Comments on: Musing on VRS Working from Home

By: Todd Wakefield

Todd Wakefield — Fri, 31 Jul 2009 20:17:05 +0000

JetBlue has all of its ticket agents and customer service people work from their homes and they have very high customer satisfaction rates with those services. The company believes it gives them access to a bigger pool of higher quality representatives than would otherwise be available. Of course VRS can involve conversations that are much more sensitive and deserving of confidentiality, so the comparison is not apples to apples. But the point is that there are businesses who have figured out how to do something like this and still maintain very good quality control.

Another point worth noting is that some providers have moved toward, or are adding “micro centers” where they may have only 2 or 3 VIs working at a time. These micro centers can present similar issues – mainly the inability of managers and supervisors to maintain a constant and close watch over privacy and confidentiality. If that’s the major concern, prohibiting home-based VRS services may also mean prohibiting these micro centers as well. In my opinion, that would be a shame because it could remove some real talent from the VI pool. Some very good interpreters simply don’t like the working conditions in large call centers.

Personally, I doubt the ability of regulators to deal effectively with the issues presented by home-based or micro center based VRS. At the end of the day, shouldn’t the bottom line be the same as service coming from a traditional VRS call center? At the end of the day, the real question is whether the provider has earned your trust. Trust can be earned or lost in a lot of different ways (as the recent wave of FBI warrants illustrates). I think users should be aware those kinds of things, and hold providers to high standards. They also should be ready to change providers if trust is unearned or breached.

It’s easy to forget that VRS is similar to most other consumer services in one very important way: ultimately, consumers can dictate what providers are doing by “voting with their feet” and walking away from providers that fail to “earn” their business.

By: Shonna

Shonna — Wed, 16 Jul 2008 03:38:06 +0000

Hello, all.
As a VRS interpreter with previous experience working at two of the major players in the VRS world, I can tell you that the trust lies entirely with the interpreters. Confidentiality is always the responsibility of the interpreters. Any interpreter, at any time, can reveal your information, regardless of if they work from home or in a big VRS office. Of course, there are consequences to that if the person is caught but it still lies with the interpreters. Just because a terp works in a big fancy office does not mean they have any less of an opportunity to violate confidentiality.

The bottom line is this: Treat a home-interpreter as you would any other interpreter you would use with a VRS company or a community interpreter. Give them the benefit of the doubt. If they violate the FCC rules or the RID CPC, file a complaint and don’t stop until the person is dealt with. Otherwise, try to believe that the interpreter is ethical. Just my 2 cents.

By: Jackie (Sloan) Stover

Jackie (Sloan) Stover — Wed, 20 Jun 2007 16:17:42 +0000

Hello friends,
I would reply to this sooner as our computer was acting bad, now it is good.
I know that there is an ongoing problem with trust with some interpreters as I appreciated to have VRS and trust them myself but for some other deaf friends still do not feel comfortable with use of interpreters –
I wonder if they need early training to use vrs at schools to feel comfortable to talk to their parents or siblings then when they are on their own, they will make use of the interpreters –
Maybe have some kind of workshops for awareness how to use vrs and get some feedbacks likewise –
show how 911 is used on tty, any phone, or vrs when needed with ready information for vrs – vi
Hope things will get better !

By: Sonny

Sonny — Mon, 18 Jun 2007 09:59:31 +0000

May

Per, ADA, ALL 9-1-1 centers MUST respond ALL incoming TTY calls. Dept of Justice developed guidelines for the centers to follow in mid 1990s. To the best of my knowledge, EVERY lawsuit and complaint against these centers for not responding to TTY calls was won by deaf people. Also, as a result of the lawsuits, each city or state defendant became more aware and sensitive of our needs which became more helpful for all of us in long run.

It is strongly recommended that your friend should file a lawsuit. Please have her contact me for assistance. My email address is sonny@pobox.com.

Sonny

By: May Harrell

May Harrell — Mon, 18 Jun 2007 03:38:36 +0000

Above interpreting services, I mean one week as an video operator and then next week as an interpreter for deaf community then next week video operator.. Not 100% as video relay operator… know what I mean?

By: May Harrell

May Harrell — Mon, 18 Jun 2007 03:36:02 +0000

In Maryland, agency named Birkuam (sp?) Interpreter Services (known as BIS) signed a contract with Hamilton Relay Services for using BIS’ interpreters as VI. BIS and Hamilton Video Relay Services make an agreement for interpreters to work as vp operator for a week and then next week this same interpreter do the interpreting assignment in the deaf community.. I surely wish other agencies who have video relay services to do what BIS and Hamilton do to make it very flexible… Any comment or suggestion would very much be welcomed.. (That’s where my niece works) :+D and thumb up!

By: Sonny

Sonny — Sun, 17 Jun 2007 21:10:34 +0000

I believe that having VIs work from home will be cost-, time- and energy-efficient – only if we include safeguards such as – like you mentioned – remote video cameras to ensure privacy, confidentiality and safety. No eyesdroppers and assurance of erasing written notes or numbers., to name a few examples…

It would mean that we would be able to obtain interpreters living in remote areas who couldnt commute to VRS centers or those who would be available for an hour or two per day, depending on their schedules.

In other words, shortage of interpreters would be minimized.

Sonny

By: May Harrell

May Harrell — Sat, 16 Jun 2007 02:24:43 +0000

OK About the interpreter issue, it is very interested for me to think about it.. There are so many diversion how to clarify whether if it should be worked at home or office… My niece who is Hamilton Video Relay operator said that it is still “sticky issue” but in other word, if something happens to one of my 2 great nieces who are under age (6 and 8 yrs old), my niece would prefer to work at home to make sure that her daughter is doing fine but otherwise, my niece is sort of against the idea because “HOW CAN WE TRUST AN INDIVIDUAL WHO TELLS US TRUE THAT SHE/HE DOES WORKS AT HOME OR JUST BEING ALOOF (sp?)??” So my niece turned her thumb down of the idea to work at home.

By: edsalert

edsalert — Thu, 14 Jun 2007 12:07:06 +0000

Erick,

I got an email from a deaf leader of a national organization that basically said the same thing; that is, directory assistance is not done from home, but office. Thus, shld be the same for VRS.

Two of biggest reasons for working from home are: costs lot less; and second reason: interpreters who are tied at home or live in remote areas can provide work from home that otherwise they would not be able to. I understand that and, apparently, so do a few others who actually support the concept of working from home. However, my concern is mostly because of confidentiality (reasonable doubt); and, after seeing the comments, functional equivalency, too (as ur comment shows).

So for now, thumbs down on working from home ;-] I’m trying to keep an open mind; so far I’m not convinced that working from home for VRS is ideal.

By: Erick Ketcham

Erick Ketcham — Thu, 14 Jun 2007 06:09:23 +0000

Ed,

Another thing to consider- would phone companies allow telephone operators “Dial O for operator”, do it at home? Most certainly not.

Why is it different for the Deaf? Are we all sub-human to the point that it is okay to give us sub-par services? Just because we are Deaf, they should bend the rules? Come on.

I’m sick of double standards.

Erick