| Pages in topic: < [1 2 3 4 5] > | Translator outsourced job to a colleague; what to do? Thread poster: Rifraf
|
|---|
Lingua 5B 
Bosnia and Herzegovina
Local time: 17:51
Member (2009)
English to Croatian
+ ...
Sergei Tumanov wrote:
Does the contract between Rifraf's agency and the translator in question explicitly prohibits outsorcing of translation projects to other translators?
While I understand why you are asking this, some things are a given and don't need to be put on a contract specifically.
For example, say a student cheats on their paper and brings a paper to a school that someone else wrote for them, and this student gets the highest marks and merits for it. I don't know of any specific signed contract prohibiting a student to do so, but that doesn't change the fact it's utterly unethical and wrong.
[Edited at 2010-09-08 14:11 GMT]
| | | | | No contradiction | Sep 8, 2010 |
Lingua 5B wrote:
.. you contradicted yourself.
If a translator claims she doesn't have time for translation, how come she has time for quality checking/ proofreading? The checking takes up more time because you need to double check everything, research things and possible restyle sentences.
Proofreading can be time-consuming when the quality of the translation is bad, but proofreading a good translation takes much less time than translating. Therefore, proofreading is generally charged at a lower rate than translation.
As proofreading and QA are performed at a later stage, it is perfectly possible that a translator doesn't have time for the translation, but for proofreading/QA.
Example:
The translator receives the following translation request on Monday morning:
5000 words to be delivered on Wednesday at noon.
His translation speed is 2500 words/day and he would need 2 days to complete the translation.
The translator is booked out on Monday and Tuesday, but available from Wednesday morning onwards. He wouldn't be able to translate all the text on Wednesday morning (until noon), but to proofread the translation (at a proofreading speed of, let's say, 1000-1500 words/hour).
The client would receive a translated and fully proofread text (4 eyes see more than 2).
(For my general opinion on this topic, please see my previous post.)
| | | | | Normal cooperation agreements | Sep 8, 2010 |
Paula Rennie wrote:
Maybe those outraged by the outsourcing arrangement could ask themselves if they want to be independent business people and act accordingly, or be employees and be treated accordingly.
I am an independent business person, but that does not mean that I can hand out the materials I am entrusted with to anyone I wish without the customer's knowledge.
It is simply not true that any company (in any industry) can do whatever they like with the materials entrusted to them by a customer. Requesting the provider not to give or share information or materials with third people without the written consent of the customer is a quite normal part of any cooperation agreement, and is what most customers expect unless you inform them otherwise.
| | | | Lingua 5B
Bosnia and Herzegovina
Local time: 17:51
Member (2009)
English to Croatian
+ ...
Why do you believe a checking process doesn't involve research, while translation process does? I'm not talking about skimming or proofreading, I'm talking about a true QA ( and not a machine one).
That would mean that a linguist would take a break to research and double check a certain term in references while translating, but wouldn't do the same while checking a translation. Very unusual. Particularly so because it is precisely in the checking phase that you are responsible to e... See more Why do you believe a checking process doesn't involve research, while translation process does? I'm not talking about skimming or proofreading, I'm talking about a true QA ( and not a machine one).
That would mean that a linguist would take a break to research and double check a certain term in references while translating, but wouldn't do the same while checking a translation. Very unusual. Particularly so because it is precisely in the checking phase that you are responsible to ensure that everything is correct, not in the translation phase.
[Edited at 2010-09-09 07:12 GMT] ▲ Collapse
| | |
|
|
|
Samuel Murray
Netherlands
Local time: 17:51
Member (2006)
English to Afrikaans
+ ...
| Rif (or Raf) has a point | Sep 8, 2010 |
Rifraf wrote:
Sure enough the Hungarian translator vouches for the quality of the end product, which she has NOT translated herself.
A translation done by a different person will necessarily be different from the translation done by the original person. Both translations may be adequate and error-free, but if the original translator is a brilliant translator and the second one is a mediocre one, odds are the original one won't rewrite the second's one's translation to make it brilliant again.
| | | | | what does the PO/contract say? | Sep 8, 2010 |
You did supply your translator with a PO where it says subcontracting is not permitted, did you? Or maybe she signed a contract where it's clearly specified she is not allowed to subcontract... in this case, you are right and she is wrong. If this is not the case, she is right and you are wrong...
| | | | Samuel Murray
Netherlands
Local time: 17:51
Member (2006)
English to Afrikaans
+ ...
| Back to the original question | Sep 8, 2010 |
Rifraf wrote:
Our agency does, however, select translators based on a number of qualifications, and I'm not talking about the length of someones legs, but on measureable qualifications, such as:
education/diploma's/translation experience/expert fields etc.
Well, I think if you want to retain the translator, you just have to explain to her that you don't want her to outsource work to colleagues. Explain that you measure a translator by his qualifications. Explain to her that you trust her and her translations alone, and that you'd rather wait longer for the translation than have the translation done by a colleague of hers. Explain to her that you do not value a translation that was merely proofread by her as much as a translation that was done by her.
| | | | Rifraf
Local time: 17:51
TOPIC STARTER | never contracts, just a PO-form | Sep 8, 2010 |
Sergei Tumanov wrote:
Does the contract between Rifraf's agency and the translator in question explicitly prohibits outsorcing of translation projects to other translators?
[Edited at 2010-09-08 13:44 GMT]
We never work with contracts, but for each translation job a translator receives a PO-form from us in which all the job details are listed, but there's nothing stipulated about outsourcing, however.
| | |
|
|
|
Nicole Schnell
United States
Local time: 08:51
English to German
+ ...
In memoriam
Rifraf wrote:
We never work with contracts, but for each translation job a translator receives a PO-form from us in which all the job details are listed, but there's nothing stipulated about outsourcing, however.
Why not? Not even an NDA? What is the problem then, if I may ask.
| | | | | Translation is not an exam | Sep 8, 2010 |
Lingua 5B wrote:
For example, say a student cheats on their paper and brings a paper to a school that someone else wrote for them, and this student gets the highest marks and merits for it. I don't know of any specific signed contract prohibiting a student to do so, but that doesn't change the fact it's utterly unethical and wrong.
[Edited at 2010-09-08 14:11 GMT]
This comparison is totally irrelevant. While a student studies for obtaining a degree (which attests HIS qualifications), and indeed it is incorrect to obtain it using the merits of others, this is totally not the case with translation. It's a piece of "merchandise" paid for: as long as the quality satisfies the client, and the contract does not have a no outsourcing clause, there is no reason why outsourcing to a colleague should be approached in terms of *ethics*. It is no one else's business to analyze and assume any payments terms and work process between the outsourcing translator and his colleague who did the work (just as the end client would not worry about what the agency pays the translator). I wonder why the first question that bothered an agency was "the translator MIGHT pay peanuts to a colleague for the work", if the very agency most likely receives much more than they pay to the translator. As long as there were no quality complaints against the translator, one should assume that such a provider would not outsource the job to a mediocre colleague, and risk his own reputation. In some cases, it's even better to have two pairs of eyes go through the same material before delivering it to the client.
As far as I am concerned, it's all about a no-outsourcing clause. If there is one, then it's absolutely incorrect and illegal to outsource (although, I am not sure how this could be verified).
Another issue is confidentiality: if the agency-translator contract does not stipulate no-outsourcing, and the first translator has a confidentiality agreement with the second translator, then no harm and no contract violation is done.
[Edited at 2010-09-08 15:50 GMT]
| | | | | Probably this is the problem | Sep 8, 2010 |
Rifraf wrote: Sergei Tumanov wrote:
Does the contract between Rifraf's agency and the translator in question explicitly prohibits outsorcing of translation projects to other translators?
[Edited at 2010-09-08 13:44 GMT] We never work with contracts, but for each translation job a translator receives a PO-form from us in which all the job details are listed, but there's nothing stipulated about outsourcing, however.
Then I think this is mainly the problem: it is always advisable to have NDAs and a framework agreement with each translator, stating the exact regulations of the cooperation between the translator and your company. Now, legal documents in the hand, you cannot really complain that this person outsourced, although I still think she should have told you.
| | | | | Back to the original posting - sorry, long... | Sep 8, 2010 |
Rifraf wrote:
I was dumbfounded. We gave her the job, assuming she would make the translation, not some colleague of hers. She said, that when she's too busy, she works with him; but she never told us this. FYI: We've been working with her for a couple of years now.
So that means she probably has worked this way for the past couple of years, without you knowing (noticing) it.
My problem:
She translates into an Eastern European language, which we can't "really" assess in-house.
...
If we receive a mediocre translation, there's almost no way for us to tell.
So that means you do not have anybody to edit/proofread her translations. You just pass them onto the client, right?
But I do know that we never had complaints about "her translations".
So the quality has been satisfying to the end client, right? So she supplied you with translations that were ready to go to the client, without you having to pay for a native Hungarian proofreader, right?
We pay her a very good price
And it seems you are getting good quality translations for it. This is how it should be, isn't it?
- for all I know she has outsourced the job for a couple of cents
How do you know how much she is paying the other translator? You are merely speculating here.
and now earns her money the easy way, cause all she has to do is read through the translation of her colleague.
Come again? "all she has to do is read through" ???
My experience with editing/proofreading is that it is a LOT MORE than a casual read-through, and whatever I get paid for it is not "easy money". It is money hard earned, trust me.
On the other hand, while you were working with this translator, you took a cut from the final price your end client paid for the translation that you passed on, admittedly without proper proofreading. So, who earned the easy money?
I told her that she will be ultimately responsible for the translation
Yes, she should be responsible for the quality towards you, as you are her client. And it should be in the a contract you signed at the beginning of your business relationship.
but I know that we as an agency are,
Yes, you are responsible for the quality towards your client. It is how it works.
so that doesn't help to get rid off the nasty feeling I'm left with.
Why is the nasty feeling? That you are responsible for the end quality? That is normal business. Or do you have a nasty feeling because you realized the risk you took (passing her translations to the end client without proper QA) may backfire on you?
To borrow your wording: I am dumbfounded.
Does anyone have advice on how to go about this?
Yes, I do.
First of all, do not get emotional about this.
Instead, calmly think through the risks you have taken so far with your approach to translations into languages you (your whole company) are not proficient in, and in general, with outsourcing to freelancers. (I tried to point them out above.) Think through the methods of risk-mitigation you have used so far. Perhaps you need to make some changes.
A few suggestions:
1. If you want to ensure quality, introduce proper QA measures. The very basic solution is to hire a native editor/proofreader for the projects. (Could be freelancer, doesn't have to be in-house.)
2. If you want to make sure your freelancers do not outsource jobs, put a prohibition clause in the contract.
3. If you are worried about confidentiality, make sure you have an NDA clause that covers it.
4. Realize that in your line of business (as an agency) you are earning your markup for the value you add to the translation process, and for the risks you are taking during the course of doing that. It is true that mitigating the risks cost money, so you have to find a good balance. I am sure it is not an easy thing. But if you choose to make more profit by doing less risk mitigation, accept the fact that sometimes the risks will cause you a loss. If you prefer not to deal with that, than be ready to give up some of that profit for proper QA. It is like buying insurance. Or more like installing and maintaining an alarm system in your house. It is not perfect, but the chances for a burglar to succeed are a lot less, compared to when you just lock your door when you leave.
I hope I did not offend you with my comments.
Just to be clear, I do not endorse what this translator did, that she outsourced the work without making sure the client knows and agrees to it. Whether this is considered a legal, ethical, moral or cultural issue, I am sure there could be multiple ways to look at it.
But in any case, you could do a better job covering your rear end, in general.
Katalin
[Edited at 2010-09-08 15:50 GMT]
| | |
|
|
|
| agency should be happy... | Sep 8, 2010 |
Annamaria Amik wrote:
In some cases, it's even better to have two pairs of eyes go through the same material before delivering it to the client.
Absolutely... at the end of the day, you are getting a better product...
| | | | | Misunderstanding | Sep 8, 2010 |
Lingua 5B wrote:
Why do you believe a checking process doesn't involve research, while translation process does? I'm not talking about skimming or proofreading, I'm talking about a true QA ( and not a machine one).
[Edited at 2010-09-08 14:27 GMT]
You missed my point. Please read my posts again. To reply to your question: Of course proofreading involves research. But like the translator, the proofreader has to be an expert in the subject field, language pair etc. When the proofreading of a translation doesn’t take less time than the actual translation, in my opinion the translation is of sub-standard quality or the proofreader is not qualified enough.
The translation and the proofreading speeds I mentioned in my example are based on my 10 years experience as translator and proofreader (daily or hourly average required by my agency clients).
But this is becoming off-topic. As I mentioned in my first post (which took ages to be vetted), besides the problem with confidentiality, the main problem is that the agency does not perform QA on the translations received. One of the reasons why they feel so insecure.
| | | | Laurent KRAULAND (X)
France
Local time: 17:51
French to German
+ ...
| A problem nevertheless... | Sep 8, 2010 |
Nicole Schnell wrote: Rifraf wrote:
We never work with contracts, but for each translation job a translator receives a PO-form from us in which all the job details are listed, but there's nothing stipulated about outsourcing, however. Why not? Not even an NDA? What is the problem then, if I may ask.
There is nevertheless a problem in this matter, at least under French law resp. jurisprudence: as soon as you are sent the PO bearing your own name and address, it implicitly means that you - and only you, not a colleague "from the left hand" - have been assigned the translation job in question, warts and all.
FWIW - legislations and interpretations may differ.
| | | | | Pages in topic: < [1 2 3 4 5] > | To report site rules violations or get help, contact a site moderator: You can also contact site staff by submitting a support request » Translator outsourced job to a colleague; what to do? | Trados Studio 2022 Freelance | The leading translation software used by over 270,000 translators.
Designed with your feedback in mind, Trados Studio 2022 delivers an unrivalled, powerful desktop
and cloud solution, empowering you to work in the most efficient and cost-effective way.
More info » |
| | Anycount & Translation Office 3000 | Translation Office 3000
Translation Office 3000 is an advanced accounting tool for freelance translators and small agencies. TO3000 easily and seamlessly integrates with the business life of professional freelance translators.
More info » |
|
| | | | X Sign in to your ProZ.com account... | | | | | |
Login to reply/comment 
Translation news
