Trump Will be President

[Steve James]

It will be really funny if scientists say that there's a comet on a collision path to the Earth, and Trump's asked what should be done.

[willie]

It will be really funny if scientists say that there's a comet on a collision path to the Earth, and Trump's asked what should be done.

i'm starting to think that your a closet racist.

[origami_itto]

It will be really funny if scientists say that there's a comet on a collision path to the Earth, and Trump's asked what should be done.

i'm starting to think that your a closet racist.

Yeah, Steve, what do you have against Oompa Loompas and their tiny hands, huh?

[Steve James]

i'm starting to think that your a closet racist.

I'll take that in the spirit it's given. Otherwise

[willie]

i'm starting to think that your a closet racist.

I'll take that in the spirit it's given. Otherwise

o.K. Steve. You already seen that i was accused of being a racist, til i told me side. lol!

So here's a question for ya.
Obama now on he way out wants to use his power to create a new law.
What does that law state?

he wants to make it illegal for any company to not hire someone because they can not speak English.
He claims it's just bigotry. which means that he considers himself as D.A, judge and jury in all cases it
must be a bigot.
Now second part. It will not be illegal to not hire someone because they don't speak any other language.

What do you think about that Steve?

[origami_itto]

i'm starting to think that your a closet racist.

I'll take that in the spirit it's given. Otherwise

o.K. Steve. You already seen that i was accused of being a racist, til i told me side. lol!

So here's a question for ya.
Obama now on he way out wants to use his power to create a new law.
What does that law state?

he wants to make it illegal for any company to not hire someone because they can not speak English.
He claims it's just bigotry. which means that he considers himself as D.A, judge and jury in all cases it
must be a bigot.
Now second part. It will not be illegal to not hire someone because they don't speak any other language.

What do you think about that Steve?

What the hell are you smokin? That's an old set of laws.

https://www1.eeoc.gov//laws/types/natio ... forprint=1

National Origin & Employment Policies/Practices
The law makes it illegal for an employer or other covered entity to use an employment policy or practice that applies to everyone, regardless of national origin, if it has a negative impact on people of a certain national origin and is not job-related or necessary to the operation of the business.

An employer can only require an employee to speak fluent English if fluency in English is necessary to perform the job effectively. An "English-only rule", which requires employees to speak only English on the job, is only allowed if it is needed to ensure the safe or efficient operation of the employer's business and is put in place for nondiscriminatory reasons.

An employer may not base an employment decision on an employee's foreign accent, unless the accent seriously interferes with the employee's job performance.

Update: The actual new text
https://www.eeoc.gov/laws/guidance/nati ... c451518821

[Steve James]

o.K. Steve. You already seen that i was accused of being a racist, til i told me side. lol!

No idea what Trump's opinion about a comet collision has with racism. I don't think I've ever accused anyone here of being a racist. But, that's because people throw racism around to the point where it's meaningless. There are maybe a handful of people here who could even have the means to be "racist." They just equate prejudice and bigotry with racism, or the political institutionalization of bigotry. For ex., a person might not like Catholics. Meh. Some people might deface a Jewish synagogue, or even beat up a rabbi. Those are crimes. However, a law that made it illegal for Catholics to vote, or a law that Jews could not buy soap, that would be racism. And, those aren't imaginary situations that I made up, either, which is my point. So, when somebody says "I experienced racism in such and such a place," I ask "Were you a citizen there?"

Anyway, to your question about Obama's law. Tell me where I could find the quote from him, and I'll answer. In general, I would understand what you wrote as that he wants to make it illegal to discriminate against someone because of language. However, I don't see how someone who can't fill out an application or attend an interview can get any job here. So, I'd like to see an example. For instance, it'd be stupid to hire someone at McDonald's if he couldn't speak English or read the menu.

So, I have to say that it sounds like fake news. I mean. Sure, you can reduce what a law proposes to absurdity, and that's what this sounds like. Anyhow, show me the proposal.

Btw, I've never said I have white friends, only German, French, Norwegians, Colombians, even US Americans. And it was all accidental. Who knows, I might be a closet racist.

[willie]

An employer can only require an employee to speak fluent English if fluency in English is necessary to perform the job effectively.

This is the part he wants to change. He Says it's bigotry. I just found out about it today.

But this will not apply to any other language.

[Steve James]

Update: The actual new text
https://www.eeoc.gov/laws/guidance/nati ... c451518821

oragami_itto wrote:

An employer can only require an employee to speak fluent English if fluency in English is necessary to perform the job effectively.

This is the part he wants to change. He Says it's bigotry. I just found out about it today.

Where did you "find" this out though? If English fluency is required, then it'd be the same if the job required a mathematician. I.e., he'd have to be able to do math. Of course, English fluency might not be required. Shucks, if they made it a law that an employee had to write Standard English well, there might be a shortage. But, I wouldn't call it bigotry.

[origami_itto]

An employer can only require an employee to speak fluent English if fluency in English is necessary to perform the job effectively.

This is the part he wants to change. He Says it's bigotry. I just found out about it today.

But this will not apply to any other language.

The link that I posted was to the new text, found via a conservative website.

Fluency

Generally, an English fluency or English proficiency requirement is permissible only if required for the effective performance of the position for which it is imposed

To put it in plain language, yes, you can still require English fluency if the job requires it, no you cannot make an "English only" rule at work, and yes, if a job requires you to speak another language, you won't get it unless you speak the language.

To recap...

If the job requires you to be fluent in a language, English, Spanish, etc, you can still require that employees be fluent in that language.

If the job does not require a particular fluency in order to be performed satisfactorily, then you can't refuse an otherwise qualified person the job on those grounds.

Don't let the partisan hacks do your thinking for you, wind up looking silly.

[origami_itto]

Shucks, if they made it a law that an employee had to write Standard English well, there might be a shortage. But, I wouldn't call it bigotry.

Seriously, man. I'm surprised, daily, by the average dipstick's mediocre command of the language. Among my American "peers" at work, even.

[willie]

An employer can only require an employee to speak fluent English if fluency in English is necessary to perform the job effectively.

This is the part he wants to change. He Says it's bigotry. I just found out about it today.

But this will not apply to any other language.

The link that I posted was to the new text, found via a conservative website.

Fluency

Generally, an English fluency or English proficiency requirement is permissible only if required for the effective performance of the position for which it is imposed

To put it in plain language, yes, you can still require English fluency if the job requires it, no you cannot make an "English only" rule at work, and yes, if a job requires you to speak another language, you won't get it unless you speak the language.

To recap...

If the job requires you to be fluent in a language, English, Spanish, etc, you can still require that employees be fluent in that language.

If the job does not require a particular fluency in order to be performed satisfactorily, then you can't refuse an otherwise qualified person the job on those grounds.

Don't let the partisan hacks do your thinking for you, wind up looking silly.

Dude, are you kidding me.
How can you say that not being able to even communicate isn't a problem. I work in an extremely complicated environment.
Do you really think that it's fare for a small company to absorb to cost just because someone else refuses to learn the nations standard language?

[windwalker]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9IRCdjeTtII

"it's really simple"

[origami_itto]

Dude, are you kidding me.
How can you say that not being able to even communicate isn't a problem. I work in an extremely complicated environment.
Do you really think that it's fare for a small company to absorb to cost just because someone else refuses to learn the nations standard language?

I think you mean fair.

If being able to speak in English is required to perform the job effectively, then you are allowed to require that applicants speak English. If speaking Spanish is required to perform the job effectively, then you are allowed to require that applicants speak Spanish.

If speaking another language is going to make some special snowflake feel uncomfortable and need a safe space, then too bad. Suck it up. I doubt the complexity of your environment comes anywhere near the scale and complexity of my enterprise, and I have to deal with all kinds of ESOL around the world and near-illiterate Americans here at home.

Because what's really being discussed here is "English only" policies that turn speaking another language into a fireable offense. It has nothing to do with English fluency. English and foreign language fluency restrictions have not changed. You've just got bigots looking for ways to punish immigrants and threatening to fire them for speaking Spanish to each other on the job is a common tactic for opression. I saw it all over the place in Florida and Georgia before I joined the military and came out into a professional career.

It's just another narrative to feed your xenophobia.

And look, they included examples to make it easier.

Example 25
No National Origin Discrimination Involving English Fluency
Jorge, a Dominican national, applies for a sales position with XYZ Appliances, a small retailer of home appliances in an overwhelmingly English-speaking, non-bilingual community. Jorge has very limited skill with spoken English. XYZ notifies him that he is not qualified for a sales position because his ability to effectively assist customers who only speak English is limited. Under these circumstances, XYZ's decision to exclude Jorge from the sales position does not violate Title VII.

Example 26
National Origin Discrimination Involving English Fluency
Ender, whose first language is Turkish, works at Hotel's Registration and Concierge Desk. Hotel serves a largely English-speaking clientele. At the Concierge Desk, Ender provides local directions to restaurants, museums, theaters, and other destinations and otherwise helps guests plan their visits.

A guest complains that Ender gave him directions to a business appointment "in broken English." The guest, who was late for the appointment, demands that Hotel management remove Ender from the Concierge Desk. Two supervisors observe Ender at work. They conclude that he speaks English quickly, clearly, and precisely, albeit with a Turkish accent. They also find Ender's local directions to be accurate. The supervisors recommend against taking action against Ender. However, upper management decides to terminate Ender's employment and replace him with a native English speaker, because the guest who complained works for a company that is an established client of Hotel.

Under these circumstances, there is reasonable cause to believe that Hotel's decision to terminate Ender was motivated by his national origin and violates Title VII. The Hotel's supervisors specifically found that Ender's accent did not affect his ability to communicate information accurately, and he was terminated to appease the preferences of an unhappy client. Where client preference is based on a protected basis such as national origin, the employment decision violates Title VII.

Example 27
Bilingual Job Requirement Not Discriminatory
Andy, who is only fluent in English, applies for a custodial supervisor position with a school district in Texas. The job description states that a preferred qualification is that candidates speak fluently in Spanish and English in order to communicate effectively with the custodial staff, many of whom speak only English or only Spanish. During Andy's job interview with a school district representative, Andy acknowledges that he does not speak Spanish. The school district does not hire Andy because he is not fluent in Spanish and English. Instead, the school district promotes Anne, a Hispanic woman who was employed as a custodial foreman for the school district, to the custodial supervisor position. Anne is fluent in both English and Spanish. The school district representative suggests to Andy that he should apply for a different custodial position that does not require fluency in Spanish. Under these circumstances, the school district's preference for a bilingual supervisory employee would not support a Title VII discrimination claim based on race or national origin by the non-bilingual applicant.[109]

[windwalker]

It's just another narrative to feed your xenophobia.

Funny

where I work 90% speak Vietnamese, it's not a written requirement, but unless someone has a special skill set
chances are they will not be hired unless they can speak Vietnamese.

This is a high tech machine shop, a private company, all the people working
need to have high tech skill sets to operate the equipment.

For me it's not really an issue but it does limit employment opportunities for others, and also fosters an environment
that is culturally biased by the dominant culture of the company. There are things that can happen and do happen
that would not be accepted in a more culturally neutral biased company.
If one does not understand this, those who are not American Vietnamese,
they don't last long.

I can speak and understand a little Chinese, the Vietnamese is pretty hard to catch..
Being able to say a few things goes a long way.

The view points expressed in the shop are pretty strong...concerning other cultures
these guys are very "american" in their thinking, just find it funny at times.

If it was investigated by an outside agency in the same way as other larger public
companies they would say its not culturally diverse enough.

I can work all day and not hear any English,,,it does make it interesting at times
but "we" make it work.