Client agreed to pay by source wordcount, but now only accept target wordcount
Samuel Murray Netherlands Local time: 22:24 Member (2006) English to Afrikaans + ...
I don't think they have a valid argument
Feb 1
Hoa Hoang wrote:
Now they told me they would only pay me by target word count. The problem is the target word count is a lot less than the source (10k vs. 14k)... But now they said their client would only pay them by target word count.
They did not know in advance how many words there were, and neither did their client. The client could not have known what this translation was going to cost him. It is possible that the client was told a per-word rate, but the actual number of words (and thus final amount) was not known in advance.
My guess at what had happened here is that the agency told the client "we'll charge you X per word", and then when the final file came, they simply counted the words without thinking about it. Now the client has already paid (or he has been told the amount) and it is awkward for the agency to go back to the client with the new, higher amount.
However, the fact is that you had worked hard to translate those 4000 words for which the client now wants to pay you nothing (or $50). You could easily have worked 8 hours on those 4000 words, but the client wants to pay nothing for it. The fact that there are 4000 words less in the target text does not mean that you had worked 8 hours less on the target text.
Even if you decide to accept the average difference in word counts, it still means $200 loss, 4 hours' loss, and 2000 words translated for free.
Subject:
Comment:
The contents of this post will automatically be included in the ticket generated. Please add any additional comments or explanation (optional)
Hoa Hoang Vietnam Local time: 03:24 Member (2011) English to Vietnamese + ...
TOPIC STARTER
Editable .pdf
Feb 2
Hi Lisa and Rudolf,
I understand there are some scanned PDF files which are very difficult to count the words, but we still have OCR softs, don't we. And in my case, the pdf file is totally editable and convertable, that's why I quoted by source word and they did agree. If they had stated from the beginning that they were paying for target wordcount, everything would have been different now.
Thank you everyone for your advice! I guess I should take it as a lesson as it seems there's nothing I can do now to make them pay me for all those 14k words.
Subject:
Comment:
The contents of this post will automatically be included in the ticket generated. Please add any additional comments or explanation (optional)
JaneD Sweden Local time: 22:24 Member (2009) Swedish to English + ...
Agree with Phil
Feb 2
If it's an editable, convertable .pdf, and you have an email in which they agreed to a source word basis, then they are simply cheating you.
Try explaining it nicely first, but if that doesn't work then there's nothing to lose by giving them a bad score on the Blue Board - after all, you aren't going to work with them again, are you?!
Subject:
Comment:
The contents of this post will automatically be included in the ticket generated. Please add any additional comments or explanation (optional)
This shows once more how important it always is to KNOW what the deal between the end client and the agency was.
I'm sorry, but I have to disagree. What an agency agrees with his clients is totally irrelevant. You have a deal with the agency, with noone else. The agency agreed to source count, so that's the deal. Whether the end client pays by target wordcount, flat fee, or not at all, is of no consequence.
Subject:
Comment:
The contents of this post will automatically be included in the ticket generated. Please add any additional comments or explanation (optional)
Laurent KRAULAND France Local time: 22:24 Member (2007) French to German + ...
Very relevant, I think
Feb 2
Jan Willem van Dormolen wrote:
Laurent KRAULAND wrote:
This shows once more how important it always is to KNOW what the deal between the end client and the agency was.
I'm sorry, but I have to disagree. What an agency agrees with his clients is totally irrelevant. You have a deal with the agency, with noone else. The agency agreed to source count, so that's the deal. Whether the end client pays by target wordcount, flat fee, or not at all, is of no consequence.
Very relevant, I think. As an agency, you (general "you") cannot have it both ways.
As in this case, agreeing to pay the translator by source words AND accepting to be paid by target words is what I'd call mild schizophrenia (or plain cheat, your pick).
I am simply pointing to the fact that, contrary to the most widespread opinion, it is actually possible to enter into a tripartite contract between end client, agency and translator.
I wonder why this option gets so easily rejected or is not even taken into consideration.
[Edited at 2012-02-02 11:04 GMT]
Subject:
Comment:
The contents of this post will automatically be included in the ticket generated. Please add any additional comments or explanation (optional)
Janet Rubin Australia Member (2008) German to English
OT: "tripartite" contract
Feb 2
Laurent KRAULAND wrote:
I am simply pointing to the fact that, contrary to the most widespread opinion, it is actually possible to enter into a tripartite contract between end client, agency and translator ... I wonder why this option gets so easily rejected or is not even taken into
Laurent, my guess is that this concept is summarily rejected because when we work with an agency, that agency is our client. It performs (or should perform) certain services that add value, but more importantly, it is also responsible for paying us for our services.
As we have all stated many times over in many other threads, the remuneration paid to the translator is not/should not be dependent on whether, when, and how much the end client pays the agency. A contract with the agency bolsters this tenet, while a tripartite agreement would likely negate it.
My take on it is, if we suddenly offered to engage in some kind of three-way agreement, then our contractual right to be remunerated would no longer exist as we recognize it; we would be embroiled in more of these disputes and controversies on an even more frequent basis, and they would become even more complicated.
Subject:
Comment:
The contents of this post will automatically be included in the ticket generated. Please add any additional comments or explanation (optional)
As in this case, agreeing to pay the translator by source words AND accepting to be paid by target words is what I'd call mild schizophrenia (or plain cheat, your pick).
It might not be clever of the agency to do so (and in this case, I think it might well be a blunder on the part of the agency), but if they want it that way, that's up to them. As translator, you are have part in the strategic decisions of the agency. The only thing what matters is: you agreed to a deal, you delivered your part of the deal and now it's up to the agency to deliver its part.
BTW, I don't see how this construction (source to translator, target to client) would constitute cheating. Strange, yes. Stupid, possibly. But cheating?
Subject:
Comment:
The contents of this post will automatically be included in the ticket generated. Please add any additional comments or explanation (optional)
Laurent KRAULAND France Local time: 22:24 Member (2007) French to German + ...
OT continued
Feb 2
Janet, I will not try to convince you or anybody else about the usefulness of tripârtite contracts or agreements.
My point of view is that they would at least avoid scenarios in which the agency contacts the translator after the completion of a job and begins shifting goalposts with the opening sentence "The client told us that [insert reason for non-payment or minored payment here]" (whether this is true or not).
What I think is that a vast majority of translators is still under the impression that there is no way out of the Work for hire concept.
Subject:
Comment:
The contents of this post will automatically be included in the ticket generated. Please add any additional comments or explanation (optional)
Laurent KRAULAND France Local time: 22:24 Member (2007) French to German + ...
About the use of "cheating"
Feb 2
Jan Willem van Dormolen wrote:
(.../...)
BTW, I don't see how this construction (source to translator, target to client) would constitute cheating. Strange, yes. Stupid, possibly. But cheating?
Like in: This agency has apparently cheated Hoa by letting her assume that payment would be made according to the source text wordcount.
(edited for typo)
[Edited at 2012-02-02 16:48 GMT]
Subject:
Comment:
The contents of this post will automatically be included in the ticket generated. Please add any additional comments or explanation (optional)
Lisa Simpson, MCIL United Kingdom Local time: 21:24 Member (2010) Portuguese to English + ...
Read the PO
Feb 2
It's a lesson for us all. We should pay attention to what is in the PO because unless the contents are disputed that is what stands. If the job was based on the source word count, the PO in this instance should have stated the number of words, otherwise I would assume 'TBA' meant target. Either way these matters should all be queried and clarified before the job even starts.
Subject:
Comment:
The contents of this post will automatically be included in the ticket generated. Please add any additional comments or explanation (optional)
Laurent KRAULAND France Local time: 22:24 Member (2007) French to German + ...
To Be Announced
Feb 2
Lisa Simpson, MCIL wrote:
It's a lesson for us all. We should pay attention to what is in the PO because unless the contents are disputed that is what stands. If the job was based on the source word count, the PO in this instance should have stated the number of words, otherwise I would assume 'TBA' meant target. Either way these matters should all be queried and clarified before the job even starts.
Hoa, however, would have announced the wordcount according to what she agreed to, namely source wordcount.
I nevertheless agree that 'TBA' is more than ambiguous and therefore should NEVER be used in purchase orders unless translators make a rather generous or very generous estimate to their advantage (for example I would announce not less than ST x 1.33 for DE>FR).
Subject:
Comment:
The contents of this post will automatically be included in the ticket generated. Please add any additional comments or explanation (optional)
sbrowne Argentina Local time: 17:24 English to Spanish + ...
English to Spanish is more or less the like
Feb 7
Heinrich Pesch wrote:
[In my case Finnish has about 25 per cent less words than the same text in German, so I invoice for Finnish more than for German, if the words are counted.]
OK Heinrich, but, what about the extra words you've got to type when actually doing the job? Or do you have a highly different rate for one language than the other? Because down-here the issue exists about quoting English/Spanish source or target jobs. 25% more or less means quite a diference in terms of money earnings.
Sylvia
Subject:
Comment:
The contents of this post will automatically be included in the ticket generated. Please add any additional comments or explanation (optional)
Anne R Italy Local time: 22:24 Member (Jan 2012) English to French
Converting pdf file
Feb 20
And in my case, the pdf file is totally editable and convertable, that's why I quoted by source word and they did agree. If they had stated from the beginning that they were paying for target wordcount, everything would have been different now.
Hello,
I have converted PDF files in the past as well, to be able to work quicker. Even if it is a bit time consuming because I may have to do a bit of cleaning of repetitive, unnecessary bits like headers and footers, I take the time to do it and then I send my converted word file with wordcount to the client, and tell them I will work from that file, and from that worcount, ask them if they agree with it and tell them I'll start as soon as I write back with their go-ahead.
You did not do this and this is a pity and a lesson to be learnt, surely, but I would say that this agency has not been acting very professionally, because 1- they should have checked whether or not the file could be extracted as a word file for you to work on, or at least tell you you can do it, and 2-, they should definitely have agreed a wordcount /payment fee in advance with you, which they did not. Since you wrote "black on white", what your rates were and per source language and they gave you the go ahead then, this is their responsibility now if they are going to loose money because their client wants to pay per target language and they did not think of doing the preparation work that would have enabled them to know how high the wordcount is.
As a last comment, I used to work in a translation agency myself in the past, and when we got PDF files that could be converted we actually did it for the translators, to ease their work, and when the PDF file could not be converted at all, we did an estimate by counting, yes, counting, the words on a few paragraghs and calculating an average word count per paragraph that would allow us to calculate and estimate the total wordcount for the document, and then, we checked with the translator whether s/he thought that was fair, prior to have them agree to do the job. Obviously this is not exact science and we only did it with smaller documents, but what is important there is the fact that we always asked translators whether they agreed, and were ready to do the job at that estimated source language word count.
Subject:
Comment:
The contents of this post will automatically be included in the ticket generated. Please add any additional comments or explanation (optional)
Lisa McCarthy Spain Local time: 22:24 Member (2007) Spanish to English
Stick to your guns
Feb 27
Hoa, I think you have a strong case for asking this agency to pay you as agreed.
The bottom line is that they either screwed up by not reading the quote properly or are trying to cheat you.
It's true that you will learn a lesson through this but you shouldn´t have to lose out on money owed to you. Forward the agency a copy of the relevant email correspondence between you, highlighting the part where it says 'per SOURCE word'. See what they say then, and if you get no joy tell them you may have to consider posting negatively on the Blue Board or elsewhere.
Good luck!
Subject:
Comment:
The contents of this post will automatically be included in the ticket generated. Please add any additional comments or explanation (optional)
SDL provides market-leading translation software to over 185,000 users
SDL offers leading translation management solutions to meet LSPs needs throughout the whole translation supply chain.
With over 185,000 licenses being used by translators and organizations worldwide, our products will help you to connect to a supply chain that guarantees compatibility, making it easier to work with your customers and other users.
PerfectIt helps deliver error-free documents. It improves consistency, ensures quality and helps to enforce style guides. It’s a powerful tool for pro users, and comes with the assurance of a 30-day money back guarantee.
The translation workplace 
Translation news