California workers compensation has its own interpreter framework, separate from the court interpreter program and from the civil litigation rules. It defines who may be paid to interpret, at what rate, and what happens when a credentialed interpreter is unavailable. It is also the area where published summaries are least reliable, including the common claim that a certified court interpreter is simply required.
What the regulation actually says about credentials
Title 8 of the California Code of Regulations, section 9795.1.5, governs interpreters for hearings, depositions and arbitrations. It defines two categories, and only two.
- Certified, which the regulation defines as being listed on the State Personnel Board interpreter listing or on the California Courts interpreter page.
- Provisionally certified, which the regulation defines as being deemed qualified to perform interpreter services when a certified interpreter cannot be present, either by agreement of the parties, or based on a finding by the workers compensation administrative law judge conducting the hearing, or by the arbitrator conducting the arbitration, that the interpreter is qualified.
There is no third category. Note the shape of the second one: provisional qualification is not a vendor's fallback, it is a status conferred either by agreement of the parties or by a finding of the judge or arbitrator. A provider cannot self-certify into it.
This is why the flat statement that a certified court interpreter is required is not quite right. Certification is the primary route, provisional qualification is expressly contemplated, and the acceptable listings include the State Personnel Board list, not only the Judicial Council one.
Medical appointments and medical-legal exams have a different credential set
For medical appointments and medical-legal examinations, including QME and AME evaluations, the Division of Workers Compensation recognises a wider set of credentials. An interpreter may qualify by being listed on the State Personnel Board or California Courts listings, or by holding certification from the Certification Commission for Healthcare Interpreters or the National Board of Certification for Medical Interpreters.
That is a meaningful practical difference from the civil litigation position, and it reflects the setting: a medical evaluation is a clinical encounter conducted for legal purposes, and medical interpreting credentials test the vocabulary and protocols that matter there. Our comparison of CCHI and the National Board credentials covers what each involves.
Provisional qualification exists in this setting too, on narrower terms: where the claims administrator has given prior written consent, or where the injured worker needs a language outside the specified languages, provided that fact is noted in the record of the medical evaluation. The Division specifies certification requirements for a defined set of languages, currently Spanish, Tagalog, Arabic, Cantonese, Japanese, Korean, Portuguese and Vietnamese.
The fee schedule
Title 8 section 9795.3 sets the fees, and it became operative on August 13, 2013. It is the most detailed published interpreter fee schedule in California, which is why it is worth reading even for practitioners who never touch a comp file.
- For appeals board hearings, arbitrations and depositions: billed and paid at the greater of the half-day or full-day rate in the superior court fee schedule for the county where the service was provided, or the market rate.
- For service beyond eight hours: one eighth of the full day rate for each hour over eight.
- For medical appointments and medical-legal examinations: $11.25 per quarter hour or portion thereof, with a minimum payment of two hours, or the market rate, whichever is greater.
- Travel time: $5.00 per quarter hour or portion thereof.
- Mileage: payable where the distance exceeds 25 miles, at the rate adopted by the Director of the Department of Personnel Administration under Government Code section 19820.
- Cancellation: unless notified at least 24 hours before the service is to be provided, the interpreter is paid no less than the minimum fee.
Two features are worth drawing out. The schedule operates as a floor rather than a ceiling, because the market rate governs where it is higher. And the unit of purchase is a block of time rather than an hour, which reflects how interpreters are actually staffed. The wider commercial structure is set out in what a court interpreter costs in California.
Who pays, and the statute people misquote
Labor Code section 5811 addresses interpreter fees, providing that fees reasonably, actually, and necessarily incurred are paid by the employer, in accordance with the fee schedule set by the administrative director, and defining a qualified interpreter by reference to certification.
It is worth being precise about what that section does and does not do, because it is regularly cited for something stronger. Section 5811 is a fee and cost provision. It allocates payment and defines the qualified interpreter for that purpose. The operative credential rules for who may interpret at a hearing, deposition or arbitration are in the regulations at section 9795.1.5, not in section 5811. Citing the Labor Code as though it independently mandates a certified court interpreter overstates it, and a well-prepared opponent will notice.
Where this bites in practice
Three recurring situations, in order of how often they cause trouble:
- A medical-legal evaluation proceeds with a family member or an uncredentialed bilingual person interpreting. The evaluation is then challenged, and the months spent obtaining it are spent again.
- A provisionally qualified interpreter is used without the agreement or finding the regulation contemplates, and nothing in the record establishes how the qualification arose.
- An interpreter is booked for a scarce language on short notice, no certified interpreter exists for that date, and nobody addresses the provisional route in advance, so it is improvised on the day.
All three are scheduling failures rather than legal ones, and all three are prevented by raising the credential question when the appointment is set rather than when it begins.
The applicant's deposition
The deposition of an injured worker sits inside the hearings, depositions and arbitrations category, so the section 9795.1.5 rules apply: certified, or provisionally certified where a certified interpreter cannot be present and the parties agree or the judge or arbitrator so finds. The fee follows the greater of the county superior court half-day or full-day rate or the market rate.
Two things routinely go wrong here and both are avoidable. The first is language identification: the applicant's language is taken from the claim file rather than confirmed, and the file may record Spanish where the worker's first language is an indigenous Mesoamerican language. The second is duration: applicant depositions in disputed matters run long, and an interpreter booked for two hours who is still working at hour six is producing progressively less reliable testimony.
Both are scheduling decisions. Confirm the language with someone who has spoken to the worker, and give a realistic duration when booking so teaming can be arranged if needed.
Billing disputes and what prevents them
Interpreter billing in this system generates a steady volume of disagreement, and most of it traces to a small number of ambiguities that are cheap to resolve in advance.
- Which rate applies. A medical appointment is billed on the quarter-hour basis with a two-hour minimum; a hearing, deposition or arbitration is billed on the half-day or full-day basis. Mischaracterising the service type is the most common source of disagreement.
- Whether the market rate exceeded the schedule. The regulation pays the greater of the two, so a market-rate claim needs to be evidenced rather than asserted.
- Travel and mileage. Travel time is compensable at the stated quarter-hour rate, and mileage only beyond 25 miles.
- Cancellation. Without at least 24 hours notice, the minimum fee is payable.
The preventive step is the same one that works everywhere else: confirm the service type, the rate basis, and the cancellation terms in writing when the assignment is booked, not when the bill is questioned.
Do not carry these rules into civil litigation
The comp framework is self-contained and should not be applied to a civil damages matter. In particular, a medical examination requested by an insurer or defendant in a civil action is governed by Evidence Code section 755.5, which requires an interpreter, puts the fee on the requesting side, and makes the examination inadmissible if conducted without one. That is a different and stricter rule than anything in the comp regulations, and it is set out in interpreters at defense medical examinations. The comparison across all four exam types is in IME, DME, QME and AME.
Sources
California Code of Regulations, title 8, sections 9795.1.5 and 9795.3, the latter published by the California Department of Industrial Relations; the Division of Workers Compensation interpreter FAQs; California Labor Code section 5811 and Government Code section 11435.35, available through California Legislative Information. Verified against the primary sources in July 2026. Figures quoted are from the published fee schedule and are not AMS rates.
AMS supplies interpreters for WCAB hearings, depositions, and medical-legal evaluations across California. See our workers compensation service.