Conference interpreters122 respondents identified themselves asconference interpreters. Some conferenceinterpreters (especially when working in the simultaneous mode) work into theirmother tongue only, whereas others alsowork from their native tongue into anotherlanguage, of which they have full activecommand. We have therefore differentiatedbetween rates when working into Englishand from English. For conference interpreters working intoEnglish, we did not receive sufficientresponses to be able to report on any onelanguage combination. The WG thereforedecided to group languages in asmeaningful a way as possible, in order to be able to report at least some results.Please bear in mind that the grouping oflanguages might lead to results whichappear unusual at first sight. Further detailsabout which specific languages have beengrouped together can be found in theMaster Report. Fig. 6: Conference interpreters into English,medians of most frequently charged daily rates(in £) for agency and direct clients.For conference interpreters working fromEnglish, we had sufficient responses toreport on two specific languagecombinations, but, again, had to merge data for several others in as meaningful away as possible.Fig. 7: Conference interpreters from English,medians of most frequently charged daily rates(in £) for agency and direct clients.Ad hoc interpreters291 respondents identified themselves as ad hoc (or liaison) interpreters, working14 TheLinguistAPRIL/MAY www.iol.org.ukFEATURESFig. 5: Translation from English, rates based on target language (£/1,000), medians of most frequently charged rate for agencies anddirect clients.Of the 1,217 freelance translators whoresponded to the question about CAT(translation memory systems), 55% reportedusing such a system, which is an increase onthe 31% reported in the 2001 ITI survey. Themarket leader is still Trados, with 63% of themarket. 53% of translators using translationmemory (TM) offer discounts. For a detailedbreakdown of discount averages by level ofmatch, please see the Master Report.While TM may increase the number ofwords translated per day, it does not appearto increase the rates paid per 1,000 wordswhen working through agencies. Whenworking for direct clients, however, TM usersappear to charge direct customers about10% more than non-users.Of the 1,063 freelancers who gavefeedback on their output, about halfreported translating 200,000 words a year ormore. Again, for a detailed breakdown,please see the online Master Report.Of the 1,214 who responded to thequestion about voice recognition software,only 10% reported using it, with DragonDictate still being the leading brand.Freelance interpretersThe survey differentiates between threedifferent interpreting types (or settings), allwith their own specific characteristics andtraditions: conference interpreting, ad hocinterpreting and public service interpreting.This summary report analyses only themedian, most frequent rates, and moreexperienced or specialised interpreters arelikely to charge more. Maximum rates anddata on lowest and highest rates chargedcan be found in the Master Report.As with translators, we have reported onlyon language combinations and ratecategories for which we received at least fiveresponses, which ensures respondentanonymity and that the published data ismore representative. mainly in business, commercial law,diplomatic and other non-PSI and non-conference settings. Ad hoc interpretingwork is bidirectional, ie, interpreters workboth into and out of their native language.The survey asked ad hoc interpreters tosupply both daily and hourly rates. Overall, responses indicate that the majority of ad hoc interpreters who work for direct clients charge on a daily-rate basis. The data for ad hoc interpretersworking through agencies was inconclusivein this respect. Again, all language combinations and ratecategories for which we received fewer thanfive responses were grouped in asmeaningful a way as the data sets allowed.Details on which specific languages havebeen grouped together can be found in theMaster Report, as can information and dataon hourly ad hoc interpreting rates.Fig. 8: Ad hoc interpreters (into and out ofEnglish), medians of most frequently chargeddaily rates (in £) for agency and direct clients.There was insufficient data to report onPortuguese agency-client rates.Fig. 9: Ad hoc interpreters (into and out ofEnglish), medians of most frequently chargeddaily rates (in £) for agency and direct clientsfor grouped languages (fewer than fiveresponses per language combination). Therewas insufficient data to report on agency ratesfor Latin American languages.Public service interpreters262 respondents identified themselves aspublic service interpreters working for thepolice, courts, local government or the NHS.Public service interpreting work is alsobidirectional, ie, interpreters work both intoand from their native language. Again, alllanguage combinations and rate categories T £120£100£80£60£40£20£0£65Greek/TurkishFrench£84£60£88Agency clientsGermanSpanish£62£70£110ChinesePolish£100£70£65£78£81Direct clientsPolishAgencyclientsDirectclients£600£500£400£300£200£100£0TurkishRussianSpanishFrenchChineseGermanItalianPortugueseJapanese 180200225250225250245250254258330285350350500400£400£350£300£250£200£150£100£50£0Other pre-2004 EUlanguagesOther Non-EuropeanlanguagesLatinAmericanlanguages£256£278AgencyclientsDirectclientsOther post-2004 EUlanguages &other European£400£253£350£280£3006 T£400£350£300£250£200£150£100£50£0£375French, German,Non-EuropeanItalian & SpanishOtherEuropean£310£295£325£288£338AgencyclientsDirectclients £450£400£350£300£250£200£150£100£50£290Non-EuropeanFrenchOtherEuropean£315£300£300£350AgencyclientsDirectclientsGerman & SpanishItalian£400£320£375£400£425£0

Vol/51 No/2 2012APRIL/MAYTheLinguist15FEATURESfor which we received fewer than fiveresponses were grouped in as meaningful away as the data sets allowed. Details onwhich specific languages have beengrouped together can be found in theMaster Report.Fig. 10: Public service interpreters (into and out of English), medians of mostfrequently charged hourly rates (in £) foragency and direct clients. There wasinsufficient data to report on Czech direct-client rates.Fig. 11: Public service interpreters (into andout of English), medians of most frequentlycharged hourly rates for agency and directclients, grouped languages (fewer than fiveresponses per language combination). Therewas insufficient data to report on either direct-client rates for Indian sub-continentlanguages or agency-client rates for pre-2004EU languages.Comparing interpreting rates withprevious surveys is even more problematicthan comparing translation rates, as it is notonly necessary to bear in mind that theenlarged overall survey population mighthave had an impact on results, but also thatchanges in the reporting format need to betaken into account. In the 2001 ITI survey, for example, theinterpreting categories were different tothose in this joint survey (only conferenceinterpreting remained the same), and therewas no differentiation between agency anddirect-client rates.For this reason we have not attempted a historical comparison. However, it isprobably safe to say that, even for languages where rates have increased over the past decade in absolute terms, the increase will most likely not have beensufficient to keep pace with inflation. This means, in real terms, that mostinterpreters will have had to cope with lower rates and - unlike translators - theyhave not had the benefit of a tool such astranslation memory at their disposal to boost productivity.Staff translators and interpreters Of the 243 respondents who indicated theyare salaried, 220 provided data on theircontract and, of these, 191 werepermanently employed. 51 were workingpart-time and 11 claimed to work more than 50 hours a week. 65 worked forlanguage service providers/agencies, 13 fornational government and a further 13 forinternational organisations.Some 15% of staff translators worked from home.For more information please see theMaster Report.Fig. 12: Staff translators/interpreters,distribution of annual salaries (£) inrespondents' most recent tax year.This summary report was prepared onbehalf of the Joint CIOL/ITI Rates andSalaries Working Group (chaired byMichael Cunningham, CIOL). The Working Group would also like to thankPamela Mayorcas for her involvement in thedevelopment of the survey questionnaire andAlan Wheatley (Consultant) for his valuedcontributions to the technology element increating the survey, and for the dataanalysis and preparation of the Master Report. FrenchAgencyclientsDirectclients£35£30£25£20£15£10£5£0RussianChineseItalianPolishSpanishCzech£20£25£18£19£29£29£30£30£30£30£20£22£22A£35£30£25£20£15£10£5£0Other post-2004 EU and otherEuropean languagesIndian sub-continentlanguagesOther pre-2004 EUlanguages £20Other non-Europeanlanguages£30£20£28£30£28AgencyclientsDirectclientsp 605040302010028less than £14,99948535834£15,000- £24,999£25,000- £34,999£35,000- £49,999More than £50,000G CIOL members have received a copyof the full, detailed report by emailand can also access the survey onlinevia IoL Advantage. Non-members canpurchase a copy of the Master Report.For details, please contact the CIOLoffice at r& REPORTFIRST RATEAn interpreter renders the words ofToyota Executive Vice President,Shinichi Sasaki, in English. Conferenceinterpreters working in non-Europeanlanguages charged more than thoseworking in European languages© ISTOCKPHOTOGross salary staff translators/interpreters