Regional Committees in Place

Regional Committees in Place
The Regional Court Interpreter Labor Relations Committees have been formed and are developing labor relations rules and the initial job description for employee interpreters. The intent of the new law is for courts to retain the interpreters they currently use and to attract new interpreters. Courts will ultimately hurt their own interests if they set initial conditions that are unacceptable to interpreters. As implementation moves forward, courts must work within the law, conditions will be set regionally, and interpreters can and should have a say in this process.

We also now have the right to choose a representative for collective bargaining. Taking this step quickly will mean the courts must negotiate with interpreters over conditions and changes.

Local Courts Unclear on Law’s Provisions and Intent
CFI-BACI has received reports that some courts have created an atmosphere of uncertainty and intimidation around the transition to employment. These courts appear to be proceeding on the basis of an incomplete and mistaken understanding of the law (see regional updates below). CFI/BACI have asked the Administrative Office of the Courts (AOC) to work with all local trial courts to ensure they have a full understanding of the following:

Social Security Questions Still Pending
We are also pressing the AOC to provide information to interpreters about social security issues without further delay. The AOC has confirmed that those courts that do not contribute to social security must by law offer an alternative, tax-deferred retirement savings plan for employees not included in the full retirement plan. The AOC’s Human Resources Division has agreed to provide CFI/BACI with the following information that is of critical importance to interpreters:

We have also asked the AOC to investigate whether courts that do not currently contribute to social security for other employees can do so for interpreter employees through the AOC or a regional system. CFI/ BACI will provide the information to interpreters as soon as it is available to us.

Regional Updates
Compiled by Mary Lou Aranguren, Silvia Barden, Adele Negro and Margaret Roberts

Interpreters should keep in mind that local court coordinators and administrators do not have the last word on how interpreters will work in the new employment system. Interpreters can influence this process by contacting CFI or BACI as issues arise and by being vocal about what we want and quickly organizing for representation.

Region 1 – Los Angeles and North. The Los Angeles Superior Court administration has attended and/or conducted over twenty meetings regarding implementation, but until April 1, 2003 had not shared with interpreters even basic information about the status of the court’s implementation plans. Apprehension among interpreters has been exacerbated as the administration has held meetings in courthouses only to say that "there are many questions but no answers."

At an April 1 meeting, Administration and Human Resources representatives finally answered some very basic questions about the pension savings plan. Interpreters will be included in the plan as an alternative to Social Security. The court will deduct 4.5% of gross pay for deposit in a tax-deferred account and the court will contribute 3% of the gross salary to this account. These funds can later be rolled over into the retirement system interpreters participate in after negotiations, or may be withdrawn according to retirement rules.

Administration was sharply criticized by interpreters at the meeting for not providing any details or written information and for being unprepared to answer many of the questions posed by interpreters. Another meeting will be held in early May.

Region 2 – Bay Area, Monterey North Coast. On January 30, the Contra Costa County Court held a meeting for interpreters and court staff. Administrators told interpreters that, as employees, we should expect to work differently than we have up to now, simply by virtue of our change in status. They suggested they expect interpreters to have to work at the counters and do translations when work in the courtrooms is slow. Interpreters at the meeting sharply objected, differentiating interpreting from clerking or providing other services to the public, and vehemently opposed any blanket requirement to do translations. Margaret Roberts reminded those present that many questions, such as the scope of our work, will be subject to contract negotiations, and have yet to be determined. The AOC representative at the meeting confirmed this.

As if putting the Trial Court Act to work now, on March 3, 2003, eight certified court interpreters who regularly work in the Monterey County Superior Court met with the Chief Executive Officer to discuss issues that have been of growing concern since last year. The fact that eight interpreters were present was very significant in a county where not much concerted and unified action has occurred in the courts. Thanks to interpreters’ unity and clarity of purpose, administration representatives are beginning to take our concerns seriously.

There have been some positive efforts, if insufficient still, with respect to the use/misuse of non-certified interpreters. Other concerns are, among others: the often-imposed overtime without pay; the inappropriate interference of other court staff in the performance of our duties; the lack of adequate information for trials, prelims and complex motions; the lack of parking privileges for certified interpreters; the inappropriateness of, and resistance to, filling out the ‘activity log’; and safety and health-related concerns (exposure to disease, etc.). A series of focus groups will be held, at the suggestion of the Chief Executive officer, with bailiffs/sheriffs, and with attorneys and other court personnel, to bring them on board about our needs and concerns.

The Sonoma County Superior Court held a meeting in late January to inform interpreters of implementation plans. Interpreters were told that they will be working longer hours and be required to perform duties that are outside the current scope of work such as working at the public counters and windows and doing written translation work. In fact the draft job description for pro tempore employees does not include any reference to written translations. The Sonoma administration also provided a document that suggests the court believes it can hire certified independent contractors for more than the 100-day limit in the statute if certified and registered interpreters are not otherwise available. This is actually in conflict with the statute and CFI/ BACI are working to clear up
the misunderstanding.

Region 3 – Central Valley: Sacramento and North, South to Kern. The Fresno County Superior Court has filled two previously unfilled positions for staff interpreters (one Hmong and one Spanish) after the effective date of the legislation. Section 71805 of the statute states that beginning January 1, 2003 all interpreters hired as employees must be pro tempore employees unless otherwise provided in a memorandum of understanding. CFI/BACI are looking into these hires and will be seeking appropriate remedies. Interpreters have also reportedly been told that the court will not allow them the same flexibility in hours and schedules if they become pro tempore employees and are being encouraged to remain in the independent contractor or "extra help" employee classifications that do not have bargaining rights.

Region 4 – Southern Counties: Orange, San Bernardino, Riverside, Imperial, San Diego and Inyo Imperial. The Orange County Superior Court has held several meetings with interpreters about the implementation of the new law. At the most recent meeting the administration informed interpreters they would be included in a tax-deferred retirement fund. Interpreters were shocked to hear the court intends to deduct 7.5% of their paycheck for deposit into the fund and, unlike Los Angeles, the court will make no contribution. This is entirely unacceptable to interpreters and may result in a serious reduction of interpreters available for employment in Orange County. CFI/BACI are investigating whether the court can place interpreters in another classification with employer contributions to a retirement savings plan.

An Imperial County Superior Court coordinator/administrator of interpreter services twice met with interpreters, most recently in late February. Interpreters were told that if they become employees she has decided they will have to work longer hours, stay on duty when the courts no longer need them and perform clerical duties besides interpreting because "that’s just the way it is when you are employed." Interpreters were told they will receive no benefits until 2005. At the same time the additional duties were justified by saying "when you’re employees you get benefits and the court has to maximize your time." Such comments are not appropriate as they do not take into account the right of interpreters to choose representation and negotiate over scope of work, conditions and benefits before 2005.

An interpreter was also told that if she opts out of employment she will not be offered as much work as she has now because the coordinator claimed she will have to give more work to a new employee over an opt-out contractor. In fact, the statute does not require courts to give preference to employees over longtime independent contractors who opt out of employment.

In late January and early February, the District Manager for the Chino and Fontana courts for the San Bernardino County Superior Court told interpreters that as employees they will work longer hours, work at the clerk’s window (something that is not currently part of their job), and will only have a 15 minute break at lunch. The court’s representative also reportedly made negative comments about the transition to employment, is already attempting to change the work schedule and is questioning and intimidating interpreters who are following their normal work schedule. CFI reported this inappropriate treatment and inaccurate information to the AOC so that the court can be asked to refrain from such intimidation.

To find out how to particpate in choosing our representative, contact CFI/BACI: info@cfinews.org, or baci@mediaworker.org. Now is the time to make ourselves heard.