Interpreters Seek Status as Court Employees

A group of court interpreters filed a legal action against the Los Angeles County Superior Court on Thursday, in effect accusing the county’s top judges of violating the rights of their workers.

At issue is the status of about 350 Los Angeles court interpreters--the people who translate legal proceedings for non-English speaking witnesses, victims and criminal defendants. The Los Angeles chapter of the interpreters’ association says its members are court employees and should be treated as such, while the court says they are merely contract workers.

Court employees are entitled to workers’ compensation, collective bargaining rights and other benefits that are not extended to contract workers.

The dispute, which has been quietly building for months, already has frayed tempers between some of the interpreters and local judges. Meanwhile, the California Court Interpreters Assn. has distanced itself from the actions of its Los Angeles-area chapter and urged the local group to call off its legal battle.

Normally an action of this kind would be filed in Superior Court, but since the judges there are a party to the dispute, the association has gone directly to the 2nd District Court of Appeal for a ruling.

According to the filing, the Superior Court’s conduct “is arbitrary, capricious and an abuse of discretion.” The suit--formally known as a petition--asks the appellate court to force the Superior Court to meet with the interpreters’ union and give the workers employee status.

For years, the Los Angeles Superior Court has negotiated salary and benefit issues with the interpreters’ association. But in February, court administrators broke off their relationship with the group and unilaterally enacted a new salary and benefit package.

The court raised salaries for the workers, who now make $210 a day. But it simultaneously cut off their bonus pay and refused to renew the agreement that regulates such issues as layoffs and transfers.

“That was a terrible blow to us,” said Michael Ferreira, a court interpreter and chairman of the association’s greater Los Angeles chapter. “We are totally vulnerable now to whatever they want to do with us.”

Ferreira said that although interpreters have never been formally accepted as court employees, they did not mind their contract status as long as the court administration agreed to meet with their representatives to hammer out salary and benefit agreements known as memoranda of understanding.

Gerrianne Hayslett, a court spokeswoman, said some of the interpreters are dissatisfied with the new arrangement, but added that a majority prefer it. The new salary and benefits package gives employees a raise and more flexibility with their time, she said.

“There was initially a fear that this change would work to their detriment,” she said. “That has not proved to be the case, but a minority would like to go back to the old contract.”

Glenn Rothner, a Pasadena labor lawyer who represents the Los Angeles interpreters, sharply disagreed. He said that if court officials believe that a majority of the interpreters favor the current arrangement, they should schedule an election.

As the Los Angeles group tussles with the court, it also is faced with objections from its statewide organization. Renee Veale, president of the California Court Interpreters Assn., said her organization had questions about the election used to authorize the lawsuit, as well as doubts about the wisdom of suing to become employees.

“If we are declared employees, there is no stepping back,” Veale said. “That’s a bad move.”