel was so much lower, we would expect the fuel reimbursement to be at 45p if not 65p per mile. Some sessions offered are at various locations across the UK which were readily filled prior to outsourcing, because the professional interpreter was adequately remunerated for the travel costs. Currently, I have to calculate whether it would be viable for me to travel to a remote area to have enough money to cover my bills and that I do not run under the minimum wage threshold. For example, what I would get for a (3hr) session in Bradford Magistrate’s Court in 2008 would be £138.50 regardless of how long I stayed in court. As per current Contractor’s Terms and Conditions, I get a guaranteed payment of £60.52, this is if I get booked to attend for 3 hrs only one is guaranteed. Should the session be cancelled whilst on the way to the court, I would get only £50.00. Also previously, multiple day trials were successfully met by virtue of honouring the booking time and days as per National Agreement. Unfortunately, with the Contractor it is not so. The bookings are not transparent, sessions are now only offered via the app. Except for the location, the duration and payment offer, there is no further information on the case provided. The process of the booking and payment is very impersonal and unfair. I have learned this on my first multiple day trial booking since registering with them. On 13th of November 2018 I accepted a booking for a two day trial in Stoke-on-Trent, agreed through the agent to provide me with additional £60 towards the travel. The booking was two days between 9.30 am till 5.30pm. The trial was concluded on day 1 at 11am. I only got paid for 1.5 hrs for the 13th of November and £0.00 for the 14th of November as this was recorded as a separate booking and cancelled a day before the session, I received no cancellation fee. I ended up earning to cover the cost of travel to the venue and the time I spent travelling. I was so upset by the whole situation and felt quite frankly cheated by the agency that I swore to myself, that I will never accept distance assignments and no more trials. I believe I am not the only interpreter who “suffered” such a blow to professional dignity.
Not at all. I regularly see an interpreter, especially in the family court, whom I have failed on two occasions, as a language assessor.
This should be a matter of picking the telephone by a court staff member (listings office) and dialling the number of an interpreter of the required language. No middle-man needed.
Technology should always be the facilitator of communication between individuals and groups, not the obstruction. Current experience is that the technologies used, in particular the WordSync app, has been the biggest downfall and barrier to communication and transparency.
1 October 2024