Monday, April 25, 2016

The ITI retirement/resignation saga, and wider ITI issues

In a joint letter published in the July/August 2014 issued of the ITI Bulletin (the journal of the Institute of Translation and Interpreting), surprise was expressed that the ITI Board had abolished the 'Retired' category for members who are no longer actively engaged in translation or interpreting work or whose income falls below a certain threshold. This had been done without informing the members, not least those most likely to be immediately affected. It transpired that anyone seeking the reduced life membership or retired membership category would be invited to convert to 'Supporter' status, which is open to anyone. In the meantime, the situation has gone from bad to worse – you can read all about the astonishing saga on Lisa Simpson’s blog. See also the post at Margaret Marks' blog.

In stark contrast to the way long-standing ITI members are being treated by the 'higher ITI echelons', the German Federal Association of Interpreters and Translators (BDÜ) clearly values its long-standing members, as evidenced by the 10-year anniversary letter I received from the Baden-Württemberg "Landesverband" (regional association) of the BDÜ – see below. Coincidentally, the letter arrived on the same day on which disgruntled ITI members decided to 'go public'.

In case you are wondering, please note that I have no intention of retiring any time soon, and quite possibly not until around 2040 or so, if I'm still around then...

More generally, it is worth pointing out the broader issue that the ITI Board and management has shown itself to have little interest in any members' concerns, apparently regarding itself as above criticism. They have banned other letters (in addition to the retirement letter referred to in Lisa's blog post), don't engage properly with members on the member forum or ITI LinkedIn group, and generally show no signs of being the governing body of an association run by its members for its members. These are issue that affect all ITI members.  

Wednesday, April 20, 2016

The loss of trees in Victoria Park, Leicester

In a memo dated 6 November 2011, Leicester Civic Society elaborated on a previous suggestion to create a Victoria Park Centenary Walk between the Victoria Park Lodges and Edwin Lutyens' Grade 1 listed War Memorial. The memo envisaged the loss of a (presumably small) number of trees, as indicated by the 'red blob' in the sketch shown below, which is an extract from the sketch attached to the LCS memo of 6 November 2011.

Crucially, the LCS memo stated:  

"There would be approximately three times as many new trees planted as would require removal".

Between 24 July and 23 August  2013 there was a (perhaps not particularly well publicised?) public consultation, the details of which are still accessible here. The Leicester Mercury reported on the project in March 2014 under the heading "Leicester's Victoria Park cenotaph and other war memorials to get £100,000 revamp" – see article here, and the  'regeneration works' were announced on the Leicester City Council website in early 2016 (again, perhaps not adequately publicised?).

Meanwhile, construction of the Centenary Walk has commenced, and the associated loss of mature trees has caused an – apparently entirely justified – public outcry, as widely reported by the BBC under the heading "'Devastation' over 50 chopped Leicester Victoria Park trees" and in the Leicester Mercury.

About 50 mature trees in Victoria Park and more trees in the car park have been felled (BBC)

The actual planning documentation relating the project can be accessed here. At first glance, there is no clear indication of the scale of the tree loss. Perhaps the apparent obfuscation was deliberate, in order to prevent an outcry at the planning stage? Note in particular the 'existing' and 'proposed' plans.

Further 'research' by an LCS member revealed further details:
There's a very detailed arboricultural survey by the LCC Trees and Woodlands Team here. It identifies, classifies and categorizes each tree (pp7-14) and cross refers to a numbered map on the last page. An arboricultural impact assessment (AIA) on p15 states that; - 76 trees will need to be removed - a further 31 will be affected and may suffer as a result of the works - 49 trees will be planted as part of the development - a minimum of 29 trees will be planted in the park generally to offset the losses. There may have been promises subsequently to plant more trees. 

In summary, it seems 'safe' to draw the following conclusions:
  • The large number of trees removed obviously exceeds what was expected based on the 'red blob' in the LCS sketch of 2011 (see above).
  • The number of replacement trees is obviously nowhere near three times the trees removed and could therefore be regarded as inadequate.
  • It would appear that there is a good basis for a campaign to push for significantly more new trees.

Wednesday, April 13, 2016

Hedgehog release

Time to release the 'foster hedgehog' we looked after over the winter...

Sunday, April 10, 2016

Artificial Grass – Made for Living (!?)

Van advertising Artificial Grass – Made for Living spotted in Leicester the other day:

Sure enough, the company has a website with the same advertising slogan:

Has it occurred to them that surely there is a degree of irony in advertising lifeless, plastic grass under the motto made for living?

Saturday, April 02, 2016

From Richard III to topping the Premier League: how Leicester hit the big time

HE Translation's main office is based in Leicester, so one can't help feeling a degree of excitement when International Business Times reporter Orlando Crowcroft reports that "Leicester hit the big time"!