Can employers require their employees to speak only in English? The answer is sometimes, but employers need to exercise caution when instituting such policies.
The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission distinguishes between two types of English-only policies: (1) polices that are applied at all times (i.e. requiring employees to speak English in the workplace at all times--including breaks and lunch time) and (2) policies applied only at certain times.
The first type--policies that apply at all times-- is presumed to violate Title VII and will be highly scrutinized. As such, they are rarely if ever justified and employers should avoid them.
The second type, where the policy is applied only at certain times, can be acceptable, but the policy should be job-related and consistent with business necessity. An employer can satisfy this standard by providing detailed, specific evidence demonstrating that the business purpose of requiring employees to speak English is sufficiently necessary for employees to safely and efficiently perform their jobs, and that the policy is specifically tailored to minimize any discriminatory impact based on national origin. The circumstances where an English-only policy may be justified include: communications with customer or coworkers who can only speak English; emergencies or other situations in which workers must speak a common language to promote safety; and cooperative work assignments in which the English-only rule is needed to promote efficiency. Employers should take note that business convenience alone does not justify an English-only policy.
A fashion chain was recently accused of allegedly having an illegal, English-only work policy. Apparently, employees were to speak only English with customers (even those who spoke only Spanish), among themselves, and during rest breaks. This type of restriction is likely unnecessary to run the business of selling clothes properly and when employees complained, they were purportedly retaliated against by a reduction in work hours and manager hostility.
Employers should also note that they cannot take disciplinary action against an employee for violating an English-only policy unless the employer has notified workers about the policy and the consequences of violating it.
Ultimately, employers should proceed with caution when instituting an English-only policy and ensure that the policy is limited to specific circumstances and justified by business necessity.
The postings on this blog were created for general informational purposes only and do not constitute legal advice or a solicitation to provide legal services. Although we attempt to ensure that the postings are complete, accurate, and current as of the date of publication, we assume no responsibility for their completeness, accuracy, or timeliness. The information in this blog is not intended to create, and receipt of it does not constitute, a lawyer-client relationship. Readers should not act upon this information without seeking professional legal counsel.
This blog may contain links to independent third party websites and services, including social media. We provide these links for your convenience, and you access them at your own risk. We have no control over and do not monitor the content or policies (including privacy policies) of these third-party websites and have no responsibility for, and no liability with respect to, their content, accuracy, or reliability. Unless expressly stated, we do not endorse any of the linked websites or any product, service, or publication referenced herein or therein. We will remove a link to any site from this blog upon request of the linked entity.
We grant permission to readers to link to this blog so long as this blog is not misrepresented. This site is not sponsored or associated with any other site unless so identified.
If you wish for Wilentz, Goldman & Spitzer, P.A., to consider representing you, please obtain contact information from the Contact Us area of this blog or go to the firm’s website at www.wilentz.com. One of our lawyers will be happy to discuss the possibility of representation with you. However, the authors of Wilentz blogs are licensed only in New Jersey and/or New York and do not wish to represent anyone who viewed this site in a state where the site fails to comply with all laws and ethical rules of that state.