Posted on 12/01/2016 4:47:37 PM PST by jazusamo
Requiring employees in the United States to speak a foreign language is not discriminatory but forcing them to speak English violates federal law under a sweeping order issued by the Obama administration to crack down on “national origin discrimination” in the workplace. The government’s new enforcement guidelines state that bilingual requirements don’t meet discrimination claims under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act but English-only rules do because they’re restrictive language policies.
The administration asserts that the new rules, which cover a broad range of scenarios that could get employers in trouble, were created because the American workforce is “increasingly ethnically diverse.” The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), the federal agency that enforces the nation’s workplace discrimination laws, made them public a few days ago. “The increased cultural diversity of today’s workplaces presents new and evolving issues with respect to Title VII’s protection against national origin discrimination,” the agency writes in the lengthy document. “This enforcement guidance will assist EEOC staff in their investigation of national origin discrimination charges and provide information for applicants, employees, and employers to understand their respective rights and responsibilities under Title VII.”
Two years ago, the administration laid the foundation for the new measures by suing a private American business for discriminating against Hispanic and Asian employees because they didn’t speak English on the job. The case involved a Green Bay Wisconsin metal and plastic manufacturer that fired a group of Hmong and Hispanic workers over their English skills. Forcing employees to speak English in the U.S. violates Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the EEOC claimed in its lawsuit. That’s because the Civil Rights Act protects employees from discrimination based on national origin, which includes the linguistic characteristics of a national origin group. Therefore, the EEOC argued, foreigners have the right to speak their native language even during work hours at an American company that requires English.
Now the agency has created official federal rules to support this absurd theory as well as other innovative discrimination categories, including “multiple protected bases.” This is a seldom recognized but potent Molotov cocktail of prejudice based on race, color and religion. As an example, the new rules mention discrimination against Middle Easterners perceived to “follow particular religious practices.” Among the amusing hypotheticals embedded in the rules is an Egyptian named Thomas who alleges he was harassed by his coworkers about his Arab ethnicity and Islam. “Thomas’ charge should assert national origin, race and religious discrimination,” the EEOC writes, referring to its new “multiple protected bases” category. The agency reassures that it will protect Middle Easterners, stating that “Title VII prohibits employment discrimination based on the perception that someone is from the Middle East or is of Arab ethnicity, regardless of how she identifies herself or whether she is, in fact, from one or more Middle Eastern countries or ethnically Arab.”
Employers that use Social Security requirements to screen applicants are warned that they may be charged with discrimination because it disproportionately eliminates individuals of a certain national origin and has a disparate impact based on national origin. That makes Social Security screens “unlawful under Title VII unless the employer establishes that the policy or practice is job related and consistent with business necessity,” the EEOC rules say. Here’s another good one involving prejudice in hiring: “Reliance on word-of-mouth recruiting may magnify existing ethnic, racial or religious homogeneity in a workplace and result in the exclusion of qualified applicants from different national origin groups,” the EEOC rules state. That would constitute a violation of federal law, the EEOC points out, because the employer’s actions have a discriminating effect based on national origin.
Under Obama the EEOC has strong-armed private businesses and government agencies into adopting the administration’s leftist agenda and inflated standards of political correctness. Last fiscal year the agency celebrated getting a record $525 million in settlements for reported victims of discrimination in both private and public sector jobs. One of the EEOC’s biggest cases involved a national clothing retailer that specializes in hip casual wear for youngsters and refused to change a rule banning head covers for employees. The agency sued the company for religious discrimination because it wouldn’t allow a Muslim woman to wear a hijab to work. In another victory, a national retailer was forced to pay $2.5 million to black job candidates that had been screened with criminal background checks. The EEOC asserts background checks have a disparate impact on African Americans and the administration has bullied companies into eliminating them.
Most liberal voters wouldn’t agree to self-genocide, but they are blind to the long-term consequences of the policies they espouse.
Those who drive those policies... like Obama... that’s different.
In spite of the impact Immigration is having on the English language, I totes fink dat dis is nutz.
That happened to me but the person said, “Fine. Then I’ll speak English.”
Stupid me! A monolingual American.
Amen!
The establishment better come around, especially pukes like McLame and Linda.
> Most liberal voters wouldn’t agree to self-genocide
It’s been the explicit policy of the Democratic Party to encourage the importation of foreigners for the specific purpose of outvoting the existing population.
Not sure how much more explicit they can get, but if you want to see just how explicit they have become to date, head over to DU and do a search on “white people” (with quotes). It’s pretty bad.
Just what would an “Unnatural origin discrimination” be?
Even if I did speak spanish(I don’t), I would only speak it if I was visiting a spanish speaking country. But when a spanish speaker comes to my country to live, I expect them to learn, and speak English.
Not only that specifically, but the insanity of printing election ballots in 12 languages.
If you don't read and speak English, how could you become a citizen?
In the future, count on bringing your own interpreter to vote in English.
Sorry, it's our country, our language.
I’ll take door number two!
this will go bye bye.
How come native born Americans have to change for people that decided on their own to be here? It’s ridiculous and I’ve had it up to my eyeballs of being made the baddie. No one forced them to come to an English speaking country to work. Learn English or go back where you came from.
Excellent post.
These are commonly called :"administrative guidelines"
which are set up by some bureaucrat desk-jockey.
These are have no importance as law, but are merely interpretations of policy.
I’m anticipating the repeal of Barry’s many boneheaded laws.
Another one for Trump to tramp.
The intent is genocide. It can no longer be reasonably denied that this is so.
.................................................
Exactly!!!
That is solved simply by ending the importation of refugees from all over the world.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.