There is an interesting lawsuit against an academic institution in Colorado. Spanish-speaking custodial workers at the Auraria Higher Education Center in Colorado are suing over the failure of the Center to give them instructions in Spanish — alleging that they have faced unsafe conditions over the use of English rather than Spanish. The case suggests that the use of Spanish can not only be legally required but that the use of English can constitute a type of unsafe workplace.
Roughly a dozen custodial workers filed a complaint with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission alleging that the Center only communicated with its workers in English. The complaint names the Metropolitan State University of Denver, the University of Colorado-Denver and the Community College of Denver.
Blaine Nickeson, an AHEC vice president, said that the AHEC does offer some translations, but that it cannot be required to use native languages for all of its employees.
I tend to agree. I cannot see how using English as the primary form of communication in the United States can be the basis for discrimination or an unsafe work environment. If schools are legally required to speak the language of custodians and other employees, can they refuse to hire non-English speaking employees or would that be a form of discrimination based on national origin? Such an obligation would presumably extend to all languages from Polish to Chinese to Spanish. It creates an added burden on businesses which could find themselves in a vice between the duty to hire without discrimination and the costs of supplying translations for any non-English speaking employees.
What do you think?
Source: CBS
My Daughter is in Japan at present…. She’s been there for awhile….. She is staying in an American House….. But is required to learn Japanese fluently….. She just got her term grades back…. She maintained a 4.0 …… She must take after her mother…..
Why such a big deal over language….. You call a person that speaks three languages trilingual ….. You call a person that speaks two languages bilingual ….. And you know what we call a person that speaks one language….American…..
AY, Actually you can also call them British too. The Brits are not too big on learning other languages either. I had to help out a British couple in Germany who were driving around, and had NO idea of how to get a hotel, find out where to go, and spoke nothing other than English. Since I speak German, I had to help them out and shepherd them around to get to their hotel and clue them in how to do the driving and make arrangements.
Bron, I think we should keep NM @ least.
Actually I think I may take back what I wrote, as it seems that this is largely, if not totally, about spoken instructions/communication.
It does seem problematic that they hired workers without English skills and yet didn’t foresee this problem coming.
I think some of you are missing the distinction between speaking a language and reading (or writing) it. These people may be able to speak English passably so as to enable the hiring process and daily instructions, etc. But they are not able to read English, thus the issue at hand.
seems like a potential catch 22, hire those workers but use English get sued because they are not receiving their work instruction in Spanish. To avoid this in the future Spanish speakers are not hired and then there is the basis for a discrimination suit.
If they spoke enough English to be hired then they I would expect understood it to be able to understand the work instructions. Without knowing more, such as are they truly Spanish speaking and have no or minimal English skills, it is hard to know if there is any legitimacy to the complaint.
Well the next time you fly, just think of your safety when the mechanics who worked on your aircraft in a non-airline overhaul facility used job cards and manuals that are only in English and most of the workers read and speak only Spanish or some language other than English. The FAA has no problem with that at all. So If the FAA can allow this, I can see no problem with these workers gatting instructions only in English. What they are doing can be done with verbal instructions in their language.
I agree, Bob. It has to addressed in some other legal manner than a blanket requirement.
“In theory, yes, but the employment and workplace safety nexus complicates the issue.”
Sure, but it cannot be used to the extent that JT warned about above.
Maybe we should just give back California, New Mexico, Texas and Arizona to Mexico and be done with it.
California wouldnt be missed and neither would New Mexico or Arizona. Texas would go to war with Mexico and take them over and then be a separate country which they [Texans] want anyway.
rafflaw:
If the school system hired them knowing they didnt speak English, then they should make accommadations. It seems silly to hire someone who doesnt speak English and then get bent out of shape because you have to translate for them.
There has to be more to this story.
Around here, there is usually one guy who speaks both and is made foreman.
Bob,
“Allowing people to immigrate into the country does not constitute a legal obligation to alter the language and culture to suit each and every such immigrant.”
True.
“The mere fact that many people happen to speak Spanish on the continents of North and South America does not obligate the United States to speak any other language than it has been speaking since its inception.”
True.
“Any accommodations afforded to those who have not or are incapable of learning the mother tongue are strictly optional.”
In theory, yes, but the employment and workplace safety nexus complicates the issue.
Gene,
I don’t think I’m old fashioned.
OS,
“The case suggests that the use of Spanish can not only be legally required but that the use of English can constitute a type of unsafe workplace.”
That’s the issue.
And the answer is categorically no.
Allowing people to immigrate into the country does not constitute a legal obligation to alter the language and culture to suit each and every such immigrant.
The mere fact that many people happen to speak Spanish on the continents of North and South America does not obligate the United States to speak any other language than it has been speaking since its inception.
Any accommodations afforded to those who have not or are incapable of learning the mother tongue are strictly optional.
On the subject of Polish speaking custodians. Many, if not most, of the custodians who cleaned office buildings back in the 80’s in Chicago were Polish immigrants. I worked in the Sears Tower, and would converse w/ them since I knew a little Polski from the Pollack friends of my youth. Their English was broken, but they always were looking to improve it.
Regarding this case. Mexicans are some of the best immigrants this country has ever had IMHO. They are gracious, hard-working, family oriented, and religious. The latter being a plus in most folks eyes. This type controversy is not typical of Mexican immigrants. The vast majority strive to learn English and speak their native language in the home, just like the aforementioned Polish, and my Italian grandparents. If nothing else, this is just bad pr for immigration reform. I am an enthusiastic supporter. However, many U.S. citizens are on the fence..as it were! This will not help Mexicans cause. And, the legislation I’ve read about has a requirement to speak English, which I also support.
Bron,
the point is that if the school hired Spanish speaking employees, how do they get trained or told what to do until they learn Spanish? The employer needs to be reasonable. Of course they should learn English, but if you are hired as a non-English speaking worker, it only makes business sense that this employee will need accommodations until he/she understands English.
OS:
Not any now but I am not going to force someone to learn English. But at the same time I think if you are in a country it behooves you to learn their language not the other way round.
As I said above, if I moved to China I would learn Chinese as fast as I could so I would be able to function in business.
I have an architect friend who emigrated from a South American country who learned English in about 1 year, he still has a few problems but his English is way better than my Spanish. He could only do landscape work when he got here, now he is working on building a construction company with a friend of his.
If he had not learned English there is no way he could do what he is now doing. Do you think it is any different for a brick mason, plumber, carpenter, doctor or lawyer?
juliet is right. mespo, too.
The bandage was wound around the wound.
The farm was used to produce produce.
The dump was so full it had to refuse more refuse.
We must polish the Polish furniture.
He could lead if he would get the lead out.
The soldier decided to desert his dessert in the desert.
Since there is no time like the present, she decided to present the present.
A bass was painted on the bass drum.
When shot at the dove dove into the bushes.
I did not object to the object.
Gene,
Esperanto? I haven’t heard of that since college days in the 70’s! 🙂
This is one area where I’m old fashioned. A shared language builds a stronger community and ergo a stronger country both culturally and economically much like common laws and common currency. If you live and/or work in a country where the local language is not your native language, you should learn the local language. Millions of non-English speaking immigrants before you learned English. You should too. That being said, if you’re an employer hiring people with no local language skills? Reasonable accommodation is simply a cost of doing business within the parameters of your decision and “what mespo said”.
And for OS, Sie weiß, dass ich Deutsch sprechen und lesen Sie einige Latin mit ein paar Brocken der anderen Sprachen.
In some ways, it’s too bad the experiment of Esperanto failed so miserably.