Political Discussions
English Only?!?!?!
Posted by ReneMonroe • 10/26/09 • Subscribe to this Discussion [RSS] • Report This Topic
Topics: english only movement., english vs spanish, equal rights
So apparently a hotel owner from Texas has forbade hispanic employees from speaking Spanish in his presence and forced some of his employees to anglicize their names.
Some of his employees were fired because they failed to live up to these new rules. What do you think about this?
On a similar note, do you agree with the english only movement?
Here is a link to the article:
www.courant.com/news/nation-world/sns-ap-us-trouble-in-taos,0,1352550.story
User Comments
-
One wonders why this guy hired these people in the first place, if English is necessary for the job. Your brief summary reminds me more of blatant discrimination. I wonder what the law is on that. And the name changes . . . ? I thought those bad old days were long gone.
Forcing people to speak English via the law is nonsense. People will learn if they need to learn, and eventually they will. And if they don't? So what? We've got a long tradition of different languages, although there were some laws against German when we entered the First World War.
This movement has been around a long time. I don't see it ever gaining legs. Talk about being at odds with limited government! Imagine the government telling you what you can speak? That would almost amount to the government telling you what to think, since thought and culture are embedded in language. Last I heard, we were guaranteed freedom of speech and expression in our constitution. Not that these extremists have much respect for that document. -
Ah, freedom of speech. As you have pointed out, it doesn't mean you can say whatever whenever, and especially wherever.
This is a private company, if they have decided that all communication is to be in English, that is their business.
I've worked for companies abroad that have English only clauses even though they aren't in English speaking countries. This to ensure that all communication follows corporate standards.
in a country where employee A, making a joke that Employee B doesn't like, and Employee B then suing Employer C for having a "hostile working environment" It stands to reason that the employer wants to be able to hear what is being said so that he can control it.
You don't want to work there, go somewhere else. I'm sure that there's plenty of people that don't mind being told what language to speak waiting to fill the slots.-
I'm sure English is essential to washing dishes and vacuuming rooms. [/sarcasm] The guy runs a hotel. There would be good reasons for English in certain parts of it, but none in others. And why did he hire them? And what about the name-changing?
-
Having a more culturally adapted name is a pretty common practise to get people to feel welcome.
Call your local bank support and talk to the nearest Indian representative. You'd be surprised how many Bob's, James, Thomas etc. Apparently are born in India. If you choose to believe that this is just some random occurrence of course.
And like i said, has nothing to do with what language is required for the JOB task.
If X can sue the employer because Y is being mean to them. Then the employer has a right to demand that the language spoken is one that he/she understands. This to stop such behavior before the employer gets sued. You see, not stopping it in time, is reason enough to be sued. and not understanding the language it was spoken in does not protect the employer.
And again, who is forcing these people to work there? If they don't like it, go somewhere else. -
Corporate cross-cultural communications are at a much more sophisticated level these days.
-
By the way, my freedom of speech comment was aimed at the English-only movement. How'd you like it if the *government* mandated what language you spoke or raised kids in? I thought you believed in limits on government power. Was I wrong?
-
This situation isn't about government. This is about what a business owner can or can not do in his business. I believe he should be able to require english only spoken on premises. I'm less interested in the legal defense that csi is talking about and more about the overall branding of the hotel. The owner my feel that english is more welcoming to his guests and, therefore, is a good decision for his business. I'm not familiar enough with the story to say if he highered people who couldn't speak english and then is firing them because they can't speak english. Generally speaking that feels wrong but people get laidoff all the time for changes in a company's marketing/branding structure. The guy doesn't seem to have an issue with bi-lingual people or people with different races, he just wants his hotels image to be reflected in english, regardless of race. -
Well, here is a little more background on the issue. The owner acquired the hotel. He put new rules in place, as is his right, that were that only english could be spoken in his presence (according to the article I read) and he forced any person with a hispanic name to change it, while at work, to a more anglicized name, as in changing Marcos to Mark. The employees in question were already working there.
Now I understand his reasoning, though I do not agree with it. Personally, I do not believe that he has the right to force his employees to change their names. I'm sorry, but that is just not right. True they have the right to leave the company however they should not have to simply because the owner does not like their names.
Here is a link to the article I am referring to:
www.courant.com/news/nation-world/sns-ap-us-trouble-in-taos,0,1352550.story -
I agree with you on the name changing.
-
@CSI the legality issue of being sued is not that simple. The employee suing the employer would have to prove negligence. While it would make sense for communication purposes, it does not make sense for things like washing dishes, cleaning rooms, etc. Yes, the owner has the right to enforce these kinds of rules, it is just a little pathetic that he is choosing to exercise this right.
-
@xmarks: Of course this situation is not about the government, unless it turns out the guy broke the law. But there were two parts to the OP. One of them was about the English-only language, which as far as I know is about making English the official language, indeed the only language for government business. That could limit access to any number of government services and functions, and it can require students in school to change their identities. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/English-only_movement. Anyway, I replied to both parts of the OP. I thought that was clear, but I guess not.
-
-
Various employers have dumb policies. the nmae change bit goes a bit far into loony town. Sounds a bit trumped up though.-
What do you mean? (I didn't notice any formal charges, so I don't get the phrase trumped-up.
-
Having finally been able to open the article, I see that about him asking someone to use the anglo pronounciation. That is pretty idiotic. At first it sounded like it might have been a missunderstanding. Hopefully the fine citizens of Taos start a boycott campaign.
The whole issue of language in the workplace is a little more complicated. It never feels nice to have people having a private conversation in front of you, whether they are talking about you or not. It is sorta like whispering. Though a paranoid response isn't very enlightened either. There is room for sensitivity on both sides -
Monolingual people frequently feel like that. As a bilingual, I no longer worry about what others think. Even more interesting, the old sensation of being bothered when I didn't understand others has gone away. Perhaps that is because I am bilingual and realize that people are just doing what comes natural, speaking the language most appropriate to their relationship with the other person and their perception of the situation. And I've spent a lot of time in places where I don't understand a language. Here in DC there is Spanish, of course, but also a number of other languages. In Germany I didn't understand German at first, but I learned it. That still left me not understanding Turkish or other European languages, with the limited exception of French. It' just no big deal anymore.
And my wife and I have a rule. If we talk about someone in German in front of them, they will inevitably understand German, no matter where we are. So we don't do it. We use good manners no matter where we are. Most people do too. They're not using their other language(s) to "cheat" and get one over on monolingual English speakers.
Now if I could just find the time to learn Spanish. So far I haven't felt the need. I've noticed the cleaning people in my building teaching their African American supervisor Spanish. Now I hear both languages from him when he's speaking to them. They understand English. He seems to have just wanted to learn, which is understandable given what all his workers speak. Seems like a sociable solution, not about what is right or wrong, not about "when in Rome" or any of that stuff. -
I wonder what CSI's first name is...
oh, right "Erik"
maybe he should spell it with a "c" -
You can see it on his blog, I believe. I just forget if he spells it Erik or Eric.
-
oh, right "Erik"
maybe he should spell it with a "c"
-
-
[wrong place]
-
If he had asked his employee's to only converse with customers in English (providing, of course, they were not Spanish speaker) perhaps polybore could understand the motives of this chap better.
As for Anglicising names you would think that this would jar somewhat, as this was common practise during slavery.
Sounds like this guy is paranoid about what his staff are saying about him. Probably with good cause because he sounds like a git. -
Let me address the political level of official languages, not the specific workplace issue:
Here's an interesting segment about language and politics in Ukraine: www.theworld.org/2009/10/26/ukraines-language/ from today's "The World." Of course in Ukraine language is essential to a national identity that still had to be cultivated in a country that spoke more Russian than Ukrainian. Making Ukrainian the official language made sense. Some other former Soviet countries have been going through something similar.
It gets a little crazier when Bosnians, Serbians, and Croatians insist they are speaking different languages and have to go to great lengths to create differences.
In 19th-century France, part of the ongoing state-building process involved making everyone speak French at the expense of dialects (patois): books.google.com/books?id=4KnC4ROsiwwC&lpg=PR1&dq=eugen%20weber%20peasants%...
These days, however, dialects are experiencing a resurgence as people seek to prevent their complete demise and even cultivate regional identities within the nation-state.
The US is different. It is pretty safe in terms of national identity and a sense of loyalty among its citizens. If there's any doubt in your mind, witness the multicultural and multiethnic gatherings in DC on Memorial Day and Washington, DC, as a wide variety of people honor the war dead of their country, whether they were born here or adopted it. Or check out the more joyous Forth of July celebrations. It will teach anyone worried enough about this countries identity to mandate English as an official language a valuable lesson. Immigrants are opting into our culture, no matter what language they speak with one another.-
Very interesting. I'm not very familiar with the English only movement myself. Personally, I do not feel that we need to have an established official language, although if we must, I would say both English and Spanish.
However, I do believe that people should at least try to learn English before coming to America (and I realize that most people do, I am just speaking in a hypothetical sense) only because of the respect that shows when traveling to America. I am going to Germany in 8 months and, because of this, I am learning German (to the best of my ability) because I do not want to disrespect to Germans. -
The English-only movement tends to be occupied by people on the far right end of our political spectrum who identify Americanness with a host of other cultural issues as well, including Christianity and heterosexuality. The likely winner of Virginia's attorney general race, Ken Cuccinelli, is a crass social conservative who combines English-only notions with anti-immigrant stances. (He'll win, because people aren't paying attention, and it's a change year, this time to Republicans, for the governorship. And the Democrats aren't fielding strong enough candidates for such a tough year.)
-
"Cuccinelli" is hard to prononce... maybe he should change it to "Nelson"
-
*start sarcasm* Well if its hard to pronounce, then it must not be anglican and should be changed to make it easier for everyone else to say. *end sarcasm*
-
-
Ugh, i just noticed the lovely lack of grammatical sense in my above comment about learning German to show respect to Germans...*sighs* I really shouldn't type and try and talk to a 2 year old about cats at the same time. LOL
-
I don't agree with English-only but I do believe no one should come to this country without understanding at least some English. Think about it this way: you come to this country without English and you can't hold as good of a job, which lowers tax revenues and thus our governments abillity to provide you services (and your need for some of them), and lowers overall economic output. You can't live in a normal neighborhood, thus segregating cities. You can't talk to customers and others around you, creating a feeling of alienation and pigeonholing you away from promotion. And you're taking up a slot on the INS lottery that some Mexican who actually could've lived truly well here and produced enough and been enough part of society to bring 6 or 7 with him can't come so you can be here. Instability, poverty, larger Government deficits (at all levels), crime, unstable demographics, cut-up cities, and isolation, these are the fruits of being multilingual.
I have no problem with someone speaking their own language, but we should not tolerate two Americas.-
i'm really not sure what you mean by "two Americas"
clearly there are multiple cultures within our borders. the New Yorker may feel entirely in a foriegn country among the Piedmont... -
Well, I really do not thing that America being multi-lingual will bring about two Americas especially since there are already multiple languages spoken in America. America was built upon immigration and upon the various cultures that those people brought with them. I feel that this is part of America's success as a country. True it has created some division but the cause of that division is not simply because of the culture that was brought to America.
-
@RM @ Agit8r: Americas multilingual history has been a history of horrible violence, criminal gangs tearing apart neighborhoods and lives, barriers to success and monopoly, exploitation, corruption, political machines, racism, and disunity in the face of military conflict. Indeed, America has been happiest, most stable, most prosperous and most powerful when the need of communication, the only way that neighborhoods and society can be one and our nation can be whole, was provided for by a common language, especially from around 1900 (when English overtook all other languages) until about the 1970's (when Spanish divided America again) with only a brief interlude due to general and worldwide insanity in the 1930's (unrelated.)
If people can't speak to each other, neighborhoods divide, Los Angeles becomes two cities with an infernal and impoverished helltown for the Spanish speaking workers and a nearly palatial (but bankrupt) archipelago of Gringo enclaves that never see these people, look down on them, and would never befriend them. You permaneantly divide society, including creating class tension and a permaneant underclass, when you do not encourage the KNOWLEDGE of English. America is two Americas because one America can never achieve the level of success, never befriend English-speakers, never find his way around the English part of town, and must use different services that serve him in his home language, usually from large corporations that are completely detached from the local area. If you can't talk, you can't speak. It's that simple.
This said, the hotel owner went too far. But if we can't take everybody anyways, which we've already decided we can't, why don't we select off of a language requirement? It makes more sense then a stupid lottery. Talk about a counterproductive idea. -
I just do not see that being multilingual has created that. horrible violence has many inspirations if it can be called that. Division within cities? That is more simply explained by mere comfort.
People are more comfortable around people that are similar to them (i.e. the clique phenomenon in American high schools). Language certainly plays a part in that comfort but so does simply cultural similarity.
Detroit, is over 80 percent black. Dearborn MI, has the highest Arab-American population in the country relative to its size. Why, because of cultural similarities.
Being multilingual does not necessarily bring violence. In Germany, it is common for people to be fluent in German, English, and French.In fact, in most of Europe, it is common for people to be at least partially bi-lingual.
Violence, poverty, division, can all be attributed to intolerance of unfamiliar cultures by the majority as well. So I just do not see the argument there. -
@RM: I'm thinking in particular of the huge riots that occured in NYC during the Civil War and a lot of the worse organized cirminal activity of, especially, the Northeastern Cities.
And it's not just a matter of comfort. First you can't talk to each other because you can't speak the same language (notice I'm talking about people who don't know English, there's nothing wrong with speaking Spanish so long as you also know how to speak English), and then, because you live with nobody who isn't like you, and competition for jobs, illicit commerce, political influence, et cetera creates a motive for violence...
See, the thing is RM, being unable to speak the same language does not lead to more diversity, at least of the kind you speak of, but less, and more divisions. When the Mexican population can speak to the Anglo population, they can live with the Anglo population, shop with the Anglo population and make friends from the Anglo population. Until you can talk to each other, there is no such ability. It really doesn't matter what you want to do because you can't do it. Instead of black and white walking together, they walk on opposite sides of the railroad track, segregated not by government edict, but the practical limitations of multilingualism.
Europe has gone through many centuries of violence. It has taken them a lot of time, a lot of shame, and a lot of despair to find themselves at the place they are now, and while it is beautiful in a way, it is not something I'd wish for my children to be a sacrifice for. And now that a brand new language is being introduced there today (Arabic), they seem to be going through a slower burning and possibly milder version of the same thing again.
A lingua franca is a valuable thing. Don't get me wrong, I support learning many languages, but we have even greater things to learn from each other then these new tongues and, besides that, America is always receiving new immigrant groups. Today it's Spanish, tommorow it may be Tigrinya or Farsi, and this will continue, and I don't know of any nation in the world where most people speak 12 languages. We can't be living like that.
FYI: I'm not blaming them. They have bigger problems, which is why we should give them an incentive and reward (namely a guarantee of entry and unlimited access - indefinite green card with option for citizenship after 7 years) in exchange for doing this service to our country. It may seem small, but many of these people, right now, wait years for a vague probability, often in the slums of Tiajuana and other border cities, to enter and thus the value is greater then you think. -
I can agree with that. I also think that many people could also take the incentive to learn another language relative to their area. I do not think it should be forced, as always it should be a choice, but I do think it would help.
For instance, I am learning Spanish because my partner's daughter is latino and bi-lingual. She's only 3 and already speaks both english and spanish. I am also learning German because I am traveling to Germany in 8 months. So I agree that people should learn the language of the country they are traveling to out of respect for the citizens of that nation.
So I agree with you in that people should learn english when coming to America out of respect for Americans however we as Americans could make an effort to learn some languages relative to the area we are in (and who we are around) to help create that transition move about more smoothly. -
I should note that the German-speaking immigrants overwhelmingly voted for Abe Lincoln... perhaps even delivering some crucial electoral votes in border-south states. But then how should I expect that to influence a confederate-flag-waver
-
@Agit8r: See! Look at what they did.
@RM: Yeah absolutely, if you're travelling to a country for more then two weeks you should learn at least conversational level of their language. I myself learned some Chinese partially out of interest and partially because I'm studying to be a Manufacturing Engineer. Ni hao!
-
-
It seems quite clear to me that this guy is a redneck racist and certainly not a "the only bs around here is better service" type of businessman who understands how to run a complicated business like a hotel...
There is nothing wrong with asking people to communicate in english in his presence{unless an interpretor is needed to translate}...
There is nothing wrong with promoting his hotel as offering service in English but one wonders why he would not try attracting Spanish speaking customers as well...
All he has to do is to offer his staff that do not communicate properly in English the chance to learn english by some sort of english language course...
Making people change their names shows he is a bozo racist...-
I agree with that.
-
-
He is an idiot that is for sure. But on a different note is it not beneficial to spanish speaking people to learn english? -
Whether he is an idiot or not is largely a matter of oppinion.
What is the real fact here, is that he isn't breaking any laws, he is exercising whatever right he has as a business owner to run his business anyway he sees fit.
If customers don't like that, go somewhere else, if workers don't like it, work somewhere else.
The option to be an idiot is one that should be reserved for everyone on their own as long as they don't break laws.
I mean just look at the millions of idiots who Voted for Obama, no matter how tempting, i don't think we should legislate against that kind of stupidity either, even though they have an impact on the entire world as opposed to just one little business.-
While he has the right to use his business this way, the fact that he uses his rights in such a manner says little good about his character.
-
-
I believe the guy is just a bigot. The things he has asked of his employees has nothing to do with his business. While I personally like for people to speak English around me, I don't believe it is Constitutional to force them to do so.-
The anglicization of the names is the worst part. You can argue for being professional and not speaking Spanish during work hours out of respect for the boss, but someones name is their name, and to force them to alter it in any way, shape, or form is asking something fundamentally indecent and disrespectful. I remember how upset I got when the GT Financial Aid department, after seeing that I didn't write cursive, wanted to alter the signature on my thank you letters. It's my signature, you don't have a right to it, not now not ever.
-
Add Your Comment
Login to leave a message.
