English-Only Workplace Policies | Gcconsulting.com
General Counsel Consulting
About us Attorney resources Employer resources Job listings Submit resume Contact Us
General Counsel Consulting
Sign In
Forgot your password?
New User?
Most Influential
Legal Recruiters By
General Counsel
service in helping
my organization
recruit for a hard
to fill position.
They did extensive
work on the front
end to understand
our needs and
our culture and
began referring
highly qualified
candidates almost
Melinda Burrows
Deputy General Counsel
- Litigation and
Compliance, Progress
Energy Service Company

Jobs for Law Students
Law Student - Law Firm in San Jose, CA
USA-CA-San Jose
File Clerk The candidate will be organizing and filing documents for client files. Creating compute.... [more]

Click here

Job of the Day
Trust & Estate Admin Attorney - Remote California
Newport Beach California United States

"Certain beneficiaries and trustees lacking legal counsel that we fund trust loans for, generally fo...

Inhouse News
Article Archives

English-Only Workplace Policies

In-House News:

English-Only Workplace Policies
By Anique Gonzalez

Immigration has undoubtedly been a hot topic in the United States recently, and it seems there are no signs of the subject becoming any less controversial in the near future. As Congress continues to struggle over immigration reform, lawsuits filed by immigrants alleging violations of the EEOC continue to rise.

The recent trend toward businesses' creation and implementation of English-only policies in the workplace has resulted in an increase of employees filing claims maintaining that the policies discriminate against them and create a hostile work environment. According to the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), there were 30 such suits filed in 1996; 10 years later, that number had risen to 120.

There have been instances of such suits taking place across the country, and the companies involved have not been as victorious as one might think. For example, a case currently pending in Massachusetts sets the EEOC against the Salvation Army for enforcing an English-only policy as well as requiring a specific level of English proficiency among employees. A New York suit resulted in a geriatric center being forced to pay $900,000 after it settled with Haitian employees who maintained they were unable to speak their native tongue even though other languages were allowed. In Atlanta, three Hispanic housekeepers filed suit against a private college in response to an English-only policy that required them to speak English to supervisors as well as colleagues. The college, Oglethorpe University, and the plaintiffs have agreed to settle.

Not all English-only policies have been struck down in court, however. One New York case was found in favor of the defendant, a taxi company based in Long Island. The federal court found that the English-only policy was not implemented for discriminatory purposes and did not create a hostile work environment but, rather, was a necessity that helped increase the ease of business functions and avoid communication problems.

There is a difference between essential and necessary English-only policies and those that can be viewed as companies' ways of purposefully discriminating against employees. For example, policies that prohibit employees from speaking their native tongues even on their own personal time (i.e., lunch breaks) are often viewed as discriminatory or conducive to a hostile work environment.

English-only policies are justified when they serve specific business purposes. (This is especially true in environments that are customer-service based.) The bottom line is that businesses must be aware that such policies are precarious and fully understand the legal implications associated with them.

According to the EEOC, "Even where an English-only rule has been adopted for nondiscriminatory reasons, the employer's use of the rule should relate to specific circumstances in its workplace. An English-only rule is justified by 'business necessity' if it is needed for an employer to operate safely or efficiently. The following are some situations in which business necessity would justify an English-only rule:
  • For communications with customers, coworkers, or supervisors who only speak English,
  • In emergencies or other situations in which workers must speak a common language to promote safety,
  • For cooperative work assignments in which the English-only rule is needed to promote efficiency,
  • To enable a supervisor who only speaks English to monitor the performance of an employee whose job duties require communication with coworkers or customers."
On the Net

U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission

Salvation Army

Oglethorpe University

Facebook comments:


Article ID: 120193

Article Title: English-Only Workplace Policies

Comment not found for this article......
+ Add Comment

Related Artilces:
Is Anyone Out There Happy?
KCS restructures legal department
SOX Exemption Extended
In-House Counsel Retention: The Only Way to Retain Wolves is by Building a Pack
Limiting Litigation Costs: Techniques to Consider
Underpaid Worker Lawsuits Increase
How to Outsource Legal Work An Average Attorney Can Do
Evolving Role of In-House Counsel: Adding Value to the Business
In Court, Splenda and Equal Battle over Advertising, Profits, and Market Share
The Good Times Still Roll Thanks to a Strong Corporate Sector
  • Share this story:

  • BlinkList
  • blogmarks
  • del.icio.us
  • Digg
  • Facebook
  • Google
  • Sphinn
  • MySpace
  • NewsVine
  • Simpy
  • StumbleUpon
  • Technorati
  • E-mail this story to a friend!
  • Print this article!
  • Faves
  • Furl
  • Netvouz
  • Slashdot
  • Spurl
  • Yahoo! Buzz


Shoot for the moon. Even if you miss it, you will land among the stars.