Unusual provisions in interpreting contract? Téma indítója: Mariane Lambert
|
|---|
Mariane Lambert 
Németország
Local time: 13:31
Tag (2014 óta)
angol - francia
+ ...
Hello,
Some time ago, I was approached by an agency based in the EU for an interpreting assignment.
It seemed to be reputable at first, but after exchanging back and forth, they sent me a contract to sign, and that’s when I realized that the agency was connected to another LSP that had been banned from posting jobs on proz due to a significant number of negative reviews related to payment issues.
I ended up declining to work with them as a result, but I a... See more Hello,
Some time ago, I was approached by an agency based in the EU for an interpreting assignment.
It seemed to be reputable at first, but after exchanging back and forth, they sent me a contract to sign, and that’s when I realized that the agency was connected to another LSP that had been banned from posting jobs on proz due to a significant number of negative reviews related to payment issues.
I ended up declining to work with them as a result, but I am still wondering about two provisions in the contract that raised some concerns. I would be curious to know if you have ever encountered them in your translation/interpreting practice and if my concerns were warranted:
1) A provision prohibiting the supplier (translator or interpreter) from posting any negative feedback on any publicly accessible platform in case of a dispute so long as the dispute is not officially resolved by a court.
2) A provision requiring the supplier (interpreter) to have a fellow interpreter fill in for them in the event where they could not complete the assignment. The replacement interpreter would have to agree to work within the same terms agreed upon by the original supplier and be approved by the agency.
In light of the negative reviews for delayed/non-payment issues, I construed the first provision as a threat to translators and interpreters aimed at dissuading them from posting any negative review (on the proz Blueboard for example) even if the agency failed to pay them. I may be wrong though. I had never seen such a provision in my 10+ years as a freelance translator, but what is your experience?
Regarding the second provision, I had never come across something like that before either, but I am newer to interpreting, so it could be standard practice for interpreting assignments, and I was simply unaware of it. To the seasoned interpreters out there, do you usually have to provide a replacement if you’re unable to complete the assignment (because of a sudden illness or other unforeseen circumstance)? I understand that it may be good practice to help out a client in such a situation as it might put them in a difficult position. Even so, making that a contractual obligation seems a bit extreme to me.
I would love to read your thoughts on the matter.
Thank you!
[Edited at 2025-04-04 14:29 GMT] ▲ Collapse
| | | | Mario Chávez
Egyesült Államok
Local time: 07:31
Tag (2024 óta)
angol - spanyol
+ ...
| Right to be skeptical about those clauses | Apr 4 |
Mariane,
It seems that we translators and interpreters should always carry a fine-tooth comb to pore over these agreements, since arbitrary clauses are sprouting all over the place.
Back in the day, some translation agencies in the USA required their providers (us) not to work with the agency's competition. That type of clause is legally unenforceable and it only serves the agency's interests.
The do-not-disparage clause is not only appearing in the interpr... See more Mariane,
It seems that we translators and interpreters should always carry a fine-tooth comb to pore over these agreements, since arbitrary clauses are sprouting all over the place.
Back in the day, some translation agencies in the USA required their providers (us) not to work with the agency's competition. That type of clause is legally unenforceable and it only serves the agency's interests.
The do-not-disparage clause is not only appearing in the interpretation agreement you were sent. When my full-time position was eliminated last year, I had to sign an agreement to get my severance package; the agreement included a clause to not write disparaging things about this ex employer in social media or elsewhere. Since I'm not in the habit of badmouthing former employers anyway, I signed it to get my severance package. However, one is forced to stop and think why a successful company is so fearful of so-called negative comments or feedback. To me, it's a Big-Brother effort to curtail free speech and inform others.
Now, to your second provision: it seems to me that this agency is offloading its own responsibility to find a replacement onto your shoulders. They want you to do some project management for free. I'd say no way. ▲ Collapse
| | | | kd42
Észtország
Local time: 14:31
angol - orosz
| A note about praising your ex-employer, client, or praying for them every night on a hilltop | Apr 4 |
My idea is that your counterpart may include anything into the NDA, severance agreement, lease, but in reality and in a court of law the effective legislation prevails, and this makes all these whims null and void.
| | | | William Bowley
Egyesült Királyság
Local time: 12:31
spanyol - angol
+ ...
Similar to that stated by kd42, terms in a contract must generally be reasonable, fair and lawful for them to be enforceable, i.e., a contract can state anything, but the law always prevails.
For example, you could happily sign a contract stating you must dance naked in the street on Tuesdays, and as entertaining as some people may find that, you would be under no obligation to comply and there would be no consequences for you were you not to comply.
In the case of your... See more Similar to that stated by kd42, terms in a contract must generally be reasonable, fair and lawful for them to be enforceable, i.e., a contract can state anything, but the law always prevails.
For example, you could happily sign a contract stating you must dance naked in the street on Tuesdays, and as entertaining as some people may find that, you would be under no obligation to comply and there would be no consequences for you were you not to comply.
In the case of your specific example, point 1) in particular is almost certainly unenforceable in reality. Point 2) is for the client's convenience. ▲ Collapse
| | | | To report site rules violations or get help, contact a site moderator: You can also contact site staff by submitting a support request » Unusual provisions in interpreting contract? | LinguaCore | AI Translation at Your Fingertips
The underlying LLM technology of LinguaCore offers AI translations of unprecedented quality. Quick and simple. Add a human linguistic review at the end for expert-level quality at a fraction of the cost and time.
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
