| Pages in topic: < [1 2] | Should the FIT-IFT judge the corporate ethics of its member associations? Thread poster: traductorchile
|
|---|
traductorchile 
Chile
Local time: 20:51
English to Spanish
+ ...
TOPIC STARTER
In response to this post I have received an email from Dr. Henry Liu with the following first paragraph:
Supposition is a rather dangerous thing. The reason why you have not heard from me is because I have not received your earlier e-mail. In any case, this is the best way to contact me.
I consider myself quite email-literate and Internet-literate, although I’m not a specialist in computers, so I’m quite aware that sometimes emails go to the spam folder instead of the inbox (when an email is not marked as a contact, mails are built with html and images and an email is used for sending mass mail: not my email), so I check the spam folder just in case and only delete those emails I’m quite sure are not legitimate. To date I have never had the case of an email not received by a contact or a client, something like that is very rare, and when an email does not arrive one usually gets a bounce-handler email.
In any case, proof of best contact means is given by:
- Send email: no response.
- Post in proz.com: I get response
Obviously the best contact method is posting in Proz so I won’t be sending more emails.
As regarding suppositions, they are the logical consequence of absence of information, or better said, bad communication. People fill in the gaps to try and understand what is really happening. Suppositions are in the surface of things, bad communication is in the roots. What bothers me is in the roots. What bothers you is that I have expressed those suppositions in public, so I will clear these up, as well, in public. I hope you clear up what’s in the roots.
With your answer,
There is no time limitation stipulated in regards to response
you back my suppositions that “there is no deadline” and that “FIT/IFT is in part a cause of the delay”. Regarding my third supposition, I have no reason not to believe that you didn’t receive my two emails (although it is very rare, specially considering you invited me to send you any query that might arise), and I value your explanation, so with this new evidence I express clearly my apologies for having made the wrong supposition regarding “I am being ignored/fooled”.
| | | | traductorchile
Chile
Local time: 20:51
English to Spanish
+ ...
TOPIC STARTER
I have received an email from Mr. Henry Liu, informing they received an answer (very detailed) from Cotich. To expand the information available on the case they need me to answer some questions. Due to FIT/IFT email problems I’m sending them an email and posting a copy here, just in case, and for this community’s knowledge.
Before we proceed any further, could I confirm with you the following:-
(1) your membership status with COTICH. Are you an... See more I have received an email from Mr. Henry Liu, informing they received an answer (very detailed) from Cotich. To expand the information available on the case they need me to answer some questions. Due to FIT/IFT email problems I’m sending them an email and posting a copy here, just in case, and for this community’s knowledge.
Before we proceed any further, could I confirm with you the following:-
(1) your membership status with COTICH. Are you an active member? If you have ceased to be a active member, when did that take place? And in what form? e.g. resignation, suspension, expulsion, etc.
On May 27th 2011 I sent a registered letter informing my resignation, starting on that date. I also published, that day, a letter in the association’s Google-groups professional forum informing the translator’s community of my resignation and its reasons. The following days I eliminated all membership reference with Cotich in the footers of my emails, my websites and at proz.com and other websites.
(2) if you have received any contact or communications from COTICH since we last communicated back in October 2012. If so, in what form?
Not anything one could fairly judge as “communication”. I did receive something one could judge as equivalent to those spams one receives with funny pictures in youtube. Not a registered letter, that is, a formal response.
This spam-email dated November 7th 2012 explained that on April 1st 2011 (casually that is April fool’s day) the Board of Directors turned down my complaint.
Considering that I had complained about not receiving an answer to my initial complaint in the Association’s Google-groups 4 days before the 1st of April, a forum where members of the Board of Directors, and members related to them, together with a Board of Director’s moderator that sometimes moderated, the Board must have had clear reference that I was expecting an answer, either because they read my post or someone told them. If they forgot to inform the complainant just 4 days after he has expressed in challenging terms the need to inform, then probably that Board of Directors should visit the doctor, for their Alzheimer must be galloping.
For this reason, and considering that I kept expressing my demands in different forums where members of the Cotich roam and interact, they can’t say they forgot about it, and when Mrs. María Eugenia Poblete, the new President of Cotich, says they are sorry they didn’t inform me before, her words are not credible.
Example: At the end of August 2011 my website was visited by an unusual amount of visitors, most of which were probably Cotich members (I can prove that at least 1 Cotich member visited the website, browsed the frontpage and dug down to a file in a third level). At that date my demands against Cotich were in the frontpage and in this file in the third level. In this particular file visited by this Cotich member I analysed an information I had received in my email (in the spam box), information that according to my analysis was evidence that in Cotich their members are afraid of expressing their opinions openly, if those opinions might be judged as inappropriate by the influential, bullying, group of members. How do I know my website was visited at least by this 1 Cotich member? Very simple, she published an aggressive post in a forum demanding I delete that information because, according to her, it was private information. Although she was wrong: because I received that information by mass email, and not only the email said nothing that it was private, but I could follow all the links in the email as well as anyone else, the website didn’t prevent me from access even not being a member of the website (if it was necessary) or member of Cotich (if it was necessary), so obviously there was nothing private in that information it was an open forum; I decided to eliminate that analysis because it was merely anecdotal, not an important argument in my complaint against the Cotich (the tolerance of violence not the political slant of the violent), and it might be considered an accidental occurrence so once informed that they preferred to keep it in private, so I did. But in the interim, many people visited that file and knew that I still hadn’t received an answer from Cotich.
If it’s true or not that Cotich ruled against my complaint on April fool’s day 2011 or yesterday, maybe is of little importance, but it’s clear that I have received it because of my complaint with FIT/IFT.
The translating world is small, the Chilean translating world is even smaller, and the Chilean people are specialists communicating by word of mouth, so Mrs. Poblete can’t say she didn’t know. If they are sorry, they should discuss that with their pillow, specially if they turned down my complaint without taking a clear stand to address the events complained about.
Her words tell me more about hypocrisy than about good manners.
As is, in the Cotich anyone that is part of the bullying few can say that anyone else: a) is a disgruntled speaker; b) has no discernment; c) is intolerant; d) doesn’t have common sense; e) that condemning the infringement of the rule of law is having an “exotic and dissimilar ideology"; f) is a hooligan; and any other you may wish to use to derogate a fellow translator.
Of course, they could also have said that my opinion deserved those fighting words, just as well as a woman who has been violated is accused of provocation for using red earrings or a short dress.
(3) that your complaint against COTICH alleges COTICH mishandled your original complaint of December 18, 2010, and a direct consequence of which is that COTICH brought the profession into disrepute.
I have not accused Cotich of taking the profession into disrepute. That is a personal judgement each person must make on his own. I have my own, but it is not part of my complaint.
I have accused Cotich of concrete behaviours:
1) Retention: The President of the Board of Directors, Alejandra Villarroel, retained my complaint for over 1 month (December-January), before processing (See dates of “Complaint to COTICH” and “Meeting minutes”). The procedure created at that point considered an additional period of two months for studying the complaint, to start off with (see “Meeting Minutes”).
2) Depart from the normal course of a procedure: When the President decided what to do with it, she gave copies to the members of the Board of Directors for them to “recoger apreciaciones” (which in Chilean Spanish means: to gather judgments, appraisements) (See “Meeting minutes”). The normal procedure is that all judgments related to the Code of Ethics are mandated to the Ethics Committee, a consulting entity (ad hoc or permanent) separated from the Board of Directors (although it may include one or more Directors as members), in a similar way as occurs in a democracy between the executive, legislative and judiciary.
3) Infringement of the mandate of the Ethics Committee: as in 2) the judgment about the validity of a complaint due to the misconduct of one party (not a controversy that requires clarification or arbitration) belongs to the Ethics Committee, as experts on these matters and as it is their mandate. The infringement of this mandate produces a serious undermining of the authority of the Ethics Committee and challenges its independence. This infringement is evidenced when the complaint is not delivered immediately to a permanent Ethics Committee or to an ad hoc Ethics Committee assigned during the Board of Directors meeting (in the worst scenario, one month after the complaint was filed) (See “Meeting Minutes”).
4) Failure to inform the complainant at significant points of the procedure: 1) confirm having received the complaint and/or inform of its admissibility or not. 2) Inform if the complaint is upheld and the measures imposed, or the contrary, if the complaint was considered unfounded. (As I have received no message from the translators association related to this, I cannot present any document as evidence). During this period I received other correspondence from this association (the professional identity card for members, a payment receipt, etc.), but this is not related to this complaint, except that my address is known to them.
5) Failure to inform the community of translators of the outcome of the procedure: as occurred with the previous complaint about a breach of the Code of Ethics, where the sentence was disclosed and published in the professional forum of the association (30 days after it was filed), during the 5 months I followed this procedure there was no official (or unofficial) statement delivered by the President or by the Board of Directors related to my complaint in this forum. Even more, during all the time I was an active member of this Association they never delivered copies of the minutes of the Board of Directors meetings to the association’s members (the minutes I deliver here were received by the undersigned in an underground fashion from a member of the Board of Directors, not as stipulated by the FIT-IFT Bylaws).
5) Double standard on the length and outcome of the procedure: about a month before my complaint was filed a group of translators filed another complaint (verbally?) against a colleague. This complaint was judged and measures were taken in less than 30 days. My complaint was formal and in writing; it was retained for 30 days, it was not delivered to the appropriate Ethics Committee, apparently it wouldn’t be followed up till two months later (next Board of Directors meeting - see “Meeting Minutes”), and after over 400 days there has been no formal outcome to the procedure (See “Sentence of previous complaint”). In other professional associations 30 days is a maximum deadline; in the EU institutions it seems that 20 days is an adequate deadline to take a decision, so 400 days seems clearly a denial of justice. (Even if one finally gets an answer in 730 days).
(4) that your position is the same as when I first wrote to you, i.e. that you wish to purse this matter and thus ask FIT to rule on your complaint as outlined in (3).
Please don’t purse my complaint; I would prefer you to pursue it.
Also, I expect that before it is ruled, FIT/IFT discloses to me the response given by Cotich in the same way and extent you have disclosed the contents of my complaint to Cotich, that is, the right to assess the evidence or arguments put on the table by the other parties and object or present further evidence, if necessary. ▲ Collapse
| | | | traductorchile
Chile
Local time: 20:51
English to Spanish
+ ...
TOPIC STARTER | And time goes by | Apr 4, 2013 |
Zzzzzzzzzzzzzz.
[Edited at 2013-04-04 22:07 GMT]
| | | | traductorchile
Chile
Local time: 20:51
English to Spanish
+ ...
TOPIC STARTER | And 4 months after the last contact | May 10, 2013 |
FIT/IFT seems to be zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
| | |
|
|
|
traductorchile
Chile
Local time: 20:51
English to Spanish
+ ...
TOPIC STARTER | Transparency | May 12, 2013 |
Probably the word transparency burns some people's pants.
TraductorChile
www.sinclavos.cl
| | | | traductorchile
Chile
Local time: 20:51
English to Spanish
+ ...
TOPIC STARTER | 5 months and rolling. | Jun 8, 2013 |
Have you ever see a stone roll up a hill?
| | | | traductorchile
Chile
Local time: 20:51
English to Spanish
+ ...
TOPIC STARTER
Gotcha, there's no follow up yet.
Have you ever seen a stone roll up a hill?
Érase una vez
un lobito bueno
al que maltrataban
todos los corderos.
Y había también
un traductor malo,
una bruja hermosa
y un colegio honrado.
Todas estas cosas
había una vez.
Cuando yo soñaba
un mundo al revés.
| | | | traductorchile
Chile
Local time: 20:51
English to Spanish
+ ...
TOPIC STARTER | 6 months and nothing | Jul 5, 2013 |
Maybe it's time to start making suppositions, something that so bothers those people that don't, and probably will never, understand that good communication is paramount. Maybe their ego is so big that (occupying a position that gives them power) they believe they are
above other people. They don't get it, that occupying a position of power gives them higher responsibilities, not higher privileges. Abusing power is not something really acceptable in this modern world, maybe 2000 years ... See more Maybe it's time to start making suppositions, something that so bothers those people that don't, and probably will never, understand that good communication is paramount. Maybe their ego is so big that (occupying a position that gives them power) they believe they are
above other people. They don't get it, that occupying a position of power gives them higher responsibilities, not higher privileges. Abusing power is not something really acceptable in this modern world, maybe 2000 years ago. ▲ Collapse
| | |
|
|
|
traductorchile
Chile
Local time: 20:51
English to Spanish
+ ...
TOPIC STARTER | Lying to the FIT/IFT | Jul 7, 2013 |
Although the following is not part of my complaint against the Colegio de traductores e Intérpretes de Chile (Cotich) presented to the FIT/IFT, it is an element that puts the relationship between the Cotich and the FIT/IFT in a tricky situation, and with that in consideration it might affect the procedures of my complaint.
When Mrs. María Eugenia Poblete, the new President of Cotich, says that my complaint was discussed and turned down on April 1st 2011, logic says she is lying an... See more Although the following is not part of my complaint against the Colegio de traductores e Intérpretes de Chile (Cotich) presented to the FIT/IFT, it is an element that puts the relationship between the Cotich and the FIT/IFT in a tricky situation, and with that in consideration it might affect the procedures of my complaint.
When Mrs. María Eugenia Poblete, the new President of Cotich, says that my complaint was discussed and turned down on April 1st 2011, logic says she is lying and has lied to the FIT/IFT:
1) No law, ruling or legal resolution comes into force unless it’s published and delivered to all stakeholders.
2) The resolution for a previous ethics complaint was published in the Cotich’s Google group a few days after issuing it, so everyone was informed. In the 37 days after April 1st (while I still was a member) there was no publication related to my complaint, and till August 2011 (while I still received mails from this Google’s group in my spam box, although I was not a member anymore) there had been no publication with a resolution about this case.
3) It has no sense to keep as a secret a resolution or any other communication that should solve a problem, unless the intention is not to solve the problem, or make it bigger.
If Mrs. María Eugenia Poblete and FIT/IFT believe that just by sending an email, 2 years after my complaint, where someone says that Cotich is sorry they didn’t inform me before, is enough to cover up the improper behaviour (or corrupt practices) of Cotich, the laissez faire of most of its members and the verbal violence of a group of privileged members, she and FIT/IFT are very wrong. Those practices should have a cost for those who practice them, not only for those that complain against them or all this “professional union” structure, FIT/IFT and associations, won’t be very trustworthy. This is similar to the case of the thief that steals a pot of gold and 2 years after someone complains, he says he is sorry, but doesn’t give back the gold, and the judge let’s him go free together with all his accomplices. People start believing that maybe it’s better to be a thief.
Furthermore, I still have to see just one argument that may justify that in a translator’s professional environment it is acceptable for one translator to call another translator: disgruntled, intolerant, hooligan, exotic ideologist, or any other verbal violence,
because he expresses his disgust when the government of a powerful country acts like a terrorist, influence peddling to gain advantage over an individual, instead of following the rule of law. I’m sure there is no justification, just cover-ups. Of course, violent people should defend other violent entities; it must be a type of coherence. ▲ Collapse
| | | | traductorchile
Chile
Local time: 20:51
English to Spanish
+ ...
TOPIC STARTER | July 2013 insistance | Jul 18, 2013 |
Dear Mr. Liu:
Considering that after 6 months I still have not received a confirmation of receipt, or an answer, for my letter dated Jan 17-2013, I must suppose you have not received my letter (?) nor do you follow the corresponding proz.com forum posts I have put in place to ensure no loss of communication. If that were the case it is, at least, strange you make no effort to establish any communication whatsoever to keep parties informed about the procedures, updates or follow ups... See more Dear Mr. Liu:
Considering that after 6 months I still have not received a confirmation of receipt, or an answer, for my letter dated Jan 17-2013, I must suppose you have not received my letter (?) nor do you follow the corresponding proz.com forum posts I have put in place to ensure no loss of communication. If that were the case it is, at least, strange you make no effort to establish any communication whatsoever to keep parties informed about the procedures, updates or follow ups, and finish this thing once and for all, appropriately.
Considering that from the start FIT/IFT has managed this complaint in a questionable manner, first denying it being incumbent to FIT/IFT, later accepting the challenge but with procedures that cast doubts on FIT/IFTs ability, like no reasonable deadlines, bad communication with strange justifications, and apparently promoting with the COTICH to issue a complaint resolution dated April 1st 2011 (although it’s obvious that it’s false), I am wondering if FIT/IFT is really the adequate interlocutor for solving an issue like this one?
Well, Mr. Liu, you (FIT/IFT) don’t seem to understand, I’m not here to ask you for a personal favour, although, surely enough, the results I expect should be of justice for me too. No, Mr. Liu, I’m here to demand that the FIT/IFT cleans up its backyard before the smells come round the front. And as I’ve felt them, you can be sure I’ll call everyone’s attention to the bad smells I have found because it’s a civic responsibility and I don’t see anyone else committed enough to follow this through, so that we can live in a clean and peaceful neighbourhood (the one that is produced by mutual respect).
Your silence Mr. Liu (and FIT/IFT’s through you) is a bad symptom and you know it, because it’s been on the table before. Letting 2, 3, 4, 6 months go by without a word on the topic, either an update or follow up for reassurance, is a clear representation on your (and FIT/IFT’s) deficient commitment to good practices. You can’t say you don’t receive my emails; you simply are not interested enough in the topic of Good Practices.
I’m sure you’ll dislodge your resolution whenever you feel fit; hopefully it shall be a measure of FIT/IFT’s commitment to Good or Bad Practices, even if some measurements can be made already.
With my Best Regards, ▲ Collapse
| | | | traductorchile
Chile
Local time: 20:51
English to Spanish
+ ...
TOPIC STARTER | | Pages in topic: < [1 2] | To report site rules violations or get help, contact a site moderator: You can also contact site staff by submitting a support request » Should the FIT-IFT judge the corporate ethics of its member associations? | 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! » |
| | Protemos translation business management system | Create your account in minutes, and start working! 3-month trial for agencies, and free for freelancers!
The system lets you keep client/vendor database, with contacts and rates, manage projects and assign jobs to vendors, issue invoices, track payments, store and manage project files, generate business reports on turnover profit per client/manager etc.
More info » |
|
| | | | X Sign in to your ProZ.com account... | | | | | |
Login to reply/comment 
Translation news
