Polish interpreters speak out against potential pay cut

http://www.hastingsobserver.co.uk/news/local-news/polish_interpreters_speak_out_against_potential_pay_cut_1_3240915

11 November 2011

Polish interpreters speak out against potential pay cut

TWO Polish interpreters who provide a vital service for courts, hospitals and councils say they face a bleak future after the Government changed the way they work.

Bartosz Orlik, 37, of West Hill, and Magdalena Zalesiak 29, from St Leonards, have been working across the south east for several years translating Polish into English.

But the way in which they receive their assignments has changed and they claim they face losing up to half their income.

Earlier this year Applied Language Solutions won the contract to provide interpreting services for the Ministry of Justice (MoJ).

The Oldham-based firm has agreed a five-year deal with the Ministry which has responsibilities for courts, prisons, the probation service, the Legal Aid system and employment tribunals.

It means organisations including police forces, the Crown Prosecution Service and probation trusts will be able to sign contracts under a framework agreement to deliver interpretation and translation services.

Before the contract was awarded, interpreters would be contacted by court managers or police officers asking them for their services. But from December they will have to go through ALS to find an appropriate interpreter.

Before the contract Bartosz and Magdalena were earning up to £30 per hour but under the new system the most they will earn is £22 per hour.

ALS says it will save the MoJ £60 million and cut administration and time costs for frontline workers across the justice sector.

Bartosz, who has been interpreting in the UK for three years, said: “The Ministry is saving money but at what cost?

“We would get less pay and I would be unable to survive and I feel the quality of the interpreter may also drop.

“I have a mortgage and bills to pay and I just can’t afford to lose this amount of money. I may have to return to Poland and a lot of interpreters are in the same situation.”

Magdalena, who has a degree in English Language said: “Under the new rules, I will not be earning enough to support myself and my concern is that after I have spent considerable time and up to £10,000 in course, exam and professional membership fees to become an interpreter, I may now have to retrain and look for any work available to make a living.

“My fees for a one-hour assignment may be equal to the cost of me travelling to the venue and therefore I will not be making any profit.”

The Society for Public Services Interpreters said none of its members had joined ALS and it intended to make a legal challenge to the framework of the MoJ agreement.

Ireland: Judge hits out at interpreters’ service

http://www.longfordleader.ie/news/local/judge_hits_out_at_interpreters_service_1_3229772

9 November 2011

Judge hits out at interpreters’ service

During a district court sitting in Longford recently, Judge Seamus Hughes directed that a manager at Lionbridge – the company which provides the courts with interpretation services - attend one of his courts “as soon as possible” to enable him to address what he believes is “a serious decline” in the service being provided by the company.

The judge’s order was made after a case involving a foreign man who was being assisted by a female interpreter from the company.

Oral questions - House of Lords

http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld201011/ldhansrd/text/111101-0001.htm#11110170001449

House of Lords

Tuesday, 1 November 2011

Legal System: Translation and Interpreting Services

Question

Asked By Baroness Coussins

To ask Her Majesty's Government what assessment they have made of the provision of translation and interpreting services for the legal system in the United Kingdom.

Baroness Coussins: My Lords, I beg leave to ask the Question standing in my name on the Order Paper, and I declare interests as chair of the All-Party Parliamentary Group on Modern Languages and honorary fellow of the Chartered Institute of Linguists.

The Minister of State, Ministry of Justice (Lord McNally): My Lords, the Ministry of Justice has been looking at this matter for some time and has identified a number of issues that call for change. They include the limited number of linguists available for use, an inefficient and costly booking process, and concerns over the quality of service and complaint investigation. The ministry has therefore announced that it will be moving to a framework agreement with a single supplier. We anticipate that this will resolve current problems while saving the taxpayer at least £18 million a year on current spending.

Baroness Coussins: I thank the Minister for his reply, but would he be prepared to review the framework contract in the light of an independent study commissioned by the Association of Police and Court Interpreters, which predicts that the new arrangement is unsustainable and, far from saving £18 million a year, could end up costing £200 million a year? Secondly, is the Minister aware that more than half the existing number of qualified interpreters have refused to sign up with the new single supplier and take very substantial pay cuts, and that this situation could well result in the employment of less competent interpreters, to the detriment of witnesses, defendants and victims?

Lord McNally: No, we will not review the framework or the agreement that we have made. We have looked at the report-which, in any lobbying exercise, is quite legitimate-and examined the figures in it, but we do not believe that they stand up. We have always been clear that translation and interpretation services of the appropriate quality should be available, where they are required, for all those who come into contact with the justice system, while obtaining value for money for the public. Let us see how it settles. There are many threats and ideas that people are not going to sign up or that it will not work out. Obviously the noble Baroness is far more expert than me on this issue, but there is no doubt that the present system was not working, which is why the previous Administration initiated the inquiry, which has now culminated in this decision, as far back as 2009.

Lord Avebury: My Lords, in designing the new system, why was it decided to ignore existing professional qualifications and to sideline the National Register of Public Service Interpreters, with its established system of registration that requires not only an appropriate degree-level qualification but 400 hours of proven public service interpreting? Does my noble friend think that it is fair to make experienced and qualified interpreters and translators go through the hoops and pay for a new accreditation procedure that assumes that they have just come out of the sixth form?

Lord McNally: My Lords, we are not doing this for fun. We are doing it because the present accreditation system was not working and there was a lot wrong with it. That is why we set up a new register. There were faults in the old register in the quality of assessment and we believe that, starting as we are with a new system, a new register is the most effective way of guaranteeing quality.

Lord Kinnock: My Lords, no one is arguing for simple maintenance of the status quo. When over half of the qualified people in this profession have made it clear that they are unwilling to register with a new body under the new framework because it implies cuts of up to 70 per cent of their incomes, does the Minister not think that the Government are taking a huge risk by pursuing this course without further review and that it will result in loss of quality, compromise justice-which is worst of all-and could end up ultimately, as the professionals warn, costing much more and not reducing costs?

More here: http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld201011/ldhansrd/text/111101-0001.htm#11110170001449

Finding a voice

http://m.publicservice.co.uk/article.asp?publication=Central%20Government&id=529&content_name=Overview&article=17946

01 November 2011

Finding a voice

Asylum seekers' prospects and even their lives are put at risk by a lack of translation support, argues Arnaud Vervoitte, Senior Operations Manager of the Refugee Council

Language can be a significant barrier for asylum seekers and refugees who have recently arrived in the UK as they attempt to navigate a complex asylum system. But a crisis in interpreting and translation services is making it even harder for them to settle into their new environment.

Many asylum seekers and refugees will have fled their countries at short notice, and will have little prior knowledge of the English language. The countries from which the largest numbers come include Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan and Eritrea – none of which count English as a first language. At the Refugee Council, we have long recognised the need to provide for the many languages our clients speak in order to give them the support they need – with our Own Language Telephone Advice Service, multilingual website and publications, and team of interpreters, we are able to offer advice in languages including Farsi, Pashto, Arabic, Kurdish and Mandarin.

Outside of the Refugee Council, for legal and asylum matters to date, the Ministry of Justice has been responsible for providing translation and interpretation services, and requires qualified interpreters to sign up with the Register of Public Service Interpreters (RPSI). But the Ministry of Justice is proposing to outsource these services to a private company, which will render the RPSI defunct – potentially lowering the quality of language services provided.

This could potentially have very serious consequences for asylum seekers. The Home Office is making life or death decisions on asylum cases – if asylum seekers are not supported properly to explain why they need protection here using high-quality interpreters, they could face being returned to countries where their lives are at risk.

There is also clearly already a shortage of interpreters to meet the demand, and cutting the service further will cause people to have to wait for their cases to be heard. We know from working with asylum seekers every day that courts often postpone hearings for weeks in order for people who speak the same language to attend on the same day. More shockingly, we also know of appellants being pressurised into accepting the proceedings to be conducted in English in the absence of an interpreter, which can, of course, detrimentally affect the outcome of the proceedings. This is due to both the shortage of people specialised in this area and to save on interpreter costs. This will no doubt worsen as the justice system is forced to squeeze budgets further.

As well as asylum and legal matters, asylum seekers and refugees rely on interpretation in order to access public services to meet their basic needs and to aid their integration into society: from GPs and housing providers to children's services.

Mental health services are a particular issue.

Evidence suggests refugees and asylum seekers experience a higher incidence of mental distress than the wider population, due to the traumatic experiences they have faced. Last year, the charity Mind published a report that identified language as a key obstacle for this group in accessing mental health services. Dispersal areas, such as Norfolk, which are not traditionally diverse, find it particularly difficult to source interpreters. Asylum seekers are often still relying on family – in some instances, their own children – and community members to interpret for them, which compromises their confidentiality and can put service users and the people interpreting for them in very uncomfortable or inappropriate situations. It is clear that the situation is already critical. In a year when David Cameron has called for immigrants, including refugees, to make more of an effort to integrate into society, the government is making it extremely difficult for people to access the services they need in order to do that. There must be more investment into translation and interpreting services to ensure that those seeking safety in the UK can not only get the protection and help they need, but also play their part in our society.

Union fighting local firm’s interpreter deal

http://www.oldham-chronicle.co.uk/news-features/8/news-headlines/62302/union-fighting-local-firms-interpreter-deal

21 October 2011

Union fighting local firm’s interpreter deal

A Union is campaigning to stop a Government deal with a Delph firm, calling it “the privatisation of legal interpreting services”.

Earlier this year Applied Language Solutions (ALS) was awarded a government contract to provide translation services for the police and courts. But Unite, which includes the National Union of Professional Interpreters and Translators (NUPIT), yesterday launched the Speak Up, Speak Out campaign at the House of Commons to call for it to be reconsidered.

Regional officer Andrew Murray said: “We fear that this is the classic cocktail of privatisation — an inferior service for vulnerable people seeking legal redress who don’t have the necessary skills in English; and a lessening of the terms and conditions for the interpreting workforce.

“We are concerned that when this agency takes over, some people will be given a second-class service because this agency will not be able to provide enough interpreters of the required level of linguistic skill and competence.

“We feel it is wrong to introduce the profit motive into our justice system. Economies made by cutting interpreters’ pay will be used to finance the running of a commercial company and will not, therefore, bring the savings that justice secretary, Ken Clarke, is seeking.”

Unite is urging interpreters and translators to lobby their MPs, saying about 2,300 interpreters will be affected by the changes.

The Chronicle recently reported how the deal with the Ministry of Justice is expected to save £18 million a year and will allow justice organisations to make a booking request which will automatically allocate the nearest interpreter with the right language skills and experience, who is security-checked and approved to work within the justice sector for the particular assignment.

But in the Commons, Manchester Withington MP John Leech said ALS, set up and run by Gavin Wheeldon, a former “Dragons’ Den” contestant, was not suitable to offer the service and urged the Government to rethink its decision.

He argued there was strong evidence to suggest outsourcing led to a lesser quality of interpreting. He claimed only 1,000 public service interpreters had signed up to ALS, saying reluctance highlighted the level of opposition due to worse pay and conditions.

MOJ Outsourcing of Interpreting services – End of Day Adjournment Debate

http://johnleechmp.wordpress.com/2011/10/20/moj-outsourcing-of-interpretering-services-end-of-day-adjournment-debate/

20 October 2011

MOJ Outsourcing of Interpreting services – End of Day Adjournment Debate

In the last Parliament I secured a Westminster Hall Debate on plans by police forces in the North West to “outsource” their interpreting service to an agency. (By outsourcing I mean paying an agency to provide interpreters, rather than booking them direct.) There is a lot of evidence to show that such outsourcing led to a lowering of standards of interpreting, with lots of unqualified people being sent, instead of those with interpreting qualifications. The debate fell on deaf ears. Unfortunately the Government hasn’t learnt from the previous Government’s mistakes and now the Ministry of Justice has decided to put the provision of interpreting services into the hands of one company – Applied Language Solutions, who are one of a number of agencies that have come in for criticism in the past.

Last week I secured an “end of day of adjournment” and once again argued against outsourcing.

Continues: http://johnleechmp.wordpress.com/2011/10/20/moj-outsourcing-of-interpretering-services-end-of-day-adjournment-debate/

Stop interpreting in legal services being privatised, says Unite

http://www.unitetheunion.org/news__events/latest_news/stop_interpreting_in_legal_ser.aspx

18 October 2011

Stop interpreting in legal services being privatised, says Unite

Unite, the largest union in the country, is backing a campaign to stop the interpreting and translation services in the legal, police and probation arenas being privatised.

Unite, which embraces the National Union of Professional Interpreters and Translators (NUPIT), is launching the Speak Up, Speak Out campaign in Room 8 at the House of Commons on Thursday 20 October between 12pm-2pm.

Unite is concerned that the Ministry of Justice has signed an agreement with the agency, Applied Language Solutions (ALS), which will soon be supplying interpreters for courts and tribunals. The police and probation services are expected to follow.

Unite regional officer Andrew Murray said: ”We fear that this is the classic cocktail of privatisation – an inferior service for vulnerable people seeking legal redress who don’t have the necessary skills in English; and a lessening of the terms and conditions for the interpreting workforce.

”We are concerned that when this agency takes over, some people will be given a second-class service because this agency will not be able to provide enough interpreters of the required level of linguistic skill and competence.

”We feel it is wrong to introduce the profit motive into our justice system. Economies made by cutting interpreters’ pay will be used to finance the running of a commercial company and will not, therefore, bring the savings that justice secretary, Ken Clarke, is seeking.“

Unite wants the justice ministry to reverse this privatisation policy and is calling for the interpreters and translators to lobby their MPs. There are about 2,300 interpreters who will be affected by these changes.

 

Budget cuts for translators could threaten justice for crime victims

http://www.birminghampost.net/comment/letters-to-the-editor/2011/10/14/budget-cuts-for-translators-could-threaten-justice-for-crime-victims-65233-29590760/

Oct 14 2011

Budget cuts for translators could threaten justice for crime victims

Dear Editor,

I write on behalf of members of the Institute of Translation and Interpreting (ITI) in response to your article (West Midlands Police to cut £750k from budget for translators, Post September 8).

We are concerned about the quality of service that will be provided under the new arrangements. By slashing rates of pay to interpreters, effective and experienced professionals will no longer be able to afford to carry out this vital work in the public sector, and will seek to earn a better living in other sectors.

Potentially less qualified and experienced language speakers will take on the role in sometimes highly charged and significant police matters. We fear that justice may no longer be done for victims of crime and that court cases may be thrown out due to ineffective translation and a lower quality service, at a high cost to both the taxpayer and our society.

Removing reasonable reimbursement for travel and parking expenses alongside the cuts in rates of pay and minimum period of engagement means it will not be viable for experienced translators and interpreters to continue offering their professional and trusted services, for which they currently earn on average £15,700 per year, according to our current salary survey.

Professional interpreters and translators are required to work anti-social hours and be on call at any time of day or night to attend crime scenes, hospitals, courts and police facilities. Police forces and courts have been able to rely on high calibre professionals who are listed by the National Register of Public Service Interpreters (NRPSI) which independently verifies their credentials and qualifications.

The Ministry of Justice is now setting aside this established approach in favour of using a single private sector provider with its own performance standards. We believe they have made this choice purely on the basis of cost, without fully considering the need for professionalism and a high skill level and the overall impact on judicial processes. We are concerned the West Midlands Police force is not prepared to pay dedicated professionals even the modest fees they have received up to now to safeguard an effective and proven service, when the stakes are so high for our society and for victims, witnesses and criminal suspects.

We note that the Metropolitan Police Force has already opted out of the new arrangement, recognising the quality of work and value for money delivered by the trusted network of NRPSI approved professionals it has always used and prioritising the needs and rights of victims of crime and the general public.

We hope that West Midlands Police will follow their lead.

Nick Rosenthal

Chairman, ITI

Source: http://www.birminghampost.net/comment/letters-to-the-editor/2011/10/14/budget-cuts-for-translators-could-threaten-justice-for-crime-victims-65233-29590760/

The £60 million question

Interpreters

The £60 million question

Questions are finally being asked in parliament about the outsourcing of language interpreting in the justice sector to a single firm, Applied Language Solutions (Eyes passim).

As the Eye went to press, Lib Dem MP John Lech was preparing to question the contract in a late evening adjournment debate.

In a letter to former home secretary Alan Johnson, who wrote to the ministry on behalf of worried interpreters, justice secretary Kenneth Clarke described the selection of ALS as “robust and rigorous”. But interpreters continue to question whether a firm so tiny it took advantage of the small companies exemption to publish abbreviated accounts last year, is capable of handling a £60m national contract.

Private Eye, issue number 1299, page 31, 14th-27th October 2011.

PQ - 13th October 2011

http://www.theyworkforyou.com/wrans/?id=2011-10-13e.73782.h

13 Oct 2011

Translation Services

Justice

Sadiq Khan (Tooting, Labour)

To ask the Secretary of State for Justice

(1) what changes he proposes to the National Agreement on arrangements for the use of interpreters, translators and language service professionals in investigations and proceedings within the criminal justice system;

(2) what representations he has received from organisations and individuals involved in translation and interpretation on the decision to enter into a Commercial Framework Agreement for the provision of language services in the criminal justice system;

(3) which organisations were shortlisted for the Commercial Framework Agreement to deliver language services in the criminal justice system; and what the monetary value was of their respective tenders.

Crispin Blunt (Parliamentary Under Secretary of State (Prisons and Probation), Justice; Reigate, Conservative)

As I announced in a written ministerial statement I made to the House on 5 July 2011, Hansard, columns 86-87WS, we are reforming the delivery of interpretation and translation services across the justice sector. This will primarily affect England and Wales. A Languages Services Framework Agreement with a single supplier was signed by the Ministry of Justice (MoJ) on 24 August 2011. As a result, parts of the National Agreement will be dis-applied to organisations inside the MoJ framework.

The Ministry has received representations from a wide variety of individual interpreters, translators and their representative organisations throughout our consideration of this issue. We held a series of four roadshows, in autumn 2009 in London, Cardiff, Manchester and Newcastle, which sought attendees' views on the strengths and weaknesses of the current arrangements and how to bring about improvements. A general email address has been available since February 2010 to allow interested parties to submit views direct to the project team and ask questions.

In August 2010 various interested parties were notified of the Government's intention to embark upon a procurement process and there were meetings with some of those interested parties, including interpreters' and translators' representative bodies. The Ministry sought views on our specific proposals as they had emerged from the competitive dialogue process, which was undertaken between 30 March 2011 and 4 May 2011. We continue to receive, consider and respond to correspondence from interested parties and groups.

The procurement exercise for the Language Services Framework Agreement was undertaken via a competitive dialogue process. There were several stages to this process:

(A) A Pre-qualification Questionnaire;

(B) Invitation to submit an Outline Solution;

(C) Invitation to submit a Detailed Solution;

(D) Invitation to submit a Final Tender.

126 suppliers were invited to submit a pre-qualification questionnaire. 77 accepted the invitation and 58 fully completed one. Their responses were evaluated.

12 suppliers were invited to participate in the competitive dialogue itself, because they met the pre-qualification criteria. These were:

Applied Language Solutions

"Thebigword"

Language Line Services

K International

Computacentre

Merrill Legal

Cintra Ltd

Eclipse

Language Services Associates

Wessex Translations Ltd

Royal National Institute for Deaf People

SDL Plc.

During the competitive dialogue process only one supplier met the acceptable non-price criteria following the Invitation to Submit Detailed Solution stage of the process. Therefore, only one supplier was able to go on to be evaluated against the price criteria. That supplier was awarded the Framework Agreement.

The current value of interpretation and translation in the justice sector is between £58-65 million per year.