Betsy's Page

Monday, November 19, 2007

A coming fight over English speaking requirements

Should businesses be forbidden from requiring that employees speak English? It seems commensensical that businesses might want employees who can interact in the common language of the country. But as John Fund reports, some Democrats, with Nancy Pelosi's support, want to prevent language allowing employers to make English-speaking skills a requirement for employment and that those employees speak English on the job.
It's been less than a week since New York's Sen. Hillary Clinton and Gov. Eliot Spitzer had to climb down from their support of driver's licenses for illegal aliens. Now House Speaker Nancy Pelosi has moved to kill an amendment that would protect employers from federal lawsuits for requiring their workers to speak English. Among the employers targeted by such lawsuits: the Salvation Army.

Sen. Lamar Alexander, a moderate Republican from Tennessee, is dumbstruck that legislation he views as simple common sense would be blocked. He noted that the full Senate passed his amendment to shield the Salvation Army by 75-19 last month, and the House followed suit with a 218-186 vote just this month. "I cannot imagine that the framers of the 1964 Civil Rights Act intended to say that it's discrimination for a shoe shop owner to say to his or her employee, 'I want you to be able to speak America's common language on the job,' " he told the Senate last Thursday.

But that's exactly what the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission is trying to do. In March the EEOC sued the Salvation Army because its thrift store in Framingham, Mass., required its employees to speak English on the job. The requirement was clearly posted and employees were given a year to learn the language. The EEOC claimed the store had fired two Hispanic employees for continuing to speak Spanish on the job. It said that the firings violated the law because the English-only policy was not "relevant" to job performance or safety.
I wonder how many positions Hillary can take on this issue?

posted by Betsy Newmark permalink 6:38 AM

		Betsy's Page

HOME Betsy neither necessarily uses, nor endorses, the products advertised on this site. Comments from an AP history and government teacher in Raleigh, NC. e-mail betsynewmark AT gmail.com Site Feed Wikio Your Market Research Here		Monday, November 19, 2007 A coming fight over English speaking requirements Should businesses be forbidden from requiring that employees speak English? It seems commensensical that businesses might want employees who can interact in the common language of the country. But as John Fund reports, some Democrats, with Nancy Pelosi's support, want to prevent language allowing employers to make English-speaking skills a requirement for employment and that those employees speak English on the job. It's been less than a week since New York's Sen. Hillary Clinton and Gov. Eliot Spitzer had to climb down from their support of driver's licenses for illegal aliens. Now House Speaker Nancy Pelosi has moved to kill an amendment that would protect employers from federal lawsuits for requiring their workers to speak English. Among the employers targeted by such lawsuits: the Salvation Army. Sen. Lamar Alexander, a moderate Republican from Tennessee, is dumbstruck that legislation he views as simple common sense would be blocked. He noted that the full Senate passed his amendment to shield the Salvation Army by 75-19 last month, and the House followed suit with a 218-186 vote just this month. "I cannot imagine that the framers of the 1964 Civil Rights Act intended to say that it's discrimination for a shoe shop owner to say to his or her employee, 'I want you to be able to speak America's common language on the job,' " he told the Senate last Thursday. But that's exactly what the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission is trying to do. In March the EEOC sued the Salvation Army because its thrift store in Framingham, Mass., required its employees to speak English on the job. The requirement was clearly posted and employees were given a year to learn the language. The EEOC claimed the store had fired two Hispanic employees for continuing to speak Spanish on the job. It said that the firings violated the law because the English-only policy was not "relevant" to job performance or safety. I wonder how many positions Hillary can take on this issue? posted by Betsy Newmark permalink 6:38 AM \|

Wikio

Monday, November 19, 2007

A coming fight over English speaking requirements