Can supervisor’s inability to understand conversation be reason for English-only policy?
Issue:

Vivienne has been giving Amy one-on-one training with a new computer program. The women, both French-Canadian, have been speaking French during the training sessions. Judith, the department supervisor, stopped by Amy’s desk to see how training was going and heard the women speaking another language and laughing. She is now in your office, telling you that—while she doesn’t know exactly what they were saying—she knows they were talking about her. She wants a new rule that requires employees to speak English while on company property. Should your company institute an English-only rule?
Answer:    

In this instance, probably not. According to the EEOC, an English-only rule may be used if it is needed to promote the safe or efficient operation of the employer’s business. Some situations in which business necessity would justify an English-only rule include:

  • communications with customers, coworkers or supervisors who speak only English;
  • emergency situations in which workers must speak a common language to promote safety; and
  • cooperative work assignments in which a common language is needed to promote efficiency.

An employer’s use of an English-only rule should relate to specific circumstances in the workplace. In this instance, Judith wants to implement an English-only policy because she didn’t understand what two employees were saying to each other—not because the employees’ use of French was disrupting or preventing safe or efficient business operations.

Source: EEOC Guidance: “Questions and Answers for Small Employers about National Origin Discrimination,” reported in Employment Practices Guide, New Developments ¶5070.
[ Return to top of document ]