| Pages in topic: < [1 2 3] > | Freelance interpreter stole client Thread poster: kevin316
|
|---|
Neptunia
Local time: 20:52
Italian to English
| you have to pay for loyalty | Mar 30, 2016 |
It sounds like you expect the non-solicitation agreement to cover this situation even though the interpreter 1) didn't personally profit from your client and 2) the original job was completed.
It sounds like you require on-going loyalty which is usually something that people can only expect when they hire an employee and compensate them over an extended period of time. It is not negligent for the interpreter to have no idea that you expected that from a single freelance job. He sounds lik... See more It sounds like you expect the non-solicitation agreement to cover this situation even though the interpreter 1) didn't personally profit from your client and 2) the original job was completed.
It sounds like you require on-going loyalty which is usually something that people can only expect when they hire an employee and compensate them over an extended period of time. It is not negligent for the interpreter to have no idea that you expected that from a single freelance job. He sounds like a nice guy just trying to be helpful. It would be very interesting to see exactly what the terms are in the original agreement and if they would even be considered legal or binding in your jurisdiction. ▲ Collapse
| | | | Kevin Fulton 
United States
Local time: 14:52
German to English
| Professionalism | Mar 30, 2016 |
Robert Rietvelt wrote:
(snip)
I do some work for a certain translation agency, and a client of them (years ago) wanted to have direct contact with the translator (=me), or they would go to another agency. At first I refused, but they insisted. To make a long story short, I still work directly with this client. All contacts (personally) go directly by me, where the agency (still their end client) only acts as paying office.
It is a case of trust! I don't BS the agency and they don't BS me (they still give me other jobs).
Is such a "trust" still possible in these times? YES! It all depends on you (and by the way, I am working successfully with "their" end client for the last 5 years, and I have no intent to "steal" him).
Ideally this is the way it should work when all involved parties are professionals. An important aspect of professionalism is thinking in the long term. Many freelancers don't think past the current job and don't bother to cultivate an ongoing relationship with their agency clients. But this cuts both ways. Agencies likewise need to maintain relationships with their linguists. It pays off in the long run for both sides.
| | | |
Hey guys
First, I wanted to let you know I read every single reply. If I didn't address yours, sorry. There are too many things to address.
The most frequent request was to provide the relevant parts of the non-solicitation agreement. Here it is:
A. Solicitation of Clients. Interpreter acknowledges that Company spends considerable time and resources finding, attracting, and retaining clients. As such, Interpreter agrees that he or she will not, either dire... See more Hey guys
First, I wanted to let you know I read every single reply. If I didn't address yours, sorry. There are too many things to address.
The most frequent request was to provide the relevant parts of the non-solicitation agreement. Here it is:
A. Solicitation of Clients. Interpreter acknowledges that Company spends considerable time and resources finding, attracting, and retaining clients. As such, Interpreter agrees that he or she will not, either directly or indirectly, solicit any of the Company’s clients, or take away such clients, or attempt to solicit or take away clients of the Company, either on behalf of the Interpreter personally or for any other person or entity.
B. Interference. The Interpreter agrees that he or she will not, either directly or indirectly, interfere with the Company’s contracts and relationships, or prospective contracts and relationships, including, but not limited to, the Company’s customer or client contracts and relationships. ▲ Collapse
| | | | | Lesson learned, I guess | Mar 31, 2016 |
kevin316 wrote:
Yes, I was hesitant to give the client the interpreter's phone number. But I figured when they meet, they can exchange numbers then so it doesn't matter.
You are right here.
No, I didn't tell the client "don't contact my interpreter directly" because I had no reason to believe he would do that.
You were wrong here.
You should not only have said it, but should have WRITTEN it into the contract that you signed with him.
This could have been much simpler. "where did you get my number?" "I got it from XYZ Translation Company. "
or, it could have been like this: "where did you get my number?" "I am not sure, my secretary gave me a list" OR "I searched the internet"
It was your client who went after your interpreter, and he did that because he could. There was nothing to prevent him from going around you, and nothing to motivate him to go through you. I am sure it is a bitter lesson to learn, but the fact is, they will try to cut out the middleman, if they see no added value in having him. (I very much agree with what Ilan wrote earlier.)
Even if your interpreter refused the job, and told the client to call you, the client could have just called another interpreter (Google is his friend), or another agency, and disappear anyway.
| | |
|
|
|
Angela Malik
United Kingdom
Local time: 19:52
German to English
+ ...
| Not reasonable and not a correct interpretation of your own non-solicitation clause | Mar 31, 2016 |
kevin316 wrote:
I am not saying he did it deliberately. All I am saying is a reasonable interpreter in this situation would have made sure this client is not an agency's client. When an interpreter who works with many agencies picks up the phone, he has a duty to make sure something like this doesn't happen.
I'm not sure that is a reasonable interpretation of your non-solicitation clause. A translator or interpreter "who works with many agencies" as you say may have 20+ agency clients on their books. Are you suggesting they go down the list and contact everyone to find out if this guy may have once used their services first? That is unreasonable and also not part of the interpreter's obligations under a standard non-solicitation clause (and not part of yours in any case).
My understand of your non-solicitation clause is:
A. Solicitation of Clients. ... Interpreter agrees that he or she will not, either directly or indirectly, solicit any of the Company’s clients, or take away such clients, or attempt to solicit or take away clients of the Company, either on behalf of the Interpreter personally or for any other person or entity.
This is an active act. My understanding is that the client solicited the interpreter, not the other way around. The interpreter has not breached this clause.
B. Interference. The Interpreter agrees that he or she will not, either directly or indirectly, interfere with the Company’s contracts and relationships, or prospective contracts and relationships, including, but not limited to, the Company’s customer or client contracts and relationships.
Again, this feels active. As far as we know, the interpreter did not tell the client not to use your services or try to "interfere" with your relationship -- we don't even know if he or she knew that you had a relationship with this client to begin with. He didn't even poach your client -- he referred the client to someone else entirely, so your client did not become HIS client. Your client just left you. Get over it.
My advice: pay the interpreter for the work he did. That is a separate matter and you have no legal leg to stand on. What if your clients were to find out that you don't pay your interpreters? Then YOU would be interfering with your own client relationships. And then investigate why the client cut you out of the mix to begin with and think of ways to prevent that from happening in future. Either write a better contract for your clients or find a way to be indispensable to clients so they don't leave you in the first place.
[Edited at 2016-03-31 07:17 GMT]
| | | | | A few thoughts | Mar 31, 2016 |
kevin316 wrote:
I am not saying he did it deliberately. All I am saying is a reasonable interpreter in this situation would have made sure this client is not an agency's client. When an interpreter who works with many agencies picks up the phone, he has a duty to make sure something like this doesn't happen. This is negligence on his part.
Maybe the client in question wasn't actually your client when they phoned the interpreter. If they were your client, why did they not phone you? They could still have done so, even after the interpreter had recommended his friend. But they didn't.
kevin316 wrote:
This could have been much simpler. "where did you get my number?" "I got it from XYZ Translation Company. "ohhhhhhhhh really? sorry, you have to contact them directly."
I don't see how that works unless you have some form of agreement with the client to this effect. Is the client not free to choose their own interpreters? I don't understand about the phone number either - you gave the client the interpreter's phone number - the interpreter knows that, right? Or was it two different people phoning the interpreter?
| | | | Diana Coada (X)
United Kingdom
Local time: 19:52
Portuguese to English
+ ...
| I am sorry, but this is utter bollocks, to put it mildly! | Mar 31, 2016 |
kevin316 wrote:
All I am saying is a reasonable interpreter in this situation would have made sure this client is not an agency's client. When an interpreter who works with many agencies picks up the phone, he has a duty to make sure something like this doesn't happen. This is negligence on his part.
This could have been much simpler. "where did you get my number?" "I got it from XYZ Translation Company. "ohhhhhhhhh really? sorry, you have to contact them directly."
Colleagues here have already told you why.
Are you saying that every time someone calls me I'm supposed to say ''wait, if you are currently using any agency, I can't work with you''? And are you saying that a client cannot use the services of Agency X, Agency Y and Freelancer Z whenever they wish to do so?
[Edited at 2016-03-31 09:38 GMT]
| | | | mariealpilles
France
Local time: 20:52
Member (2014)
English to French
+ ...
| Interpreter stole client | Mar 31, 2016 |
I strongly disagree with you. If the client phones the interpreter directly, it is the client by passing you unless the interpreter has an exclusive contract with you.
| | |
|
|
|
| Wrong assumptions | Mar 31, 2016 |
kevin316 wrote:
I am not saying he did it deliberately. All I am saying is a reasonable interpreter in this situation would have made sure this client is not an agency's client. When an interpreter who works with many agencies picks up the phone, he has a duty to make sure something like this doesn't happen. This is negligence on his part.
It's like me accidentally crashing into someone's car. Deliberate? no. but I still have to pay for the damage because it was negligence on my part.
Wrong assumptions!
When I'm driving a car, I am expected to do so carefully and responsibly. When I translate, I am expected to do it carefully and responsibly.
However when a prospect or a client contacts me out of the blue, I can't be expected to rummage all my history, all the NDAs and non-soliciting agreements I've ever signed, to make sure I am not breaching any clause. Keep in mind that over the years I have signed maybe a hundred such agreements with translation agencies that have never assigned me any jobs.
I am a rather "abusively ethical" kind of guy. Both over the phone and personally, when a translation agency needs me to contact their client directly, usually for technical discussions on video work options, I introduce myself as a member of their staff. If the client realizes that I'm an outsider, and asks me anything about prices, I tell them, "Oh, I don't handle that part. We have an umbrella agreement encompassing all the many jobs we do together, you'd have to discuss your specific needs with (PM's name)".
Fortunately, so far I haven't had yet to introduce myself to the same client as a staff member of two different agencies!
Someone here mentioned the value your agency adds to the final product/service. This is very important! A middleman making money merely from being in the middle is obviously a waste of money. Though it is not about interpreting, I've put together some pointers for end clients on using agencies vs. hiring freelancers on THIS PAGE. Perhaps some ideas there would be useful.
For instance, when I am hired as an interpreter for a somewhat extended job, I make sure to have a backup. Being human, there are things that could make me suddenly unavailable. Though I am quite careful with that, these are times when I wish I were an agency, to have a much larger number of possible backups to deploy on a moment's notice.
Finally, on the options...
One of my best clients ever, I served them for 20 consecutive years without a written agreement. Only once we did draw an agreement for a specific project, as we needed it to show to a third party involved. It eventually got all soaked with beer, since we took the chance to celebrate over it. All the unavoidable disagreements we ever had were solved amicably and to mutual satisfaction in less than five minutes.
Whenever I see on the Blue Board or anywhere else that some agency was involved in legal action, either as a defendant for a translator to get paid, or as the plaintiff in a case like yours, I make a note to avoid them. Just like some end-clients try to get rid of middlemen, I proactively get rid of lawyers.
| | | | | client didn't do it deliberately either | Mar 31, 2016 |
Hey guys
thanks for all your responses. I can assure you I read each and every one. I got what I needed. But I also wanted to give some additional info.
The client did not deliberately try to cut me out. in fact, the client didn't even know I was a middleman.
This is how it happened the second time: Client calls me and says he needs an interpreter again. He says "I called X, but he is not available." I prepare the agreement and send it 30 minutes later. I ... See more Hey guys
thanks for all your responses. I can assure you I read each and every one. I got what I needed. But I also wanted to give some additional info.
The client did not deliberately try to cut me out. in fact, the client didn't even know I was a middleman.
This is how it happened the second time: Client calls me and says he needs an interpreter again. He says "I called X, but he is not available." I prepare the agreement and send it 30 minutes later. I call him to make sure he received agreement. He says "I just called THE GIRL and she is coming today. I will sign and send your agreement shortly. "
I say "What girl? What are you talking about?"
He says "X's friend."
I say "I don't know anything about this. She is not a part of our company. Whatever transaction you guys have, that's between you and her. We are not involved"
After I hung up, I realized I could have pretended the girl is with my company and made some money from this.
Some of you said I should have a "dont steal our interpreter" clause in my agreement with the client. I thought about that, but that gives away the fact that the interpreter is not a part of the company, and it makes the service look cheap. I like the client to believe the interpreter is an employee of the company and not a freelancer. ▲ Collapse
| | | | | So you caused it yourself | Mar 31, 2016 |
kevin316 wrote:
the client didn't even know I was a middleman.
but that gives away the fact that the interpreter is not a part of the company, and it makes the service look cheap. I like the client to believe the interpreter is an employee of the company and not a freelancer.
Basically, you have lied to the client about the interpreter's relation to you, and the lie has come back like a boomerang and hit you in the face, and then you blame the interpreter for having egg on your face.
Sorry if I sound harsh, but that's essentially what you have done.
Couldn't you just have been transparent and honest instead of hiding and manipulating?
I've never ever in my life heard that a service should be "cheap" because it is outsourced to a specialist, and particularly not in this business where it is common practice.
Since you've made the client wrongly believe the interpreter is an employee, the client would not have understood why he shouldn't contact that person directly, and now you see the result of trying to play games with this.
The worst is you've tried to blame the interpreter for your own mistake and even thought of not paying him for the honest work he has done for you.
You need to get your act together and stop playing games, stop manipulating and stop lying. Then you're less likely to run into such problems.
| | | | Inga Petkelyte
Portugal
Local time: 19:52
Lithuanian to Portuguese
+ ...
| Unthinkable in Portugal | Mar 31, 2016 |
Suing anyone in such situation is unthinkable in Portugal.
Once, many moons ago already, I was contaced by an agency iabout interpreting at a conference. We agreed about terms and the lady, the agency owner, asked whether I knew more interpreters in requested languages. I knew, I told and asked how we should make arrangements and how should I protect my interpreters from the future direct hiring by this agency.
The answer was: "You can't. Once we have direct contacts, it becomes a di... See more Suing anyone in such situation is unthinkable in Portugal.
Once, many moons ago already, I was contaced by an agency iabout interpreting at a conference. We agreed about terms and the lady, the agency owner, asked whether I knew more interpreters in requested languages. I knew, I told and asked how we should make arrangements and how should I protect my interpreters from the future direct hiring by this agency.
The answer was: "You can't. Once we have direct contacts, it becomes a direct relationship between us and them, and it is up to the interpreters if they accept our direct orders or not". ▲ Collapse
| | |
|
|
|
kevin316 wrote:
The client did not deliberately try to cut me out. in fact, the client didn't even know I was a middleman.
That's the very point: a middleman adds NO value!
If you sell interpreting services at the time and place requested, it means that you are accountable for having someone there properly qualified to do it.
kevin316 wrote:
This is how it happened the second time: Client calls me and says he needs an interpreter again. He says "I called X, but he is not available." I prepare the agreement and send it 30 minutes later. I call him to make sure he received agreement. He says "I just called THE GIRL and she is coming today. I will sign and send your agreement shortly. "
I say "What girl? What are you talking about?"
He says "X's friend."
I say "I don't know anything about this. She is not a part of our company. Whatever transaction you guys have, that's between you and her. We are not involved"
If THE GIRL simply doesn't show up, or if she can do no more than babble a few words in either one language, the client will be in trouble.
Likewise, if X were available, bypassed you, took the job and, for any reason failed to show up, all your client could do was to refrain from paying her.
You clearly have some selling points you could use with your client, that would place you on a higher level than a mere 'middleman'.
kevin316 wrote:
Some of you said I should have a "dont steal our interpreter" clause in my agreement with the client. I thought about that, but that gives away the fact that the interpreter is not a part of the company, and it makes the service look cheap. I like the client to believe the interpreter is an employee of the company and not a freelancer.
As a translation agency, you sell professional interpreting SERVICES. When they hire X or THE GIRL, they are only hiring THEM, with whatever they are able to do by themselves, which may include good quality interpreting services or not.
| | | | LEXpert
United States
Local time: 13:52
Member (2008)
Croatian to English
+ ...
kevin316 wrote:
After I hung up, I realized I could have pretended the girl is with my company and made some money from this.
I like the client to believe the interpreter is an employee of the company and not a freelancer.
In other words, you wouldn't hesitate to commit (probably tortious) interference in a business relationship that doesn't involve you, and you knowingly misrepresent your independent contractors as actual employees?
Both of those are really bad ideas.
| | | | | to kevin 316 on this part | Mar 31, 2016 |
kevin316 wrote:
This could have been much simpler. "where did you get my number?"
I don't think that you are fully aware of the reality of what freelancers do.
I am a freelance translator. I must advertise my services in order to get customers. Some customers are end clients. Agencies such as yourself are also customers (who happen to have their customers). Since I put the word out that I provide a service, customers are going to contact me. That is how businesses work. Customers know about you, and contact you.
Clients contact us just like they contact you. I would have no reason to ask a client "Where did you get my number?" After all, when you advertise your business, you are going to give contact information. Why should a customer NOT have a professional freelancer's contact information? (phone number, e-mail, fax, Skype etc.) We put it out there just like you do.
You must also realize that for a freelancer linguist, you are one of any number of agencies that he works for. When a customer calls us out of the blue and we can't handle the work, there is no reason for us to recommend your agency in particular. In fact, I'd be much more likely to recommend a colleague like this gentleman has done. Why? Because I know the quality of my colleague's work. I do not know the quality of the unknown translator or interpreter whom you might hire. However, if the job calls for an agency --- say multiple languages or large volume requiring several translators - then I would recommend an agency that I know is well organized whose quality requirements resemble my own.
A lot of non-competition clauses have been borrowed from material intended for employment. An employee works several years in a company and could poach the clients and set up shop on his own. These clauses don't work in freelancing. Joe Blow contacts agency X, which hires me to translate, without telling me the name of their customer. Later Joe Blow tries agency Y, which also hires me. Finally Joe Blow contacts me for a third translation. This is the first time I actually see the name Joe Blow because previously he was always "our client" - some anonymous person. There is no way I can avoid working for a customer who once commissioned work from one of my agency clients.
The ethics come into play in regards to active poaching. I work for the client and tell him, "Look, why spend all that extra money. Next time come to me directly and I'll cut you a deal."
| | | | | Pages in topic: < [1 2 3] > | To report site rules violations or get help, contact a site moderator: You can also contact site staff by submitting a support request » Freelance interpreter stole client | CafeTran Espresso | You've never met a CAT tool this clever!
Translate faster & easier, using a sophisticated CAT tool built by a translator / developer.
Accept jobs from clients who use Trados, MemoQ, Wordfast & major CAT tools.
Download and start using CafeTran Espresso -- for free
Buy now! » |
| | 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
