English Only Discrimination Lawyers

Both California and Federal law prohibit national origin discrimination and harassment. Generally, national origin discrimination means treating someone less favorably because that individual (or his or her ancestors) is from a certain place or belongs to a particular national origin group. The National Origin Discrimination Lawyers at Helmer Friedman LLP represent employees in these types of cases.

Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 forbids national origin discrimination unless the employer can show a business necessity; therefore, “English Only” employment policies are in violation of both federal law and EEOC instruction. Additionally, these regulations are viewed as discriminatory because they have an unfavorable impact on workers who speak English as a second language or because they treat those same workers differently when they use their native tongue and face reprimands or other negative consequences.

Do you, a friend or a family member have direct knowledge of wrongdoing?

Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) regulations state that a rule requiring employees to always speak English is presumed to violate Title VII and will be closely scrutinized by the Commission. However, such a rule can be valid in very limited circumstances and usually only at certain times. Some situations the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) indicates might meet the business necessity requirement are the following:

  • Communicating with customers, coworkers, or supervisors who only speak English.
  • Employees must speak a common language to promote safety in emergencies or other situations.
  • For cooperative work assignments, 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 in English with coworkers or customers.

Do you, a friend or a family member have direct knowledge of wrongdoing?

Generally, such a rule cannot be applied to casual conversations between employees when they are not performing job duties.

Likewise, federal courts have upheld “English Only” rules when there is a potential for workplace danger, where a foreign language is being used to further hostility in the workplace, or when monitoring of employees by supervisors is necessary. Trends in these court decisions track the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) guidance—the business justification must be narrow and necessary, and those justifications are shrinking.

It is important for employers to seek advice from employment counsel before implementing any rule related to language use in the workplace. Even a policy that appears neutral on its face can result in discrimination when applied. Additionally, recent decisions and guidance may contradict a business justification for such a policy. Contact the Los Angeles employment attorneys at Helmer Friedman LLP for guidance on labor and employment-related issues.