Apuntes talks to… Ann Macfarlane, ATA President

Rosa Codina

In today's rapidly changing world, business is also changing very fast, and translators everywhere are being affected by the new forces at work. In the last couple of years or so, many U.S. translation agencies have been "exporting" big translation projects to countries where translators charge much lower rates. However, to assure the quality of the final translation, they still use professional U.S. translators as editors, soliciting their services at the last minute and with hurried schedules.

The Editorial Committee of Apuntes feels that it is time to examine this situation, so that our readers may learn about some of the problems created by the new globalized translation market for US-based translators, who find it increasingly difficult to compete with the much lower rates offered by foreign translators.

Although we understand that the American Translators Association (ATA) is not a trade union but a professional association —indeed, the major one of its kind in the United States— some of the decisions made by its Board of Directors may have a detrimental effect on its own US-based members. This is why we are now addressing these questions to the president of the ATA, Ms. Ann Macfarlane. We hope that she will answer not only as the spokesperson for the association, but also as a translator, translation agency owner and US citizen.

Q: When translation companies use foreign-based translators, do their clients (that is to say, U.S. companies) know that their documents are being sent all over the world without any guarantee of confidentiality?

A: Unfortunately I don’t have the personal knowledge to answer this question. However, I would assume that well-established businesses, which value quality, exercise "due diligence" to make sure that the translation companies to whom they entrust their business do guarantee confidentiality. Businesses for whom price is the bottom line, unfortunately, would probably be less likely to inquire about this aspect of the job.

Q: Do U.S. translation agencies impose on foreign translators the same requirements (confidentiality, ban from direct contact with the client, etc.) as they demand of U.S. translators? If so, how do they follow up on foreign translators to make sure that they meet those requirements, and how would they prosecute those foreign translators if they failed to comply?

A: I would hope that reputable translation companies would have appropriate agreements as to these matters with their translators, whether in the U.S. or abroad. We have seen in the U.S. that it can be difficult to sue for failure to comply with non-compete agreements, unless the agreements are very carefully written.

Q: Is the U.S. government aware of this new business practice? How do the agencies manage to deduct from their taxes the fees they pay to the foreign translators, without the IRS recovering such claimed exemptions from those same translators? – One might argue that if the IRS is willing to forego the tax money on translations that agencies are sending abroad, maybe we should seek to have the profession declared an "international business" altogether and demand that all translators be eligible for the same exemptions. Of course, if we didn’t have to pay US taxes that take a big bite off our income, we could also charge lower rates and have a fairly uniform playing field on this globalized market.

A: I believe that the U.S. government is determined, and entitled, to collect every legitimate tax dollar owed to it. Businesses based here would have to comply with applicable U.S. laws and regulations. I certainly agree, speaking as a private citizen, that the tax burden on self-employed independent contractors is high. I am personally very sorry to see how seriously this new trend is affecting colleagues. In my own field of Russian translation, the economic crisis of August 1998 has considerably lessened the amount of work available to me and other translators whom I know. These are not easy times.

Q: The number of translation schools and translation students is increasing every year in the U.S., even in this period of uncertainty. There is more interest than ever among young people in entering the translation field. Obviously, they will never be able to compete on a price basis with their colleagues abroad. What future can they expect to have under such conditions? What future should they be looking for?

A: When I speak with young people interested in the field of translation and interpreting, I encourage their interest, but also warn them that these professions are currently under-valued and under-paid in our country. Although increasing globalization puts pressure on prices paid here, however, it also has the potential to open up new markets outside the U.S. In some cases—Japan, for instance—translators may be paid higher rates outside the U.S. than inside. In other cases, foreign firms may seek U.S. translation companies if English is their target language, recognizing the assets we bring to the work. The future is cloudy, but I hope that as purchasers of translation services become more knowledgeable, they will recognize that quality is worth paying for.

Q: Lately, there is a feeling among members that the ATA aims to become an international organization rather than remaining an American Association for American translators. Could you comment on that?

A: The recent membership survey indicated that 57% of our members believe that the ATA should be a "national organization with an international orientation." The Board endorses that view, which is consistent with our Bylaws, and will act in accord with it. We are a professional organization based in the United States and 90% of our members are physically within the U.S. By its nature, however, our profession transcends national boundaries. We welcome members from outside the United States for the contributions they bring to the Association. We will continue to develop such international links and connections as are consonant with our mission as stated in Article II of our Bylaws.

At the same time, we remain firmly based within the United States. Our Association is incorporated within the State of New York. We pay U.S. taxes and abide by U.S. law. The main focus of our recruitment efforts is within the United States and will remain so.

As an example: an overseas member asked whether, if we value international members, we would waive the postage fee that is now charged to ship the Chronicle and other materials beyond the borders of the United States. If we were planning to become a purely international body, we might do this in the belief that it would draw more members—but we are not going to do so. The ATA will keep to our current policy of charging members for the extra costs incurred by shipping their publications outside the United States.

As a second example, many of the membership benefits that we offer—health insurance, small-business insurance, and a brand-new retirement plan option—are of use only to members within one of the fifty states or Puerto Rico. We are not looking for benefit packages that are aimed at people outside the geographic boundaries of the United States.

Q: Are there any plans afoot to address the situation of U.S. translators-- and possible venues to face it --at the upcoming ATA Conference in Orlando?

A: All members are welcome to attend the General Meeting on Friday morning, and the session afterwards entitled "Meet Your Board," which gives a chance for informal discussion with individual Board members. We have chiefly focused our efforts in the ATA conference on providing high-quality educational sessions to enable attendees to sharpen their skills and gain the training that will help them maintain their edge in a competitive U.S. and international market. I am very pleased at how many members have generously offered to share their expertise with their colleagues.

We are also about to offer seed money to chapters, like the New York Circle of Translators, for bringing speakers in to address their members. This is an exciting new program for us. The ATA is also working on targeted marketing of member services and the Translation Services Directory, to help our members gain wider exposure and more work.

Q: Recently, an ATA member, Cristina Marquez de Camihort, sent us an analysis of the 2000 ATA International Accreditation Survey Report and Board Decision, questioning the validity of the data on the report that the members of the Board used to make their decision. Could you comment on that?

A: The survey was not a vote.

A: It was a survey conducted by a totally independent company with extensive professional expertise. We made an all-out effort to reach all our members, but I apologize to any members who did not receive it. Since such a large percentage—25%—of our 7000 members replied, however, the question of statistical variance within 2 percentage points does not apply. The sample itself gave us the information we sought.

The Board appreciated all the information provided in the Survey very much, but based its decision on two factors: (a) the fact that the membership was evenly divided placed the decision squarely on the Board, and (b) the need to act in accord with the Bylaws. By the way, this was the first time that the ATA—or perhaps any other organization of our type—had ever undertaken a consultation with the membership on this scale. Many members wrote to say that they appreciated our sending out the Survey, both those who agreed with our action and those who didn’t. This was a difficult decision, but I am proud of the process that we used.

Q: Shouldn't the ATA demand equal cross-accreditation or reciprocity from all countries where it now holds accreditation exams? How is it going to do so, in view of the closed-shop conditions existing in countries like Spain and Argentina, for example?

A: We are in process right now of conducting a survey of sister organizations in FIT, the Fédération Internationale des Traducteurs, to learn more about certification or accreditation offered outside the U.S. We will certainly pursue this issue and inform the membership of our findings. A professional association in one country is not in such a position of authority as to demand recognition from an association in another. We can, however, see whether there can be mutual recognition. I personally am glad that in the U.S. we do not have a "licensing" requirement for translation, as exists in the countries you mention. I favor the free market. I think that in the long term, both our country’s economic position and individuals will benefit from the openness of our system. Unfortunately in the short term the costs of that openness can be high, as we are seeing in the situations you describe.

In closing, I would like to thank Apuntes and the New York SpanSIG for the opportunity to share these thoughts with your readership. I very much appreciate it when a regional group belonging to a chapter engages in dialogue with the ATA at the national level. It is through our mutual conversation, and growth in understanding, that we can advance the work of the Association and further our profession. Finally, I should mention that I always read your publication carefully and enjoy the rich and varied menu of articles it contains—my compliments!