Pages in topic:   < [1 2 3] >
Job posters are now able to specify "confidentiality level"
Thread poster: Henry Dotterer
Henry Dotterer
Henry Dotterer
Local time: 02:57
SITE FOUNDER
TOPIC STARTER
Thanks, Katalin - we'll add a disclaimer Dec 20, 2016

Katalin Horváth McClure wrote:
I think this shows that this may be another option that is not needed and not understood by most outsourcers.

I think you are underestimating people there. Of course most outsourcers need to, and do, understand that confidentiality levels can vary from job to job.

Another problem is that it is vague, and carries the risk of misinterpretation. It opens up the possibility of the outsourcer using it in lieu of a proper NDA, and subsequently claiming confidentiality breach for whatever reason.

I think that just about anyone in the business should and would know better than to rely on this setting to meet any confidentiality obligations. But I take your point and will add a disclaimer. Thanks!


 
Annamaria Amik
Annamaria Amik  Identity Verified
Local time: 08:57
Romanian to English
+ ...
Whose requirement is it? Dec 21, 2016

Mirko Mainardi wrote:

I was obviously referring to your entire post, since you picked a single item from Gianni's to apparently (and sarcastically) dismiss the whole thing, while in my opinion it does raise some valid points, as you yourself admitted in your previous reply to me. That was the gist of my entire reply.

I see a job posting and am unsure as to whether the client will require me to be VIES registered or not, as they might very well have multiple branches around the world and I am not sure where they are legally based for tax purposes and/or if they have multiple "HQs". In such a case, would a "VIES required" flag be helpful to me? I would think so. But I concede that would be quite the peculiar case.


Mirko, I do admit I was being sarcastic, because I see so many translators who just won't do their homework paper- and registration-wise, and VIES is just an example of that, at least for someone based in the EU. Besides, I think our colleague was sarcastic, as well, although he raised some valid points that should somehow be implemented (see my suggestions below).
But saying VIES registration is the client's requirement is misleading, because it is NOT the client who requires this arbitrarily.

Anyhow, when I work with a client from a distant country, I should at least be prepared that the job might come with tax formalities unknown to me, instead of just refusing anything beyond what's the simplest way for me?

Although this is OT, I'll continue here, since he raised this issue here. I would call this section Formalities required or something else that is decent and less sarcastic.
Actually, stupid tax-related requirements are easier to handle, because more often than not, the agencies are just ignorant and you can enlighten them, if you are equipped with the relevant information. If you intend to do business in a foreign country, isn't it reasonable that you at least check what formalities are necessary?

What I can't just as easily cope with is:
1) those insane agency portals, where you spend unreasonable amounts of time on registering, submitting copies of this or that, issuing invoices in their own format, THEN issuing your own one, because obviously you have to meet YOUR country's legal requirements as to invoice format, etc. Often this part takes more than a small translation.
2) formalities during translation. Including mandatory update of their glossaries, use of a mandatory proprietary CAT tool. Or mandatory QA - every single time I had to run a QA, I spent more time clicking on ignore this or that rule than making valid adjustments to my translation based on the QA findings.
3) style guides.
4) how long their NDA is. It sounds stupid, but I would force them to state how many pages of that I have to read before I am even considered for the job. They should also be forced to state if they have what I call the "spying clause", i.e. reporting to them if any client of theirs approaches me, this instead of a reasonable non-solicitation clause which is just that, non-solicitation.
5) invoicing formalities. I have clients that expect me to issue a separate invoice for every single tiny job, while they are not willing to pay minimum fees, rather than just allow me to send my invoice at the end of the month. Payment term should also be mentioned.
6) post-translation formalities. While I find this a reasonable and often very helpful step, I should know in advance if I have to review and comment the proofreader's changes. Often agencies that are new to me just send the proofread text back for comments asap, when I'm already in the middle of another job.


 
Tom in London
Tom in London
United Kingdom
Local time: 06:57
Member (2008)
Italian to English
next Dec 21, 2016

I'm wondering what the next brilliant idea is going to be. Should I take cover?

 
José Henrique Lamensdorf
José Henrique Lamensdorf  Identity Verified
Brazil
Local time: 03:57
English to Portuguese
+ ...
In memoriam
Yes, duuuck! Dec 21, 2016

Tom in London wrote:

I'm wondering what the next brilliant idea is going to be. Should I take cover?


We are at risk of being shot by a runaway think tank.


 
Fiona Grace Peterson
Fiona Grace Peterson  Identity Verified
Italy
Local time: 07:57
Italian to English
How exactly? Dec 21, 2016

Henry Dotterer wrote:

The addition of this field relates to the SecurePRO™ program recently announced.



Could you please elaborate, Henry? How is this field related to the Secure Pro program, if our rights as member to apply for jobs are not affected on the basis of which membership package we've signed up for?

I also think that a poster specifying medium or high security should be required to give details of its requirements in the job posting itself. Otherwise it's just a box that can be distractedly, and perhaps unjustifiably ticked without posters really being sure of what their own requirements are.

Call me cynical, but I can't help feeling this is another way of encouraging posters to disregard applicants who are not SecurePROs. But that’s a story for another time... or thread.

[Edited at 2016-12-21 13:06 GMT]


 
Samuel Murray
Samuel Murray  Identity Verified
Netherlands
Local time: 07:57
Member (2006)
English to Afrikaans
+ ...
So... Dec 21, 2016

Henry Dotterer wrote:
The addition of this field relates to the SecurePRO™ program recently announced.


So, does this mean that eventually translators who have a certain level of identity verification will be given preference in being notified about jobs for clients that set the confidentiality level to "high"?


 
Robert Forstag
Robert Forstag  Identity Verified
United States
Local time: 02:57
Spanish to English
+ ...
It is hard to see how any of this is helpful to freelancers Dec 21, 2016

José Henrique Lamensdorf wrote:

Tom in London wrote:

I'm wondering what the next brilliant idea is going to be. Should I take cover?


We are at risk of being shot by a runaway think tank.


I am in sympathy with the sentiments here.

Let's get real: The projects posted on the Jobs Board at best offer marginal rates and are (at least for the main language combinations) subject to intense competition. I've seen small jobs offering low rates attract more than 100 quotes. This is not at all unusual.

So now the idea is to enable posters to further classify their postings. The tendency will almost certainly be to assign higher levels of confidentiality rather than lower (just as the tendency is to assign urgent deadlines to jobs that really are not urgent). After all, no agency wants to suggest that its jobs are somehow less important or prestigious than those of other agencies.

I agree that this creates unneeded confusion, and also that it gives unscrupulous agencies an excuse to later cry foul regarding alleged breach of confidentiality.

If a given agency requires logging in to a triple-encrypted site requiring the downloading of a plug-in, and this after conducting a detailed background check and personal interrogation of each candidate for a given project, then it can indicate this in the posting itself.

There is no need to encourage the introduction of complications into a system that is already burdened with flaws and unattractive to freelancers.

If there is no interest in addressing the problems in the system that already exist, then one might at least expect that new ones not be introduced....

[Edited at 2016-12-21 14:59 GMT]


 
Henry Dotterer
Henry Dotterer
Local time: 02:57
SITE FOUNDER
TOPIC STARTER
SecurePRO program is an initiative Dec 21, 2016

Fiona Grace Peterson wrote:

Henry Dotterer wrote:
The addition of this field relates to the SecurePRO™ program recently announced.


Could you please elaborate, Henry? How is this field related to the Secure Pro program, if our rights as member to apply for jobs are not affected on the basis of which membership package we've signed up for?
...
Call me cynical, but I can't help feeling this is another way of encouraging posters to disregard applicants who are not SecurePROs.

Ha ha, self-awareness is good, cynicism can cloud judgment, though. Please start by understanding that the SecurePRO program is not a monetization gimmick. It is an initiative to boost the industry's ability to assure confidentiality in projects involving remote outsourcing. The rationale and goals of the program are covered at some length in the introductory video. If you watch that video I think you will understand the purpose of giving job posters the option of specifying a confidentiality level, even if there are no technical ramifications.

Related, in the recent update of the ProZ.com professional guidelines, this line was added: "Professional translators, interpreters and translation companies... reach agreement with counter-parties, before projects start, on terms such as... data security and confidentiality requirements." There are no technical ramifications to that, but it is also consistent with the SecurePRO program.

I also think that a poster specifying medium or high security should be required to give details of its requirements in the job posting itself. Otherwise it's just a box that can be distractedly, and perhaps unjustifiably ticked without posters really being sure of what their own requirements are.

I disagree with that. A job poster should be able to indicate that confidentiality is important on a given job, and leave any further discussion on the matter for private agreement with the translator or translators selected.


 
Henry Dotterer
Henry Dotterer
Local time: 02:57
SITE FOUNDER
TOPIC STARTER
No such restrictions, Samuel Dec 21, 2016

Samuel Murray wrote:

Henry Dotterer wrote:
The addition of this field relates to the SecurePRO™ program recently announced.

So, does this mean that eventually translators who have a certain level of identity verification will be given preference in being notified about jobs for clients that set the confidentiality level to "high"?

No, I don't think so. This field is just what it is. The poster can optionally specify a confidentiality level, for informational purposes.


 
Henry Dotterer
Henry Dotterer
Local time: 02:57
SITE FOUNDER
TOPIC STARTER
Thanks, Tom, Robert and José Dec 21, 2016

Tom in London wrote:
I'm wondering what the next brilliant idea is going to be. Should I take cover?

José Henrique Lamensdorf wrote:
We are at risk of being shot by a runaway think tank.

Robert Forstag wrote:
If there is no interest in addressing the problems in the system that already exist, then one might at least expect that new ones not be introduced....

Hee hee!

Thanks for your many years of membership, Robert, José and Tom, and thank you for so frequently being ready to critique and criticize new services. (Believe it or not, I'm being serious about that; there is always something to be learned from feedback of any substance. Well OK, "duuuck!" doesn't give me much to work with, but you take my point.)

In this case, I predict that all three of you will better grasp the goals of the SecurePRO program, and better understand the benefits to your own august selves, as we move forward. But let's see!


 
Katalin Szilárd
Katalin Szilárd  Identity Verified
Hungary
Local time: 07:57
English to Hungarian
+ ...
Candy shop Dec 21, 2016

Henry Dotterer wrote:
It is an initiative to boost the industry's ability to assure confidentiality in projects involving remote outsourcing.
I also think that a poster specifying medium or high security should be required to give details of its requirements in the job posting itself. Otherwise it's just a box that can be distractedly, and perhaps unjustifiably ticked without posters really being sure of what their own requirements are.

I disagree with that. A job poster should be able to indicate that confidentiality is important on a given job, and leave any further discussion on the matter for private agreement with the translator or translators selected.


Henry,

The problem is that (as mentioned before) many agencies that are posting in the job board looking for "best rate" translators. Many of them can't even decide the right field they need or don't even answer when somebody asks questions concerning the project. If an agency doesn't care about the quality of the translation (they just care about best rates), why would they care about confidentiality? I don't mean whether they tick highest confidentiality level in the requirements (because they will) but whether they really practice those high confidentiality requirements what they are asking from translators? Or are they just like kids in a candy shop when all candies are available at once? Why should we give the option for such agencies looking for translators with SecureCard? As mentioned before agencies that concern about confidentiality usually don't even post, but they have competent project managers to decide whom to contact personally concerning that project.

Katalin


 
Henry Dotterer
Henry Dotterer
Local time: 02:57
SITE FOUNDER
TOPIC STARTER
Degree of sensitivity does matter for most LSPs (and for most job posters) Dec 21, 2016

Katalin Szilárd wrote:
The problem is that (as mentioned before) many agencies that are posting in the job board looking for "best rate" translators. Many of them can't even decide the right field they need or don't even answer when somebody asks questions concerning the project. If an agency doesn't care about the quality of the translation (they just care about best rates), why would they care about confidentiality?

You are describing a certain type of unprofessional translation company. Most of those in business do care about confidentiality. They have to.

I don't mean whether they tick highest confidentiality level in the requirements (because they will)

But they are not. "High" has been selected just 28% of the time. The experience so far suggests that the feature is being used with some degree of discretion.

but whether they really practice those high confidentiality requirements what they are asking from translators?

I think that is an open question. I'm with you on that one.

Why should we give the option for such agencies looking for translators with SecureCard?

We don't, not in connection with this confidentiality level feature.

As mentioned before agencies that concern about confidentiality usually don't even post, but they have competent project managers to decide whom to contact personally concerning that project.

It is true that as opposed to job postings, directory searches and direct contact via profile will be found more frequently among established translation companies. But it does not follow that none of those who post jobs care about confidentiality. It simply is not the case.


 
Robert Forstag
Robert Forstag  Identity Verified
United States
Local time: 02:57
Spanish to English
+ ...
To clarify Dec 21, 2016

I see two problems with providing the opportunity for job posters to indicate confidentiality level with a single word:

1.) The single word can serve as a substitute for the kinds of onerous requirements I indicated in my previous post. In practical terms, if I see a posting with a reasonable or marginal rate marked "high" confidentiality and with no further information on the post, I have no way of knowing if this does or does not imply any requirement beyond the completion of a st
... See more
I see two problems with providing the opportunity for job posters to indicate confidentiality level with a single word:

1.) The single word can serve as a substitute for the kinds of onerous requirements I indicated in my previous post. In practical terms, if I see a posting with a reasonable or marginal rate marked "high" confidentiality and with no further information on the post, I have no way of knowing if this does or does not imply any requirement beyond the completion of a standard NDA. So I don't really have the information that I need to know in order to decide whether or not to take the time to apply. (In this respect, "Registration on our Supersecure Dedicated Site for this project and downloading of a plugin" is a lot more helpful than "Confidentiality: High")

2.) Introducing such an option encourages a tendency to introduce further requirements for freelancers to acquire access to work without providing any extra consideration for the additional effort involved (and, indeed, without necessarily providing further guarantees of confidentiality beyond what might be expected from standard and prudent practice on the part of the freelancer).
Collapse


 
Henry Dotterer
Henry Dotterer
Local time: 02:57
SITE FOUNDER
TOPIC STARTER
The opposite, Robert Dec 21, 2016

Robert Forstag wrote:

I see two problems with providing the opportunity for job posters to indicate confidentiality level with a single word:

1.) The single word can serve as a substitute for the kinds of onerous requirements I indicated in my previous post. In practical terms, if I see a posting with a reasonable or marginal rate marked "high" confidentiality and with no further information on the post, I have no way of knowing if this does or does not imply any requirement beyond the completion of a standard NDA. So I don't really have the information that I need to know in order to decide whether or not to take the time to apply. (In this respect, "Registration on our Supersecure Dedicated Site for this project and downloading of a plugin" is a lot more helpful than "Confidentiality: High")

As you mentioned previously, nothing is stopping a job poster from including a note about confidentiality in their job posting. So using the new field to indicate a "High" confidentiality level is no more informative, and conversely no more potentially damaging, than including a line like "Confidentiality is important on this job" in the body of the posting. And if there are specific details about confidentiality practices that for some reason would have to be included before selection of freelancers is accomplished (not very common), this field would in no way prevent that.

2.) Introducing such an option encourages a tendency to introduce further requirements for freelancers to acquire access to work

I don't see how it does that. The feature gives a job poster the opportunity to indicate a confidence level, for the consideration of those viewing the job. And it is optional. How this would impart any new obligations on a freelancer is not clear to me. You could always ignore the information, rather than taking it into consideration.

without providing any extra consideration for the additional effort involved

Ah, but when it comes to confidentiality, providing extra consideration when additional effort is involved is precisely what does not happen today, but in my opinion, should. Please watch the SecurePRO introductory video. This is something we can change. The notion that doing more costs more is not so bizarre that the understanding could not be conveyed, throughout the industry, with reasonable effort, if the right parties are on board.


 
José Henrique Lamensdorf
José Henrique Lamensdorf  Identity Verified
Brazil
Local time: 03:57
English to Portuguese
+ ...
In memoriam
A meal for thought Dec 21, 2016

Henry Dotterer wrote:

Thanks for your many years of membership, Robert, José and Tom, and thank you for so frequently being ready to critique and criticize new services. (Believe it or not, I'm being serious about that; there is always something to be learned from feedback of any substance. Well OK, "duuuck!" doesn't give me much to work with, but you take my point.)


Henry, someone there went to a seminar somewhere, and heard that Proz needs to "add value" to its offer.

I have seen several - often haphazard, IMO, as a former OD consultant - attempts to add value to Proz, such as making it compatible with smartphones to some extent, and countless tidbits here and there. Does it make a difference? Certainly, however each improvement adds value to SOME constituents.

If you look at one part of my Proz profile that has been there unchanged since Day 1, it is:
I take a consulting approach to any job, based on two questions my client should answer at the outset:
1. What do you HAVE?
2. What do you NEED or WANT?


This "confidentiality" gizmo has been under fire from all sides on this thread and, if there was any, I must have overlooked any post that said "THIS is exactly what I was expecting from Proz."

Let's take my question #2... What's the most recurring issue on Proz forums, perhaps second only to Trados malfunctions? I'll give you ONE shot...

Translation RATES!

And what has Proz done about them, other than (IMO rightfully!) defusing requests to refrain from publishing jobs offering rates below a certain level?

Ah, Proz has the Community Rates section. I wonder how often they have been updated by translators. Over and over again, I've suggested giving browniz, kudoz, doughnuts, whatever you have, not too many, don't waste them, to translators who update them - even if it's just a matter of confirming as "unchanged" - twice a year.

Yet globalization has taken over our planet and, if most translation clients apparently have no clue on what it should cost locally, how can they figure out how much they should pay for it tens of thousand miles away?

I'll tell a chapter of my professional story here. I began in 1973, in the Industrial Marketing Services. Yes, it included translating and publishing all my employer's technical catalogs, manuals, spec-sheets, etc. That's what eventually brought me here, a translation portal, after I significantly broadened my coverage over a few decades,

In 1981, I was doing it in the third company, and there was no challenge left. Everything was a piece of cake, including organizing international conferences, participating in trade fairs, etc. I was on the lookout for a change, and my employer at that time gave me a chance in Human Resources. At first, I'd cover two functions: training & development, and compensation management.

Of course, I recall having read two shelves of books to get ready for the new role. I got training for it, and implemented the Hay System for salary management, which was easy to do, as I received most of it from the company US-WHQ. However it only covered white collars.

What about the blue-collars? I quick survey convinced me it was a mess. So I decided to do it scientifically. My degree in Mechanical Engineering made me completely unafraid of dealing with numbers. I found a book from the ILO/OIT describing the structure of "points" systems for salary management.

Hardware? No PCs in 1981. The best I found (and bought) was a Texas Instruments TI-59 programmable calculator, fitted with a chip that could solve - via matrix determinant - a system of up to 13 equations with 13 variables.

So I chose the 13 variables, things like education/training, experience, physical effort, visual effort, financial impact, and others, just to quote a few.

Then I had the plant job descriptions, assembled a committee (mostly plant area supervisors) to evaluate each job on these criteria, and purchased a manufacturing jobs salary survey. With this data I was able to solve the equations system, getting the weights for each variable in the final salary equation.

The result was that I had a way to calculate what should be the fair midpoint salary for a job from its number of points after evaluation. This was the path to intra-company salary equity. And If we had any unique job, not found in the survey, it would be a matter of evaluating it and, from its number of points, finding the adequate midpoint salary from the equation.

With the current computing resources available everywhere, it should be much simpler and faster to set up such a system to calculate what SHOULD be the fair translation rate for any circumstance, by defining the variables (and not all of them will be effective), and having translators fill in questionnaires.

A few variables I envision:
  • Translator location
  • Source language
  • Target language & variant
  • Years of experience/school required for the specific subject (specialized/complex vs. general)
  • Complexity of source file (from plain DOC/DOCX to scanned PDF)
  • Words per day required to meet deadline
  • Payment term (check correlation with translator location)
  • Payment method (check correlation with translator location - varying fees)
  • Others


This is not an easy task. I did it alone for a company that had less than 300 employees in one location. Did it later for a 600-headcount company in 15 locations, but then I had an Apple II, and wrote my own software.

Proz approaching a million users - still some way to go - scattered in maybe some 150 countries (my guess!). Yet that Apple II processor ran at 1 MHz, and mine had a special extended RAM to 1 MB. Considering the proportion, maybe a smartphone nowadays would handle it faster.

However it could lead to the first universal guide to translation rates. Translators would enter their actual job rates/requirements. Clients could enter theirs, and the system would calculate what would be FAIR for them to pay for translation, taking into account offer and demand.


 
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 »

Job posters are now able to specify "confidentiality level"






Trados Studio 2022 Freelance
The leading translation software used by over 270,000 translators.

Designed with your feedback in mind, Trados Studio 2022 delivers an unrivalled, powerful desktop and cloud solution, empowering you to work in the most efficient and cost-effective way.

More info »
Trados Business Manager Lite
Create customer quotes and invoices from within Trados Studio

Trados Business Manager Lite helps to simplify and speed up some of the daily tasks, such as invoicing and reporting, associated with running your freelance translation business.

More info »