Cover not available
Article published In:
The Journal of Internationalization and Localization
Vol. 8:1 (2021) ► pp.48–75

Uberization of translation

Impacts on working conditions

| University of Surrey
Digital labour platforms, encompassing on-demand translation work via apps and websites, have grown exponentially in recent years and have significant consequences for translation workers. This study explores the critical literature on digital labour platforms from a labour studies perspective and submits the findings of a quantitative survey of 70 translation workers residing in Turkey and working on/for digital labour platforms. Our research suggests that the introduction of digital labour platforms into translation production and business networks has not yet provided a significant contribution to the working conditions of translation workers in Turkey. Instead, we argue that their working conditions have been rearranged and reorganized in accordance with the uberization of (translation) work. According to the survey findings, engaging in such work on/for digital labour platforms exposes translation workers to risks related to employment status, income level, work-life balance, social protections, free agency, bargaining power, dependence on the platform, allocation of risks and rewards, and data collection, protection and privacy.
Keywords: translation and technology, cognitive and platform capitalism, uberization of work, uberization of translation work, working conditions on digital labour platforms
Article outline
  • 1.Introduction
  • 2.Uberization of work
  • 3.Uberization of (translation) work in the language industry
  • 4.Survey methodology
  • 5.Analysis of survey results and discussion
    • 5.1Professional profiles of the survey participants
    • 5.2Reasons for working on/for digital labour platforms
    • 5.3The level of income and satisfaction with the income
    • 5.4Working hours and work-life balance
    • 5.5Removal of free agency and intermediation
    • 5.6Reduced bargaining power and rights
    • 5.7Increasing dependence of translation workers on the platform
    • 5.8Allocation of rewards and risks across the ecosystem
    • 5.9Data collection, protection and privacy
  • 6.Limitation of the study
  • 7.Conclusions
  • 8.Considerations for the future
  • Acknowledgements
  • Notes
  • References


This article is available free of charge.

Published online: 13 September 2021
DOI logo
https://doi.org/10.1075/jial.20006.fir
References
Abdallah, Kristiina, and Kaisa Koskinen
2007 “Managing Trust: Translating and the Network Economy”. Meta: Journal Des Traducteurs 52 (4): 673–687. [URL]
Baker, Mona
2009 “Resisting State Terror: Theorizing Communities of Activist Translators and Interpreters”. In Globalization, Political Violence and Translation, E. Bielsa and C. W. Hughes. (Eds.): 222–242. Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Baumgarten, Stefan
2016 “The Crooked Timber of Self-reflexivity: Translation and Ideology in the End Times”. Perspectives 24 (1): 115–129. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Bauwens, Michel, and Vasilis Kostakis
2017 “Why Platform Co-Ops Should Be Open Co-Ops”. In Ours to Hack and to Own: The Rise of Platform Cooperativism, A New Vision for the Future of Work and a Fairer Internet by Trebor Scholz and Nathan Schneider. (Eds): 163–166. New York: Or Books. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Canfora, Carmen, and Angelika Ottmann
2020 “Risks In Neural Machine Translation”. Fair MT 9 (1): 58–77. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Caruso, Loris
2017 “Digital Innovation and the Fourth Industrial Revolution: Epochal Social Changes?”. AI and Society 33 (3): 379–392. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Cohen, Maurie J.
2017 The Future of Consumer Society. Oxford: Oxford University Press. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Coop
2021 “Platformcoop Directory”. Platform Cooperativism Consortium. Accessed May 2021. [URL]
Cronin, Michael
2017 Eco-Translation: Translation and Ecology in the Age of the Anthropocene. London; New York: Routledge, Taylor and Francis Group. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Dam, Helle Vrønning, and Karen Korning Zethsen
2008 “Translator Status”. The Translator 14 (1): 71–96. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2011 “The Status of Professional Business Translators on the Danish Market: A Comparative Study of Company, Agency and Freelance Translators”. Meta 56(4): 976–997. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
De Stefano, Valerio and Antonio Aloisi
2018 European Legal Framework for Digital Labour Platforms. Luxembourg: European Commission. DOI logo, JRC112243. [URL]
Disco
2021 “Open Value Cooperativism and Disco in 7 Principles and 11 Values”. Guerrilla Media Collective Wiki. Accessed May 2021. [URL]
Ehrensberger-Dow, Maureen, and Andrea Hunziker Heeb
2016 “Investigating the Ergonomics of the Technologized Translation Workplace”. In Reembedding Translation Process Research by Ricardo Muñoz Martín. (Ed), 69–88. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. [URL]. DOI logo
Ehrensberger-Dow, Maureen, Andrea Hunziker Heeb, Gary Massey, Ursula Meidert, Silke Neumann, and Heidrun Becker
2016 “An International Survey of the Ergonomics of Professional Translation”. ILCEA Revue de l’Institut des Langues et des Cultures d’Europe et d’Amérique 27. [URL]
ETUC
2018 Collective Voice in the Platform Economy: Challenges, Opportunities, Solutions. Accessed May 2021. [URL]
Eurofond
2018 Platform Work: Types and Implications for Work and Employment: Literature Review. Accessed May 2021. [URL]
European Commission, CIOL, and ITI
2016 UK Translator Survey: Final Report. London, UK: European Commission . Accessed May 2021. [URL]
Faes, Florian
2017 “Translate.com Exposes Highly Sensitive Information in Massive Privacy Breach”. Slator. Accessed May 2021. [URL]
Fırat, Gökhan
2019 “Commercial Translation and Professional Translation Practitioners in the Era of Cognitive Capitalism: A Critical Analysis”. MA thesis. Boğaziçi University.
Fuchs, Christian
2010 “Labor in Informational Capitalism and on the Internet”. The Information Society 26 (3): 179–196. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
2011 “Cognitive Capitalism or Informational Capitalism? The Role of Class in the Information Economy.” In Cognitive Capitalism, Education and Digital Labour, by Michael Peters and Ergin Bulut. (Eds), 75–119. New York: Peter Lang. [URL]
2017a “Legal Struggles in the Age of Uber-Capitalism: Are Uber-Drivers Workers or Self-Employed.” Huffpost Online. Accessed May 2021. [URL]
2017b Social Media: A Critical Introduction (2nd ed.). London: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
Garcia, Ignacio
2017 “Translating in the Cloud Age: Online Marketplaces”. HERMES – Journal of Language and Communication in Business (56): 59. [URL]. DOI logo
Gough, Joanna, and Katerina Perdikaki
2019 “Concurrent Translation – Reality or Hype?”. In TC40. London. [URL]
Hardjono, Thomas, and Alex Pentland
2019 “Data Cooperatives: Towards a Foundation for Decentralized Personal Data Management”. Arxiv.Org. Accessed May 2021. [URL]
Harmon, Ellie, and M. Six Silberman
2018 “Rating Working Conditions on Digital Labor Platforms”. Computer Supported Cooperative Work (CSCW) 27 (3–6): 1275–1324. [URL]. DOI logo
Hill, Steven
2015 Raw Deal: How the ‘Uber Economy’ and Runaway Capitalism are Screwing American Workers. New York, NY: St. Martin’s Press.Google Scholar
ILO (International Labour Organization)
2008 Measurement of Decent Work. Discussion Paper for the Tripartite Meeting of Experts on the Measurement of Decent Work. Geneva: International Labour Office. Accessed May 2021. [URL]
2013 Decent Work Indicators: Guidelines for Producers and Users of Statistical and Legal Framework Indicators – ILO Manual. 2nd Version. Geneva: International Labour Office. Accessed May 2021. [URL]
2016 Non-Standard Employment Around the World: Understanding Challenges, Shaping Prospects. Geneva: International Labour Office. Accessed May 2021. [URL]
2018a The Architecture of Digital Labour Platforms: Policy Recommendations on Platform Design for Worker Well-being. Geneva: ILO Publications. Accessed May 2021. [URL]
2018b Digital Labour Platforms and the Future of Work: Towards Decent Work in the Online World. Geneva: International Labour Office. Accessed May 2021. [URL]
2018c Work on Digital Labour Platforms in Ukraine: Issues and Policy Perspectives. Geneva: International Labour Office. Accessed May 2021. [URL]
2019 Organizing On-Demand: Representation, Voice, and Collective Bargaining in the Gig Economy. Geneva: International Labour Office. Accessed May 2021. [URL]
Johnston, Hannah, Alina Caia, Michael Six Silberman, Monica Ceremigna, Diego Hernandez, and Valerica Dumitrescu
2020 “Working On Digital Labour Platforms: A Trade Union Guide For Trainers On Crowd-, App- And Platform-Based Work”. Etui.Org. Accessed May 2021. [URL]
Kenny, Dorothy, Joss Moorkens, and Félix do Carmo
2020 “Fair MT: Towards Ethical, Sustainable Machine Translation”. Translation Spaces 9 (1). DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Kyrou, Ariel, Yann Moulier-Boutang, and Bernard Stiegler
2016 “Stop the Uberisation of Society!” [orig. Stop à l’uberisation de la société !]. Translated by Sam Kinsley. Liberation. Accessed May, 2020. Accessed May 2021. [URL]
Langley, Paul, and Andrew Leyshon
2016 “Platform Capitalism: The Intermediation and Capitalization of Digital Economic Circulation”. Finance and Society 3 (1): 11–31. [URL]
McDonough Dolmaya, Julie
2012 “Analyzing The Crowdsourcing Model and Its Impact On Public Perceptions of Translation”. The Translator 18 (2): 167–191. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Moorkens, Joss
2017 “Under Pressure: Translation in Times of Austerity”. Perspectives 25 (3): 464–477. [URL]
2020 “A Tiny Cog in a Large Machine: Digital Taylorism in the Translation Industry.” In Translation Spaces: Fair MT – Towards Ethical, Sustainable Machine Translation, 9 (1): 12–34, by Joss Moorkens, Dorothy Kenny, Félix do Carmo. (Eds). John Benjamins Publishing Company. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Moorkens, Joss, and Davis Lewis
2019 “Research Questions and A Proposal for the Future Governance of Translation Data”. The Journal of Specialised Translation, no. 32.Google Scholar
Moorkens, Joss, and David Lewis
2020 “Copyright and the Reuse of Translation as Data”. In The Routledge Handbook of Translation and Technology by Minako O’Hagan. (Ed.): 469–81. Abingdon: Routledge.Google Scholar
Moorkens, Joss and Marta Rocchi
2020 “Ethics in the Translation Industry”. In The Routledge Handbook of Translation and Ethics by Kaisa Koskinen and Nike Pokorn. (Eds). Abingdon, UK: Routledge. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Moulier-Boutang, Yann
2008 Cognitive Capitalism [orig. Le Capitalisme Cognitif]. Translated by Ed Emery 2011 Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
Muzii, Luigi
2018 Upstream. Independently e-published. Accessed May 2021.Google Scholar
Nimdzi
2020 Size and State of the Language Services Industry Today. [Webinar]. Accessed May 2020. [URL]
O’Brien, Sharon
2012 “Translation as Human-Computer Interaction”. Translation Spaces 1 (1): 101–122. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
O’Hagan, Minako
(ed) 2020 The Routledge Handbook of Translation and Technology. London and New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
Olohan, Maeve
2017 “Technology, Translation and Society: A Constructivist, Critical Theory Approach”. Target, Special Issue: Translation in Times of Technocapitalism 29 (2): 264–283. [URL]
Open Translation
2011 Open Translation Tools. [E-book]. Accessed May 2021. [URL]
Pettersen, Lene
2017 “Rating Mechanisms Among Participants in Sharing Economy Platforms.” First Monday 22 (12–4). DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Pielmeier, Hélène, and Paul O’Mara
. January 2020 “The State of the Linguist Supply Chain: Translators and Interpreters in 2020”. CSA Research. Accessed May 2021. [URL]
Rodríguez-Castro, Mónica
2015 “Conceptual Construct and Empirical Validation of A Multifaceted Instrument for Translator Satisfaction”. The International Journal of Translation and Interpreting Research 7 (2): 1–21. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Sadek, Gafar
2018 “Translation: Rights and Agency – A Public Policy Perspective for Knowledge, Technology and Globalization”. PhD thesis. University of Ottawa. [URL]
Şahin, Mehmet
2013a “Using MT Post-Editing for Translator Training”. Tralogy, II(6). Retrieved from [URL]
2013b Technology in Translator Training: The Case of Turkey. Hacettepe University Journal of Faculty of Letters 30 (2): 173–190.Google Scholar
2016 Translation Technologies for a Less Commonly Translated Language: Promises and Challenges. Translatologia, 1(1). Retrieved from [URL]
Şahin, Mehmet, and Neslihan Kansu-Yetkiner
. November 2020 “From Translation Market to Translation Curriculum: Psychosocial and Physical Ergonomics in Turkey”. The Interpreter and Translator Trainer 14 (4): 440–460. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Saner, Raymond, Lichia Yiu, and Melanie Nguyen
2019 “Platform Cooperatives: The Social and Solidarity Economy and the Future of Work”. In UNTFSSE International Conference. Accessed May 2021. [URL]
Santos, Boaventura de Sousa
2014 Epistemologies of the South: Justice Against Epistemicide. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
Schmidt, Florian A.
2017 Digital Labour Markets in the Platform Economy. Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung. Accessed May 2021. [URL]
Scholz, Trebor
2016a Platform Cooperativism: Challenging the Corporate Sharing Economy. New York: Rosa Luxemburg Stiftung. Accessed May 2021. [URL]
2016b Uberworked and Underpaid: How Workers are Disrupting the Digital Economy. Cambridge: Polity Press.Google Scholar
Scholz, Trebor, and Nathan Schneider
(Eds) 2016 Ours to Hack and to Own: The Rise of Platform Cooperativism, A New Vision for the Future of Work and a Fairer Internet. New York: OR Books. DOI logoGoogle Scholar
Siddiqui, Yasir, and Tiberius Brastaviceanu
2013 “Open Value Network: A Framework for Many-to-Many Innovation.” Montreal, Canada: Sensorica. Accessed May 2021. [URL]
Slator
2020 “Smartcat Raises USD 14.6m in Series B to Scale TMS Tech, Marketplace”. Slator. Accessed May 2021. [URL]
Srnicek, Nick
2017 Platform Capitalism. Polity Press.Google Scholar
Stepes
. May 2021 “More Uber Than Uber.” [Website Log]. Stepes. [URL]
TAUS
2017 The Translation Industry in 2022. Amsterdam: TAUS. Accessed May 2021. [URL]
2018 Translators in the Algorithmic Age. Amsterdam: TAUS. Accessed May 2021. [URL]
Türk-İş
. July 2019 “The Starvation and Poverty Line for a Family of Four in Turkey (TL/month)”. TÜRK-İŞ Newsletter. [URL]
. April 2021 “The Starvation and Poverty Line for a Family of Four in Turkey (TL/month)”. TÜRK-İŞ Newsletter. [URL]
Tymoczko, Maria
Ed. 2010 Translation, Resistance, Activism. Amherst, MA: University of Massachusetts Press.Google Scholar
Unbabel
2019 “Unbabel Raises $60M Series C to Become the World’s Translation Layer”. [Blog]. Accessed May 2021. [URL]
Urzì Brancati, Cesira, Annarosa Pesole, and Enrique Fernández-Macías
2019 Digital Labour Platforms in Europe: Numbers, Profiles, and Employment Status of Platform Workers. Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union. DOI logo, JRC117330. [URL]
Vashee, Kirti
2017 “Data Security Risks with Generic and Free Machine Translation”. Medium. Accessed May 2021. [URL]
Vaughan, Rober, and John Hawksworth
2014 “The Sharing Economy: How Will It Disrupt Your Business? Megatrends: The Collisions”. PricewaterhouseCoopers. [URL]
Vercellone, Carlo, Francesco Brancaccio, Alfonso Giuliani, Federico Puletti, Giulia Rocchi, and Pierluigi Vattimo
2018 “Data-Driven Disruptive Commons-Based Models”. DECODE. [URL]
Cited by

Cited by 6 other publications

Carreira, Oliver
2023. Market concentration in the language services industry and working conditions for translators. Perspectives ► pp. 1 ff. DOI logo
Giustini, Deborah
2022. COVID-19 and the Configuration of Materiality in Remote Interpreting: Is Technology Biting Back?. In Translation and Interpreting in the Age of COVID-19 [Corpora and Intercultural Studies, 9], ► pp. 197 ff. DOI logo
Gough, Joanna, Özlem Temizöz, Graham Hieke & Leonardo Zilio
2023. Concurrent translation on collaborative platforms. Translation Spaces 12:1 ► pp. 45 ff. DOI logo
Hoyte-West, Antony
2022. Some Characteristics of the Conference Interpreting Profession in Malta and the Republic of Ireland: a Comparative Overview. Translation Studies: Theory and Practice 2:1 (3) ► pp. 17 ff. DOI logo
Lambert, Joseph & Callum Walker
2022. Because We’re Worth It. Translation Spaces 11:2 ► pp. 277 ff. DOI logo
Parent‐Rocheleau, Xavier, Sharon K. Parker, Antoine Bujold & Marie‐Claude Gaudet
2023. Creation of the algorithmic management questionnaire: A six‐phase scale development process. Human Resource Management DOI logo

This list is based on CrossRef data as of 1 november 2023. Please note that it may not be complete. Sources presented here have been supplied by the respective publishers. Any errors therein should be reported to them.