Two Hours – Two Interpreters? How did we get there? - Deb Miyashita

I have never been one to mince words, and the focus of this article will likely do nothing to ameliorate that perception in people’s minds. J As a COI (borderline pass for sure, but COI never-the-less) with 33 years experience, I was recently challenged for taking 2 hour assignments by myself. “We’ve negotiated a teamer for those assignments – why are you doing the meetings by yourself – you’re affecting our professional standards!” I was told in a phone call. “Because I can – and easily,” I replied.
After I hung up the phone, I looked long and hard at the situation and vowed to monitor my ability to concentrate, my error rate, the impact on the meeting of having only one interpreter and what situations a single interpreter seems to be quite adequate for a 2 hour assignment. I came to the conclusion that I was providing satisfactory interpretation service, was not becoming unduly fatigued (in fact I sometimes find it more tiring to work with a newer interpreter and support them than to just go on “auto pilot” and do the job myself) and the consumer(s) were getting good service at half the price.

Why then has the norm in our field become Two Hours – Two Interpreters, I asked myself? When did this policy creep in and under what situations does it make sense or not make sense? Several possibilities occurred to me.
Perhaps new or recent grads cannot process information with the speed or ease of a more seasoned interpreter and need the support of a teamer to do a good job. If this is the case, should I be charging more because I CAN do some 2 hour assignments (certainly not ALL) by myself with ease? Should they be charging less? If I get $40 an hour, perhaps newer interpreters who need the support of a teamer should charge $20 each, thereby covering the assignment with alacrity and not costing the consumer double to make up for their lack? Or maybe this has nothing whatsoever to so with money?

Perhaps I am deluding myself into thinking I am doing an adequate to good job alone without benefit of a teamer? The feedback I get from the consumers is not supporting this presumption, and most regular consumers of interpreting services are trained to call a 10 minute break each hour (regardless of whether they have one or two interpreters). I’m good at advocating for my own breaks as well. I find it easier to clarify a missed point or perception with the speaker directly than turn to a teamer who has likely missed the same thing I have or was on “screen saver” and not attending to the speaker anyway – by the time I’ve looked to a teamer for support, it’s often too late or awkward to stop the speaker for clarification. Hmm??? Curious and more curious!

I decided to do a quick Google Search – Two Hours Two Interpreters – and came up with the following quotes.

The Canadian Hearing Society booking policy states “Assignments of two hours or less may be covered by one interpreter, provided the material is not overly technical, fast-paced, or involves numerous individuals participating in rapid interactions. In these circumstances, even for a period of less than two hours, two interpreters may be needed. Regardless of the number of interpreters present at an assignment, a minimum 10-minute break is required after each hour of interpreting.”

The Saskatchewan Deaf and Hard of Hearing Services interpreting policy reads “Interpreting is a very taxing activity, both mentally and physically. Research has shown that an interpreter's ability to mentally process the message and interpret it accurately diminishes drastically after approximately 20 minutes of interpreting. Additionally, the rate of repetitive motion injuries among sign language interpreters is very high. Therefore, when an assignment is over 2 hours, two interpreters will be scheduled; they will relieve each other approximately every 20 minutes, to ensure that the message is interpreted accurately for the full length of your assignment.”
Both these policies state two hours or MORE, two interpreters.

Deaf Expression Inc. states, “One-on-one and self-paced meetings can use a single interpreter for the full two hours. Because of the slower pace and less formal situation, an interpreter will usually have some natural down time and the opportunity to take a break if necessary.” They do go on to talk about repetitive strain injuries and mental fatigue in more demanding settings and suggest a thorough assessment of each assignment before the decision to send two interpreters is made.

Interestingly enough, spoken language interpreters also have policies around numbers of interpreters. ATIO (Association of Translators and Interpreters of Ontario) states the following:

For simultaneous or whispered Interpretation

i. for meetings with two working languages, working both ways in a single booth:
o maximum 40 minutes 1 interpreter
o maximum 3.5 to 4 hours 2 interpreters
o maximum 6 hours 3 interpreters
o maximum 8 hours 4 interpreters


And across the water in Australia, the policy is the same. Echo Interpreting in Boronia Vic, Australia have the following statement in their policy online, “

Assignments consisting of large groups or complex information under two hours duration may require a second interpreter and this will be at the discretion of Echo Interpreting and will be negotiated at the time of booking.”

Please don’t misunderstand me – I realize there are some 30 minute meetings or settings that require 2, 3 or more interpreters. But for our every-day type of community meetings, are we not doing the Deaf community a disservice by demanding 2 interpreters automatically before we see if the assignment couldn’t be well served by a single interpreter? I do and I’m interested in other people’s feedback and opinions.
Happy interpreting,
Deb Miyashita, BA, COI