Interpreters… How do you know a large new government contract is in the process of being tendered and awarded?
Answer: Those weird emails from agencies offering new services, asking you to fill out a survey or asking you to confirm you want to stay on their books i.e. bump up the numbers of their suppliers (you) even though it’s possible you never registered with them in the first place.
What examples have we seen recently?
Sign Solutions put out a survey of freelancers about their fees and terms and conditions. They’ll have been tendering for the Ministry of Justice (MoJ) second generation contract and the National Framework by the Crown Commercial Service (CCS). Let’s hope they do not get either as a contender for worst ‘BSL specialist’ agency, who have tendered for contracts below which interpreters are willing to work. This has resulted in boycotts. Which have worked.
Pearl Linguistics and The Big Word have created some wonderful 10 minute online CPD courses on subjects such as safe guarding. Clearly a tick box exercise designed to fulfil some contract specification. If only government departments would listen to organisations like NUBSLI, NUPIT and PI4J when they’ve told them that CPD is individual to the interpreter and fees must be commensurate to enable the interpreter to source good quality CPD according to their individual needs. Makes a mockery of safe guarding procedures, doesn’t it?
Wales Council for the Deaf, (I can’t comment on their services as I do not know), suddenly emailed those in the South East and South West last year to see if interpreters would register with them. Why? Despite protests from NUBSLI, the Crown Commercial Service refused to change their regional contract structure into one that was more reflective of geographical areas and market conditions and lumped in Wales with the whole of the South of England. As a result Welsh providers were chasing interpreters in Kent.
Last year, Capita were fishing around via their various subsidiaries to see if interpreters would work for one hour for Access to Work users. Alledgely Action on Hearing Loss have been quoting for blocks of one hour. They already hold DWP contracts despite advising the DWP via UKCoD and other meetings. Separation of supply and advice? Not with these organisations. These queries will be coming from the DWP who is considering its options. National Framework or bust for Access to Work then.
All those requests for ID even though you are registered and have already provided these? The contract will state a requirement for a BPPS (Baseline Personnel Security Standard) check. Ever more bureaucratic hoops for interpreters to jump through.
So if you receive any strange requests, you can bet there’s an agency chasing some public sector business and seeing how much it can get away with before it sticks in a low tender and screws its suppliers: us.
Be careful how you reply, get behind your union, (NUBSLI or NUPIT), and get ready to stand strong.
The announcement of suppliers for the National Framework will be out later this month for an April start and is open to most public authorities in the UK. The MoJ contract notice is also due in March for start in October 2016 when the cuurent contract expires.
Further reading:
privatisation
There are 5 posts tagged privatisation (this is page 2 of 3).
#ScrapTheFramework latest: 1000 sign the letter, framework is not fit for purpose
As reported on the Limping Chicken blog earlier in the week, over 1000 signatories signed the open letter to Francis Maude MP, asking him to #ScrapTheFramework.
The letter included Len McCluskey, General Secretary of Unite the Union, leading campaign organisations and several MPs.
You can read the letter on NUBSLI’s campaign page.
This framework will change the way interpreting services are delivered to Deaf people in the UK, as well as covering all spoken language interpreting and other communication support such as lip speakers, deafblind interpreters, note takers and speech to text reporters. Privatisation of a whole sector in one go.
There is still work to be done in making representations to the Crown Commercial Service as there is a proposed two-hour minimum for interpreters and no travel expenses.
Aside from terms and conditions and fees the actual framework needs much more work. There are no stipulations about where Trainee Sign Language Interpreters (TSLIs) are able to work leaving agencies able to put Trainees into child protection and mental health. The NRCPD’s view. As long as registration is stipulated that is fine. It is not. Registered is RSLI: Registered Sign Language Interpreter. TSLI is on the register but not registered. Confused? So is everyone else. Trainees have yet to reach the National Occupational Standards and as such need to be protected and Deaf people safeguarded appropriately. NRCPD states on their website that Trainees should not work in legal settings and mental health. NRCPD, do what you say and tell the CCS no Trainees in mental health. Child protection should be explicitly stated too. As an unwritten rule the interpreting community has recognised this area as a no go for Trainees for years due to its legal as well as it’s moral nature.
On the spoken language interpreting side, there are low level qualifications stated for all areas, leaving the quality of provision dangerously low. Given that most agencies are motivated by profit the lowest possible common denominator gets the job not who is the most suitable. Private contracts are hardly safe when monitoring is left in the hands of private agencies who can make up their own figures (cf Ministry of Justice framework and ALS now Capita TI).
The way Deaf people are talked about is patronising and erroneous. “Non-spoken”, interpreters enable Deaf people “to access hearing” and if you are Deafblind you have access to video relay services. Hardly written from the basis of good knowledge and practice, or even common sense. No. This framework is a disaster waiting to happen.