Skip to comments.Feds Sue Private Business for Firing Employees Who Can't Speak English
Posted on 07/03/2014 9:28:22 AM PDT by lbryce
It used to be that, if you came to the United States, you knew you'd have to learn to speak English. After all, if you wanted to assimilate into the culture, get a job, and have a life in your new nation, you'd better know how to speak the language. Unfortunately, assimilation is a thing of the past. Now, the federal government has decided that employers with English-speaking requirements are "discriminating" against a host of minorities.
Because demanding that your employees be able to understand you and communicate with you is just ridiculous.
In this case, the feds have dropped the legal hammer on Wisconsin Plastics, Inc. of Green Bay, Wisconsin. The business is accused of violating the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which outlaws any discrimination based on national origin. They're trying to argue that an inability to speak English constitutes a linguistic characteristic of a national origin group and thus deserves protection.
From Judicial Watch:
Heres the twisted explanation from the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), the federal agency that enforces the nations workplace discrimination laws; the Civil Rights Act protects employees from discrimination based on national origin, which includes the linguistic characteristics of a national origin group. Therefore, according to this reasoning, foreigners have the right to speak their native language even during work hours at an American company that requires English.
(Excerpt) Read more at caintv.com ...
Guess Wisconsin Plastics will have to hire interpreters.
Feds have no standing. Throw the case out.
Here’s what I don’t understand:
Did they interview the employees in Spanish? Why would they do that?
I say: Meet potential employees — interview them — gauge their ability to communicate — hire the ones who “can handle the job”.
Once you hire them, you have fewer options (apparently). I don’t like that, but a smart business owner will be proactive and simply make the hiring process 100% English only. You just don’t hire candidates who “don’t impress” you.
... while the world learns to speak english for technology (to develop their own countries), for business, trade in American dollars,etc etc with the worlds most successful country.
Here we have Obama doing whatever he can to screw America its economy,and the success of it’s peoples. He prefers to support all the americahaters and in doing so mess up the economies of those who want to trade with America.
The POS needs to be tarred and feathered, then run outta town on a rail!
Why did they get hired in the first place?
I'm not belittling the stupidity and absurdity of the suit, but they did in fact place themselves in this position.
does the state have English as their official language?
seems that amendment should be a big issue right now.
The Spanish channels are all illegals all the illegal time.
Which we all knew was coming.
But there's one itty bitty little distinction. Your national origin can't be changed, it's a fact of your birth.
The language you speak is of course something most can learn. Thus it is a choice.
Other than Religion the Constitution is pretty thin on protecting choices. Make a bad one...that's your problem.
I'll lay odds they worked with a temp. agency. When the employees were placed, the temp. agency probably vouched for them, then the company figured out they didn't work out, and let them go.
This is a huge mistake on the government’s part. When the American’s with Disabilities act was passed there was a sudden drop in hiring of disabled people. Companies now saw them as potential problems. When Congress gave blacks government lawyers to sue for racial discrimination there was another big drop in employed blacks. A study was conducted where identical resumes were sent to the same employer. The difference in responses between those with black sounding names those with white sounding names was more than a statistical phenomenon. Companies simply stopped even interviewing blacks. This was countered by putting the requirement for “diversity” (defined as hiring blacks) into government contracts. That resulted in blacks being hired and used essentially as decoration, as they knew they could not be fired. Perhaps the government will now require companies to hire a percentage of people who speak no English.
Well that should stop business from giving people with difficulty speaking English a chance. If you’re going to get sued if you fire them, then don’t hire them in the first place.
What I found while working with a bunch of Mexicans and El Salvadorans.....they can speak English but will not do so. I used to get on to them and tell them that speaking Spanish in an English establishment was rude so speak English!! You should’ve seen the looks they gave me. I was a woman in a station above them giving them orders and some of them intensely disliked me for that. I didn’t care.
Then they bring in the EEOC and sue you for not hiring them. In some cases it is simply best to lose the resume.
Unless there are further details, there is something wrong with this case, and it's not worth getting up an arms about.
If the requirements of the job are to “read, write and verbally communicate in the common vernacular (English)” then absolutley the Feds have no standing.
Business should stop running away from the “all consumming” judicial power of the executive branch.
...uhhh,,,do you see the disconnect there?
To wit “judicial power of the executive branch”
Unless Mr. Employer knew that when he hired Mr. or Ms. non-polyglot.
Yes the ongoing assault on our Constitution by these unaccountable politicians.
But the feds have no standing because how businesses operate are none of the feds da!#ed business. The Commerce Clause is another example of unaccountable politicians' and judges' assault on the Constitution. The original intent of the Commerce Clause was limited to the feds resolving disputes and problems which arose from intrastate commerce.
Good for you!