What would you advise me?

Eva Stoppa wrote:
I wonder what is the Point then of making translators sign tons of Agreements if no work is to come anyway.

Philip Lees wrote:



I'm speculating here, but I think it's probably a sign of MBA disease. Management sets arbitrary targets, such as "We aim to sign up XXX translators in XX languages" by the end of this month.

Then if they meet the target, they can mark it down as a success, so as to demonstrate how competent and efficient they are, even while the agency isn't making any money.

Nowadays, success in management seems to consist in this: setting targets you can meet, even if they bear no relation to the success or otherwise of the company's ostensible business. Thus, for example, Boeing have devoted so much priority and industry to buyouts and mergers that they are no longer capable of manufacturing aeroplanes that can fly.

Adieu wrote:

See if they pay up or start nagging and whining.

Some agencies are scammy, but some penalty clauses surely exist solely because of the proliferation of ctrl-c-ctrl-v-submit-done MT bullsh!t artists and other clowns in our profession.

Philip Lees wrote:

In cases like this I tell the agency, politely, that it is not my policy to read and sign large amounts of documentation unless there is an actual job on the table.

If there is such a job, we can discuss price and other terms, and assuming we come to an agreement, at that point I'll deal with their other bureaucratic stuff.

But that second part has never happened to me so far.

Eva Stoppa wrote:



I wonder what is the point then of making translators sign tons of Agreements if no work is to come anyway.

Tom in London wrote:

I wouldn't worry too much about signing these documents. They are written by the lawyers who work for the agency and have to justify their existence.

In my (quite long) experience, the more legal agreements these agencies ask you to sign, the less work they give you.

Nikki Scott-Despaigne wrote:



Tom: I agree with what you indicate above but consider that it may not apply with the state the Korana describes. Their implication may need to be taken much more seriously.

Korana: It is not unusual to have to sign a contract and various undertakings when registering for work with an agency. However, if you are not at ease with what is being offered, the specific context making you all the more concerned, then do not sign with this agency.

EDIT: Do not be surprised that an agency asks such documents to be signed before any offer of work. it would be odd to sign a contract after having accepted to work for them.




[Edited at 2021-08-13 10:33 GMT]

Korana Lasić wrote:



There has been no actual job yet, something Philip rightfully pointed out, and the contracts are micromanaging the freelancer and designed so the freelancer takes all the risk.

If anyone in the agency makes an error and I don't catch it before I even accept the work, they can not pay me. If I make even a minor mistake they can not pay me.

Adieu, mistakes will be made. I am an excellent, bilingual, very versatile translator, but I am not a miracle worker or infallible. If I make too many mistakes, an LSP can stop working with me, after they pay me for my time and work. Hiring a subpar translator is the risk they take. Just like I, as a freelancer, take certain risks working with a new agency. I also do not catch anything about the projects I accept from people at 8 PM my time, before I start actually working on them, which can be a couple of days later.

I understand that they aimed to protect themselves from bad translators but that must be done by offering reasonable rates, which they do, and vetting your translators with a small job, as you mentioned. Not by expecting the freelancer to take his or her own risks, the risk the agency is supposed to take and the risk the two parties should share, and all that before you even have any actual work for them.

I'd just rather not.

Thank you all for your input. I really do appreciate it.

[Edited at 2021-08-13 09:54 GMT]

Heinrich Pesch wrote:

Telle these people you will sign these papers the moment they give you a job that justifies these documents. NDA for birthday greetings: no thanks!

Ice Scream wrote:


Actually, it is highly unlikely they could enforce them. IANAL but they can't enforce anything unreasonable whatever you have agreed.

Unless you've caused massive problems and with demonstrable negligence, it will not be worth their time and money coming after you. And if you have, well then you deserve it!

Korana Lasić wrote:
I've now received a total of three contracts to sign. The NDA, the vendor service agreement, a guide for freelancers, that, yes, needs to be signed as well and is basically another legal contract.

So basically, if...well..."anything at all", they can not pay me up to 100% and/or impose penalties.

Samuel Murray wrote:


Read them, then cross out any sections that you disagree with, sign in the margin, and sign the agreement at the end. Then scan/convert it to PDF again, and send it back. If they disagree with you crossing out any sections, they'll tell you, and then you can discuss it with them.


Perhaps what they mean is that their fuzzy match grid applies discounts to fuzzy match categories and that the discount for 100% matches is, well, 100% (i.e. they don't pay for 100% matches, and they pay a discounted rate for fuzzy matches). This is not abnormal. Or... are you sure they're talking about penalties for delivering work with mistakes in them?

Baran Keki wrote:

Sorry to appear to hijack/derail your topic, but this short clip really sums up my thoughts about NDAs and puts things into perspective:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PrajM-aG4tc