Cucumis - Free online translation service
. .



Translation - Sjinees-Engels - 争议

Current statusTranslation
This text is available in the following languages: SjineesEngels

Category Explanations - Business / Jobs

Title
争议
Text
Submitted by Oana F.
Source language: Sjinees

2008年4月至2009年10月原告填写的调休申请表及年假申请表,其中调休申请表有23,5天调休,被告陈述,被告考勤制度的规定,半年之上的加班作废。

Title
disputes
Translation
Engels

Translated by pluiepoco
Target language: Engels

According to the overtime-for-leave applications and annual leave applications completed by the Plaintiff from April 2008 to October 2009, there were 23.5 days' leave taken by the Plaintiff during this period, so the Plaintiff represents that under the attendance system, his overtime workload during that period will be invalidated.
Laaste geakkrediteerde redigering deur lilian canale - 13 June 2011 14:27





Last messages

Author
Message

20 February 2011 22:44

Tantine
Number of messages: 2747
Hi Pluiepoco

Great English

I've set a poll.

Bises
Tantine

21 February 2011 01:11

pluiepoco
Number of messages: 1263
Thanks Tantine,
I translated it more literally,
but actually I prefer the meaning-only translation of the last sentence:

...His Overtime workload during that period will not be paid.

To highlight this, the previous text gives us the clue:
Some of his credit for leave or pay application was consumed, because he did ask for leave of more than 20 days which might take almost all of his OT credit.
So in his logics, the credit consumed up is of course invalidated or void, and it is unnecessary for him to restate this outcome.
What mattered is that since he used the credit for leave/vacation, he could not use it for pay.

One saying is "You can't have your cake and eat it too!"

So, I believe in my intuitive judgment that HE spoke of his pay instead of vocation here.

21 February 2011 09:36

Oana F.
Number of messages: 388
Hi, Pluiepoco, thank you for your interest. Can we change the phrase like this:According to the overtime-for-leave applications and annual leave applications completed by the Plaintiff from April 2008 to October 2009, there were 23.5 days' leave,about which the defendant says that actually, they account for overtime work not completed/done in the limit of a 6 months period, as the attendance system requires, but beyond, which calls for its nullity.

21 February 2011 12:17

pluiepoco
Number of messages: 1263
ok, Oana,
I made a mistake in translation,
the second plaintiff --> defendent
Thank You!
Your work is even greater than the Chinese original.

In fact, the Chinese text is not so clear as there may be some neglected words.

21 February 2011 12:28

Oana F.
Number of messages: 388
If it weren't for your explanations and laailash', I wouldn't have understood. Thank you, again