By Fardous Bahbouh, PhD researcher in Equality, Diversity and Inclusion

Like many, I was saddened to read about the closure of the Modern Languages department at Cardiff University. This represents a lost opportunity for global understanding, cross-cultural communication, economic development, and the continuous progress of humanity.

However, I was deeply concerned by the letter from Raisa McNab, CEO of the Association of Translation Companies (ATC)—the trade association representing translation companies and claiming to set the standards in the translation industry (ATC, 2025). The letter framed the closure of the department as a direct threat to the “pipeline of talent” destined to employment for translation companies in the flourishing UK language services market worth £2 billion. Yet, it neglected to recognise a critical issue: the reality that the UK language market increasingly undervalues linguistic expertise in favour of cost-cutting. If translators and interpreters are truly essential to such a vital and lucrative sector, and for the whole UK economy as the letter claimed, why are they so consistently undervalued? This reality leaves many highly skilled language professionals struggling to sustain viable careers, barely able to make ends meet.

While the market may indeed be worth £2 billion, the ATC’s letter notably omits that translation companies have self-reported gross margins of up to 77% (ATC, 2021, p.25). This raises important questions: how much of that revenue reaches the translators and interpreters who perform the core labour? And considering that many contracts are outsourced to professionals outside the UK, how much of that value actually benefits those working within the domestic sector? The ATC’s letter also did not address concerns that some translation companies are contributing to the precarious working conditions faced by translators and interpreters.

Economists such as Guy Standing (2011) have argued that flexible market arrangements often shift the burden of risk and insecurity onto workers. Furthermore, the increasing concentration of the industry among a few dominant firms has been linked to downward pressure on wages and the erosion of professional standards—factors that warrant further scrutiny and discussion.

The letter presented the translation companies as stakeholders adversely affected by broader educational shifts, but this perspective overlooks how systemic undervaluation of linguistic labour may disincentivise individuals from pursuing language studies. In a market-based system, persistent signals of low pay, job insecurity, and limited career progression can discourage the uptake of language degrees. While motivations for choosing a course of study vary, the diminishing value placed on language work at the point of employment undoubtedly impacts student decisions. In this light, the “pipeline problem” cited by the ATC may be, at least in part, a result of current working conditions.

This ATC letter follows a broader pattern in which some industry voices appear to assume an entitlement to a continued supply of skilled workers without a corresponding commitment to ensuring sustainable working conditions. Economist Joseph Stiglitz has described how some business models are underpinned by assumptions of “the right to exploit” and “freedom from liability” (2024), enabled by insufficient regulatory oversight. This can raise ethical concerns, especially when workers’ rights to a living income—recognised in the Universal Declaration of Human Rights—are not being upheld in practice (United Nations, 1948).

One could argue that instead of closing language departments, universities might attempt to raise tuition fees for language-related degrees in order to sustain these programmes. However, this approach may not be viable in practice. If prospective students perceive the return on investment as low—given the persistently poor rates of pay and insecure employment prospects in the language services sector—many may still choose other fields of study. In other words, ensuring fair pay, stable contracts, and career progression for translators and interpreters is not only a question of justice—it is a strategic necessity to secure the talent pipeline the industry itself depends upon.

These tensions were further illustrated during the oral evidence presented by the ATC CEO to the House of Lords inquiry into court interpreting. In that session, Mrs McNab cited the “competitiveness” of the market. Lord Carter rightly challenged this characterisation, noting that the current contract for court interpreting is a monopoly held by a single company for a lengthy period of few years (House of Lords, 2024). This example highlights the need for a more nuanced understanding of market dynamics.

Later in the session, Mrs McNab spoke of the need to “leverage the linguistic potential of the UK’s multilingual communities” and expressed concern that interpreters could not be brought in from outside the UK. While perhaps not intended this way, such framing risks evoking extractive logics that treat people as economic resources rather than individuals with rights and agency. It also appeared to overlook the ATC’s own findings (ATC & Nimdzi, 2023) that difficulties in recruitment and retention are due to low pay and unsatisfactory conditions—challenges that are structural rather than incidental.

The House of Lords Public Services Committee addressed these concerns in its final report, acknowledging that “low and opaque pay, a lack of control and remuneration for cancelled or delayed bookings, and a lack of respect” are driving professionals out of the sector (House of Lords, 2025). Its recommendations—such as setting minimum pay rates and ensuring fair treatment—reflect a more balanced and constructive approach, one grounded in workers’ lived experiences.

Meanwhile, within the UK’s £2 billion language services market, interpreters are pursuing legal action against two translation companies. Represented by Leigh Day, the claimants argue for reclassification and compensation based on contractual arrangements that include fixed pay, control mechanisms, and penalties—features that suggest a degree of control inconsistent with self-employment (Leigh Day, n.d.). These cases bear similarities to previous landmark rulings involving Uber and ongoing litigation involving Amazon delivery drivers (The Guardian, 2021; Reuters, 2023), raising important questions about classification, responsibility, and rights.

Previously, the ATC issued a joint statement with 11 language organisations titled Working Together. The document attributed problems in public service interpreting primarily to procurement complexity. While procurement processes are undeniably complex, this framing arguably downplays the effects of monopolistic contract structures and the unequal distribution of risks and rewards. The term “ecosystem” used to describe this arrangement may unintentionally mislead, implying mutual benefit in a system that many practitioners have instead likened to the “Wild West.”

For example, a 2023 NRPSI survey of 381 interpreters—most of whom worked with the Ministry of Justice—found that 47% earned less than £10,000 gross in the tax year ending March 2024. Only 5% earned over £30,000 (NRPSI, 2024). For context, a single person in the UK now requires at least £29,500 to meet a minimum acceptable standard of living (Joseph Rowntree Foundation, 2023).

These realities challenge the view that pipeline issues can be solved without first addressing pay, conditions, and professional recognition. If the language services sector ensured fair compensation and sustainable careers, perhaps more people would pursue these professions without needing to be channelled through a “pipeline” at all.

Additionally, a growing body of academic literature highlights the challenges faced by language professionals both in the UK and internationally, particularly in the context of platform-based work (Fırat et al., 2024; Giustini, 2024; Lambert & Walker, 2024; Moorkens, 2020). While language proficiency can enhance earnings when paired with other specialised skills—as in finance or sales—this is not the case for most full-time translators and interpreters. As Lambert and Walker (2022) note, questions of pay are not just technical—they are ethical. It is crucial that aspiring language professionals are given an accurate and realistic picture of the sector they are preparing to enter.

It is important to acknowledge that not all translation companies engage in the practices described in this article, including my very own translation company. While some companies may contribute to the challenging working conditions faced by translators and interpreters, there are others within the industry that are committed to fair compensation, professional development, and maintaining ethical business practices. Many organisations actively work towards creating a supportive environment for their employees and freelance professionals, offering competitive pay, job security, and career advancement opportunities. This diversity within the industry underscores the complexity of the issue, as the challenges outlined here are not universally experienced by all companies or professionals in the sector.

Note: This article was slightly revised on 07.04.2025 to clarify certain points in response to feedback. It was written in a personal capacity, and in good faith, with the intention of contributing to informed public discussion. The views expressed here are offered in the public interest and are grounded in publicly available evidence and in peer-reviewed research. The aim is not to target individuals or organisations, but to critically examine structural challenges facing the language services sector and the professionals who sustain it.

Bibliography

ATC. 2025. Letter from ATC CEO to Cardiff University. https://www.linkedin.com/feed/update/urn:li:activity:7298349821822656512/

ATC, and Nimdzi. 2021. UK language services industry survey and report. Accessed 24 November 2023.https://atc.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/ATC-UK-Survey-and-Report_2021.pdf

ATC, and Nimdzi. 2023. UK language services industry survey and report. Accessed 24 November 2023. https://atc.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/ATC-UK-Language-Services-Industry-Survey-and-Report-2023-1.pdf

ATC and PI4J. 2023. Working together: recommendations for tackling the immediate issues facing procurement and provision of language services for the public sector. Accessed 27 July 2024. https://www.nrpsi.org.uk/downloads/231120-UK-Language-Services-for-the-Public-Sector-Working-Together.pdf

Dotson, K. 2014. “Conceptualizing Epistemic Oppression”, Social Epistemology, 28(2), pp.115-138).

Feagin, J. 2013. Systemic Racism: A Theory of Oppression. Taylor & Francis.

Fırat, G., Gough, J., and Moorkens, J. 2024. Translators in the platform economy: A decent work perspective. Perspectives: Studies in Translation Theory and Practice. 32(3), pp.422–440.

Giustini, D. 2024. ‘You can book an interpreter the same way you order your Uber’: (re)interpreting work and digital labour platforms. Perspectives, studies in translatology. 32(3), pp.441–459.

House of Lords. 2024. Public Services Committee’s Event on Wednesday 20 November 2024. https://committees.parliament.uk/event/22444/formal-meeting-oral-evidence-session

House of Lords. 2025. Lost in translation? Interpreting services in the courts. Accessed 26 March 2025. https://publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld5901/ldselect/pubserv/87/8703.htm#_idTextAnchor002

Joseph Rowntree Foundation. 2023. A Minimum Income Standard for the United Kingdom in 2023. Accessed 25 August 2024. https://www.jrf.org.uk/a-minimum-income-standard-for-the-united-kingdom-in-2023

Lambert, J. and Walker, C. 2022. Because We’re Worth It: Disentangling freelance translation, status, and rate-setting in the United Kingdom. Translation Spaces. 11(2), pp.277-302.

Lambert, J. and Walker, C. 2024. Thriving or Surviving: Motivation, Satisfaction, and Existential Sustainability in the Translation Profession. Finnish Association of Translators and Interpreters (SKTL).

Leigh Day. n.d. DA Languages Claim. Accessed 2 January 2024. https://www.leighday.co.uk/our-services/group-claims/da-languages-claim/

Leigh Day. n.d. TheBigWord Claim. Accessed 12 July 2024. https://www.leighday.co.uk/our-services/group-claims/thebigword-languages-claim/

Moorkens, J. 2020. Translation in the Neoliberal Era. In: Bielsa, E. and Kapsaskis, D. eds. The Routledge Handbook of Translation and Globalization. Abingdon: Routledge, 323-336.

NRPSI. 2024. NRPSI Survey for the House of Lords Inquiry into Interpreting and Translation Services in the Courts. Accessed 5 January 2025. https://www.nrpsi.org.uk/news-posts/Click-here-for-a-summary-of-the-results-from-the-recent-survey-gathering-data-to-answer-questions-asked-by-the-House-of-Lords-Public-Services-Committee-Inquiry-in-to-interpreting-and-translation-sevices-in-the-courts.html?fbclid=IwZXh0bgNhZW0CMTEAAR2y5sQe006BhkxPiUtf4sM1TvRmp5_OGJ2BVkfAPXs4iEdnz0QfRAVgJ9A_aem_rUBVEDp1GmkUYSeN-YoMgQ

The Guardian. 2021. Uber drivers entitled to workers’ rights, UK supreme court rules. Accessed 28 November 2023. https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2021/feb/19/uber-drivers-workers-uk-supreme-court-rules-rights

Reuters. 2023. Amazon loses bid to throw out case by UK drivers seeking worker rights. Accessed 10 August 2024. https://www.reuters.com/technology/amazon-loses-bid-throw-out-case-by-uk-drivers-seeking-worker-rights-2023-03-27/

Standing, G. 2011. The Precariat: The New Dangerous Class. London: Bloomsbury Academic.

Stiglitz, J. 2024. The Road to Freedom: Economics and the Good Society. Penguin Books Limited.

United Nations. 1948. Universal Declaration of Human Rights. Accessed 7 April 2025. https://www.un.org/en/about-us/universal-declaration-of-human-rights