| Pages in topic: < [1 2 3 4] > | How to improve Proz blue board and rates problem at the same time Thread poster: Radovan Pletka
|
|---|
| bottom-fishing agencies / bottom-priced translators | Apr 8, 2010 |
Radovan Pletka wrote:
So it is clearly understandable that they reacted to the petition of nearly 1000 translators and are willing to make some cosmetic changes, but they will not do anything to jeopardize their main stream of income - which seems to be the bottom fishing agencies, not the translators.
But if it are the bottom-fishing agencies who are offering jobs on Proz, who are the translators taking on these jobs? Bottom-priced, mostly not or less qualified translators if you ask me!
Don't get me wrong: I own an agency, but never post a job on Proz, because we are not a bottom-priced agency. And that's my point: only the agencies with low budgets have the need to outsource their work on such a global site with bottom-priced translators.
And they know that they can find cheap translators here! But it just like the one post here where an Arabic translator already worked for a low rate, and then even lowered his rate some more, because he otherwise wouldn't get any more jobs.
And that's where the crisis kicks in: there are less jobs to go round and all the more (unqualified) translators to give these jobs to; so many agencies just work with the cheapest translators (irrespective of quality issues).
| | | | | Post removed: This post was hidden by a moderator or staff member because it was not in line with site rule | | It is a problem with the evaluators, not the BB | Apr 8, 2010 |
If some people still give 5's to an agency on the BB, while at the same time in their comments they say payment is low - well, it is not because the BB is faulty.
I am wondering, why is it, that if they say the rates are low (peanuts), they still give a 5 for "likelihood of working again"??? To me the only logical explanation is that they really ARE willing to work for such rates, again and again, and THAT is the problem. That is definitely something I am not happy with.
But ... See more If some people still give 5's to an agency on the BB, while at the same time in their comments they say payment is low - well, it is not because the BB is faulty.
I am wondering, why is it, that if they say the rates are low (peanuts), they still give a 5 for "likelihood of working again"??? To me the only logical explanation is that they really ARE willing to work for such rates, again and again, and THAT is the problem. That is definitely something I am not happy with.
But that is not the BB's fault, I think.
Katalin
[Edited at 2010-04-08 16:04 GMT] ▲ Collapse
| | | |
All for it. I especially like your comparison to coffee growers Fair trade indeed!
As to the technical implementation (remembering that 10 cents a word for, say, Italian-Romanian is not the same as 10 cents a word for Finnish-Japanese) -
It could work like this: the translator enters feedback by clicking on the language combination(s) they have done for the agent and the rates they received for each of t... See more All for it. I especially like your comparison to coffee growers Fair trade indeed!
As to the technical implementation (remembering that 10 cents a word for, say, Italian-Romanian is not the same as 10 cents a word for Finnish-Japanese) -
It could work like this: the translator enters feedback by clicking on the language combination(s) they have done for the agent and the rates they received for each of those combinations. Because Proz already _has_ all of the data about average rates in various language combinations from the online CVs we have filled in, it should be easy for the program to rank the outsourcer's rates (bottom 20 percentile = 1* / 21-40 percentile = 2* etc.)
This helps get rid of the human factor, too: the translator is not entering a subjective rating - instead, the Proz DB is just assigning a symbol to a hard, cold number. ▲ Collapse
| | |
|
|
|
Dmitrie Highduke 
Ukraine
Local time: 12:32
Member (2008)
English to Ukrainian
+ ...
| With Radovan | Apr 13, 2010 |
Radovan Pletka wrote:
We can also evaluate them as restaurants in five categories,
from $, $$, $$$, $$$$, and $$$$$.
I believe, this idea would be more useful than all those attempts to persuade outsourcers/translators to pay/request more.
The implementation of this initiative would really help translators (at least me).
[Edited at 2010-04-13 22:16 GMT]
[Edited at 2010-04-13 22:16 GMT]
| | | | | How would it help? | Apr 14, 2010 |
I believe, this idea would be more useful than all those attempts to persuade outsourcers/translators to pay/request more.
I am kind of lost by this comment.
Isn't the overall goal to get "outsourcers/translators to pay/request more"?
The implementation of this initiative would really help translators (at least me).
I am trying to imagine how would this help. Really, how does it help if I see "$" vs. "$$$$" next to an agency's name? The only thing I can imagine is it may save time for me, in terms of not quoting on jobs posted by the "$" agency.
But agencys may pay different rates for different languages, types of jobs, etc. If the agency is "rated" as "$$$$" so far, because until now they mainly outsourced specialized texts in less common language pairs, the next English-Spanish general business job may go for a much lower rate. Are you suggesting that an agency would have multiple "ratings" for each language pair and specialty they ever worked with? And it could be the other way around, too.
So, for each job, the rate may be different, and if I am interested in such ratings of agencies, I probably opted for seeing budget info on job postings, which means I would know exactly what the agency "budgeted" for a posted job, without any sort of ratings.
I don't think a rating like that would give me more info, or more precise info than the budget info the agency posts in their job postings. If they do not post the budget, then I will know right after I quoted.
Another issue is the confidentiality - I mentioned this before, but many agreements (including NDAs) with agencies specify the rate info as confidential. So, the translator would be in violation of those agreements should he/she choose to enter it at a third party website (e.g. ProZ).
The third thing is - and it seems it is forgotten repeatedly - that rates are AGREED by both parties. If a translator accepts a low rate, than the translator should be "rated" as well with "$" - don't you think so? What about those cases when the translator has $X entered as his/her rate in his/her profile, but accepts jobs at the rate of $X/2? Which one is his/her real rate, then? The one in the profile, or the one he/she actually accepted?
If the accepted rate is lower then the average (or whatever the agencies are compared to) will he/she be flagged the same way?
If not, it does not seem "fair" to me. If we are talking about "fairness" and such.
The only reason agencies are able to get away with low rates is because there are people accepting those rates.
And I haven't even mentioned the possibility of low-balling: let's say agency gets the $$$$$ (the highest) rating, meaning they pay more than the average. Can you imagine what would happen? #1. The agency itself will realize that, and may try lowering its rates. AND 2. Translators who are happy to work for the average, or even for slightly lower rates, will apply to them, helping #1 to happen even faster.
So, how would this help, again?
Katalin
[Edited at 2010-04-14 01:45 GMT]
| | | | Fatima Argun
United States
Local time: 05:32
Member (2006)
English to Turkish
+ ...
| Some good points | Dec 17, 2013 |
I agree with two salient points here:
1) To quote another colleague's post: "The only reason agencies are able to get away with low rates is because there are people accepting those rates". Couldn't agree more. Perhaps translators, like other professionals, could form a union. This is spelled out very well in a blog post which I also saw posted here over 3 years ago. I think it bears ... See more I agree with two salient points here:
1) To quote another colleague's post: "The only reason agencies are able to get away with low rates is because there are people accepting those rates". Couldn't agree more. Perhaps translators, like other professionals, could form a union. This is spelled out very well in a blog post which I also saw posted here over 3 years ago. I think it bears repeating: http://provenwrite.com/articles-interviews/twelve-step-program-for-self-injuring-translators/
2) The Blue Board idea is a good one, and could very well be a reliable place for translators to get a better sense of an agency's "style", or M.O. In addition to the field provided for feedback, perhaps it would be good to provide translators the ability to add more detail that is relevant to the transaction (much like ebay's feedback system for example), such as:
1) communication and professionalism of PMs: a) good b) ok, but would have expected better c) not acceptable/to a professional standard;
2) level of support: a) good b) ok, but would have expected better c) not acceptable/to a professional standard;
3) on time payment: a) on time, or early b) 2 weeks late c) more than 2 weeks late, d) ____weeks/months late, e) never got paid
4) Payment was: a) very low b) ok, but would have expected more, or c) was sufficient and consistent with amount of time required/complexity/quality expected; and
5) amount of lead time provided: a) sufficient b) insufficient for producing level of quality expected.
I believe this system could go a long way to helping translators (and agencies) save time, manage expectations, and prevent translators from getting exploited. ▲ Collapse
| | | | LEXpert
United States
Local time: 04:32
Member (2008)
Croatian to English
+ ...
| What's good for the goose...? | Dec 17, 2013 |
Katalin Horváth McClure wrote:
And I haven't even mentioned the possibility of low-balling: let's say agency gets the $$$$$ (the highest) rating, meaning they pay more than the average. Can you imagine what would happen? #1. The agency itself will realize that, and may try lowering its rates. AND 2. Translators who are happy to work for the average, or even for slightly lower rates, will apply to them, helping #1 to happen even faster.
So, how would this help, again?
These forums really need a "like" button. Katalin has hit the problem 100% on the nose, and that's exactly what would happen, only furthering the downward rate spiral.
I know for a fact there are people working for some of my clients who are charging them significantly less than I am. Whether this is due to the fact that their work is of lower quality, or they lack the ability or desire to negotiate, or have poor leverage, or somehow achieve superhuman productivity, or simply don't care about money (the only possible explanation for a lot of pricing schemes I see some translators offering!), I can't say, but it's not my problem.
What if the shoe were on the other foot? Let's say agencies were to establish a common database of translators, identifying them by pricing. Would you want to be publicly identified as a "cheap" or "medium-cheap" translator (although, judging by some published rates in Proz profiles, many people just don't care), and find yourself lowballed by every client with access to that information? But what's good for the goose is good for the gander, right?
Ultimately, the approach is fraught with problems. There are simply too many factors that go into pricing for such a rating to be of any use. And that's assuming that people enter accurate information. What if translators rate all of their agencies as cheapskates in order to keep the competition away?
No thanks. My pricing is confidential business information between my clients and me, and will remain so.
| | |
|
|
|
Tom in London
United Kingdom
Local time: 10:32
Member (2008)
Italian to English
| Back to the topic.... | Dec 17, 2013 |
I thought the original suggestion was about improving the BlueBoard - but the discussion degenerated into the usual (yawn) discussion about rates- which it would be impossible for the BB to set, since rates vary according to (A) the language pair (B) the country in which the translator/agency is based.
Anyway if an agency doesn't pay, who cares what the rate is ? Forcing non-payers to pay is where the BB really comes into its own.
[Edited at 2013-12-17 11:05 GMT]
| | | |
I think the rate issue is more nuanced. There is no single scale good for all markets. The scale provided by the OP only vaguely holds true for a couple of first-world markets. A second-world agency offering, say, six cents a word to a first-world translator isn't necessarily a bottomfeeder. It can simply be a matter of, 'we can't pay more, but we have some jobs if you're okay with the payment, so it's up to you.' In which case it'd be unfair to criticise them, unlike a local first-world agency ... See more I think the rate issue is more nuanced. There is no single scale good for all markets. The scale provided by the OP only vaguely holds true for a couple of first-world markets. A second-world agency offering, say, six cents a word to a first-world translator isn't necessarily a bottomfeeder. It can simply be a matter of, 'we can't pay more, but we have some jobs if you're okay with the payment, so it's up to you.' In which case it'd be unfair to criticise them, unlike a local first-world agency or a global one that drives translators' rates into the ground.
Also, there are some other variables in the fair compensation equation. For example, agencies operating in certain markets are notoriously more soft-bellied than others. For example, a Polish agency wouldn't normally accept detailed client feedback predicated solely on whether the client's unspoken expectations were met, down to every stylistic nuance on a marriage certificate or electricity bell, where such personal client preference with regard to the style of the target and certain client-specific subjectivity idiosyncracy in approaching the choice of equivalence or balance of equivalence and style is simply not relevant and not worth it because nobody cares about an electricity bill like that. From an Anglo-Saxon agency, on the other hand, I wouldn't be surprised.
Then there's the 'our new online system' bureaucratic madness, along with painstaking QA and admin procedures which are gaining ground in ISO-compliant agencies. I can't work like that. Nor do I want to receive 20 small-printed pages of a PO with detailed specification of each tiny job plus 50 pages of reference materials and a 100-page style guide. I can't work like that. More importantly, I won't. I'd rather take a 20% pay cut, which is probably less than the value of the time savings so enabled.
Plus, there's the good old Pareto rule: some jobs pays 20% higher rates but cost 80% more time to do.
Some of my best earnings have resulted from accepting no-nonsense jobs for unimpressive rates, often from agencies that work on oral agreements. ▲ Collapse
| | | | | Rate being more nuanced. | Dec 18, 2013 |
Thank you Lukasz. I think you hit most of the most important items. We are in a profession that pays the equivalent of piece-work. So our job, in generating our own income, is taking all of that in to account, but which can often be forgotten. We have to generate revenue - whether we want to count it by the hour, day, week, or month. There are only so many hours in a day, and there are many un-billable hours in this kind of work which we forget to take into account to our own detriment.
| | | | | No categorization, but some changes would be welcome | Dec 18, 2013 |
Katalin Horváth McClure wrote: Radovan Pletka wrote:
I am not sure what the main source of income for Proz is. OK, then it would be a good idea to refrain from making statements about it. (And draw conclusions based on those statements.)
Radovan has a point although it wasn't clearly stated. The more jobs are posted on Proz.com (they advertise that a huge amount of jobs goes through their portal) the more of an incentive it is for translators to become members and bid or be listed in the directory.
It's therefore not in Proz.com's interest to restrict job postings. It doesn't help or hurt our cause either.
What hurts is that bottom feeders find bottom eaters so to speak. Don't be a bottom eater. You'll be out of money quickly and not only that, you'll be angry you ever did it (unless you live in "Schlaraffenland/Cockayne" - but there you wouldn't have to work anyway and get sick).
As a professional, stick to your guns, look up Proz.com's translation rate page, heed the job-posting warnings telling you that 80% of the translators who have reported per-word rates on Proz.com charge more than what the outsourcer "offers" and learn more about how to be successful. Proz.com is not all you can do.
I don't support categorizing outsourcers based on their paying-scale. It's between you and the outsourcer to negotiate/agree on an adequate rate, it's not up to Proz.com to determine what is a good, adequate or low rate.
It would be great to be able to draw the line for absolute rascals who are simply out to make money by having others work their %$^# off, and Proz.com's "warning signs" could probably be expanded (total-price suggestions could be included in the 80% warning scheme and do not allow postings under a certain per-word price) or simply prohibit outsourcer's price/budget suggestions altogether, including rate/price ranges (for example: USD .01 - USD .15/word - a joke, really).
Not even the good companies would want to be categorized. I'm sure of that. And they shouldn't be.
B
[Edited at 2013-12-18 19:24 GMT]
| | |
|
|
|
Stephanie Ezrol wrote:
Thank you Lukasz. I think you hit most of the most important items. We are in a profession that pays the equivalent of piece-work. So our job, in generating our own income, is taking all of that in to account, but which can often be forgotten. We have to generate revenue - whether we want to count it by the hour, day, week, or month. There are only so many hours in a day, and there are many un-billable hours in this kind of work which we forget to take into account to our own detriment.
Then there's also motivation and professional seniority. Can't find much of either in keeping the formatting and clerking-in client-decreed preferential changes.
| | | | | Job offers using a rate range | Dec 19, 2013 |
As I said in my previous comment, I find the following an insincere, cynical, unprofessional and unusable proposal - this is another real example and it avoids the "80% of translators charge more warning":
$0.01 USD to $0.25 USD per word (for translation)
Granted, the offer also says: most content of the description is repetitions (I changed the wording to protect the author).
I would recommend not to allow this or to do away with the voluntary price propo... See more As I said in my previous comment, I find the following an insincere, cynical, unprofessional and unusable proposal - this is another real example and it avoids the "80% of translators charge more warning":
$0.01 USD to $0.25 USD per word (for translation)
Granted, the offer also says: most content of the description is repetitions (I changed the wording to protect the author).
I would recommend not to allow this or to do away with the voluntary price proposals outsourcers are allowed to post on the job board. Main reason is they can easily prey on newcomers in the business who are unaware of what they should charge. And, it's not good for the overall job-rate picture for any of us. As far as the blueboard is concerned, one consequence of this could be a 5 star rating for a company that paid peanuts to someone who didn't know any better.
B
[Edited at 2013-12-19 14:34 GMT] ▲ Collapse
| | | | | you would think so... | Jan 3, 2014 |
Katalin Horváth McClure wrote:
But this is exactly what the BB is for. You can rate a company based on how much they paid to you - if everything else was OK, and you were satisfied with the rate you got, you give them a 5, right? If you were not very satisfied with the rate, you give them a 4 or a 3.
When I first started using Blueboard I assumed as you did - that if people were paid ridiculous amounts they would never give an agency a "5". So very untrue! I can't recall the number of agencies I've contacted based on BB ratings only for them to say that "we can only pay US$0.03 a word." I have no idea why they have such stellar records if they're paying that little. Sometimes it seems to me like people rate highly because the project managers who work there are "nice."
I now know the feedback is based only on whether they paid on time, not whether they were paid well.
I'd love to see some scheme to help us sort out the bottom-feeders, though I'm not sure what would work best. I just wish people could say how much the agencies pay! That would be refreshing (I know, not gonna happen).
| | | | | Pages in topic: < [1 2 3 4] > | To report site rules violations or get help, contact a site moderator: You can also contact site staff by submitting a support request » How to improve Proz blue board and rates problem at the same time | 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 » |
| | Protemos translation business management system | Create your account in minutes, and start working! 3-month trial for agencies, and free for freelancers!
The system lets you keep client/vendor database, with contacts and rates, manage projects and assign jobs to vendors, issue invoices, track payments, store and manage project files, generate business reports on turnover profit per client/manager etc.
More info » |
|
| | | | X Sign in to your ProZ.com account... | | | | | |
Login to reply/comment 
