In the recent
years I have mainly done conference interpreting for the EU institutions; or as
I call it, the interpreter’s paradise. You don’t have to fight for your working
conditions, basic stuff, such as a working console per interpreter and at least
two interpreters in a booth, working hours, including breaks or working
documents.
All I ever
complain about is the air-conditioned (recycled) air in the booths, artificial
lighting or insufficient legroom, as I happen to be a bit taller. Even as a
member of a remote interpreting team, I had little to complain about.
In general,
the conditions could hardly be better. Long forgotten are the days back in my
home country, when we sat in booths far away from the conference room, with no
view of what was going on there, sometimes, two interpreters sharing one
console (and one volume level in the earphones), sometimes only separated by a
plexiglass desk cover from the conference room, interpreting during breaks and
the like...
Well, last
week, I was interpreting at a workshop held far away from Brussels or even Slovakia’s
affluent capital.
When I
walked into the “booth” I realised, it’s going to be a big dilemma for me.
To start
with, the booth was probably meant for two teams (or maybe even just two
“one-man-teams”), as there was a wooden partition on the desk, separating what
appeared to be two working spaces. The booth was definitely not big enough for
four people, and “one-man-conference-interpreting” seems to be quite common
over here, so I assumed, the architect never bothered to actually ask someone,
who has an idea of how an interpreting booth needs to look like.
Another funny
fact: we didn’t have interpreting consoles. Instead, we had mixing consoles,
assumingly for DJs. The technicians, who installed the equipment, informed us
we would both have the same input volume in our headsets. After we protested, they
sighed but agreed to try and split the input into our earphones. They
succeeded, but in order to adjust my volume, I had to lean over to my
colleague’s mixing console and remember, which one of the dozens of controls
would turn the volume up or down. And of course, we had no “cough” button on
the mike.
And there
was my dilemma: of course you want to be professional and nice to people, not
presenting any “diva” requirements. On the other hand, as a professional you
should be able to point out, that a booth has to be for two people at least and
that two teams need to be separated by more than a wooden partition. The
possibility to adjust your own volume in the headset should be the lowest
minimum working standard for any interpreter.
I didn’t
say much to the technicians, as they were clearly specialised in providing
equipment for other types of events and not for interpreting. As a matter of
fact, one of them muttered something about six people working in the same room
into different languages at some other event, suggesting, my colleague and I
already had luxurious conditions as there were two of us who could take turns.
Can a
professional association change things, in a situation where clients consider
you ineligible, if you ask for two people in the booth? Can a professional
association change things, if colleagues are willing to work alone in the
booth, just to get the job? Would some “awareness raising” change their
attitude, if they get maybe 10 conference days in a year?
Can I, as a
“rich” interpreter come and “preach” to the “poor” ones that they have to
observe some standards? At a time when interpreters are being sneered at, as
“everybody speaks English anyway”, how do I convince clients that it is in
their interest to hire two people?
I’m trying
hard to get our professional association back on track and actually raise
awareness among colleagues and clients. Yet, I feel a little bit like a spoiled diva, for not just accepting the reality as it is. And the reality, my
colleagues tell me, is that there is no future for interpreting and translation
in Slovakia.