Are agencies wary of working with freelance companies over individuals?

Joe France wrote:

I think what others (like Lincoln and Kay) have been getting at, and what would appear to be the main issue here, is control. If a company/agency assigns a project to an individual translator, they know exactly who is carrying out the translation, what their experience is, where their expertise lies – and who to chase if they have any issues! It's a more direct service with more direct control.

You use the word "prejudice", which I don't think is correct - but given that an intermediate agency would naturally take a slice of the payment and therefore subcontract to a cheaper (and by extension/assumption potentially less qualified/experienced) translator, I don't think it's unreasonable that a company might prefer to deal with a translator directly.

I don't think it's about prejudice. It's about choice. There are countless agencies who scrimp and save and look for the cheapest option over taking control and searching for quality. But if a method of working offers a company control, accountability and potentially greater quality, I don't really see the issue?

You might do well to set out your question more clearly. Some companies may well seek to work with individuals rather than other agencies. But really, why is that a problem?

[email protected] wrote:

'Prejudice' in the sense that an agency may assume that because a translator is a company or a network of translators, they would be more likely to not do the work themselves. I don't see how that can apply if there was a contract between the agency-business entity precluding that.
Also the typical rates on proz.com make it very difficult in practice to outsource at a profit given the risks involved.

We won't agree on this. Its about what side you take - for or against the status quo.

Kay Denney wrote:



For me it's not prejudice, it's experience. I went in with an open mind and outsourced to all sorts. Then I weeded out the ones who could not reliably and consistently work to the same high standards. It just so happened that none of those who out-sourced made the grade.

We always had a clause in our POs to say that translators were not to outsource without our written permission. However, there were several occasions when we found out that some outsourced work without asking. One even had the gall to try to pass on an emergency fee to us because she asked someone to do some work for her over the weekend (We had sent her the file in plenty of time and she agreed to do the job at her usual rate, then she realised on Friday night that she couldn't do the translation and outsourced it. Since it was due on Monday, we would have agreed to the out-sourcing although we didn't agree with paying an emergency fee. It only became urgent because the translator had left it lying on her desk for several days.). Another asked her daughter to do it for her because she was getting drunk after a break-up. When I called to ask where the translation was, she said "didn't my daughter send it to you?". We dropped both those translators of course.

My official status as a translator forbids me from out-sourcing, so anyone sending me work knows I'm the one who did the work and take full responsibility for it. And that's the way I like it.

[email protected] wrote:
I am not sure why. My interest is very specific- is there a presumption (better than prejudice) that a network of translators or a translator company is more likely to outsource than an individual freelancer? Are there other reasons why some agencies do not work with translators who are legal persons?

Teresa Borges wrote:

There’s another preconception I had to deal with for a long time: the idea that a translator who lives abroad looses inevitably the use of his/hers own language…

P.S. Sorry to divert a little from the original posting!