<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss
version="2.0"
xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
> <channel><title>Comments on: Tennessee Passes Mean-Spirited &quot;English Only&quot; Law</title> <atom:link href="http://www.calemployeerightsblog.com/2010/06/06/tennessee-passes-meanspirited-english-law/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" /><link>http://www.calemployeerightsblog.com/2010/06/06/tennessee-passes-meanspirited-english-law/</link> <description>Employment Law Firm Blog</description> <lastBuildDate>Mon, 06 Feb 2012 19:33:21 +0000</lastBuildDate> <sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod> <sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency> <generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.3.1</generator> <item><title>By: James Peters</title><link>http://www.calemployeerightsblog.com/2010/06/06/tennessee-passes-meanspirited-english-law/comment-page-1/#comment-123295</link> <dc:creator>James Peters</dc:creator> <pubDate>Mon, 06 Feb 2012 19:26:05 +0000</pubDate> <guid
isPermaLink="false">http://www.calemployeerightsblog.com/?p=313#comment-123295</guid> <description>I do see what you are saying, but legally that is not what the law says.  The law allows the requirement where there is a &quot;business or safe workplace necessity&quot;.  This is defined as:
(1) For communications with customers, coworkers, or supervisors who speak English, and
(2) In emergencies or other situations in which workers must speak a common language to promote and ensure safety
The law does not say it is allowed only where communication in English is necessary, just where the employer &quot;requires&quot; it.  For example, where a customer speaks both Spanish and English, the employee would be required to speak to them in English (even if they both speak Spanish).  The law does not say that it is only allowed where a customer, coworker or supervisor &lt;em&gt;only&lt;/em&gt; speaks English.
Also, an employer in virtually any setting can argue that the mere possibility of an emergency at some point in the future requires everyone to speak English.
If the law were written as you interpret it, then I would probably agree with you.  However, lawyers tend to run with the language and interpret it as it&#039;s written, not as it was &quot;meant&quot; to be.</description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>I do see what you are saying, but legally that is not what the law says.  The law allows the requirement where there is a "business or safe workplace necessity".  This is defined as:</p><p>(1) For communications with customers, coworkers, or supervisors who speak English, and<br
/> (2) In emergencies or other situations in which workers must speak a common language to promote and ensure safety</p><p>The law does not say it is allowed only where communication in English is necessary, just where the employer "requires" it.  For example, where a customer speaks both Spanish and English, the employee would be required to speak to them in English (even if they both speak Spanish).  The law does not say that it is only allowed where a customer, coworker or supervisor <em>only</em> speaks English.</p><p>Also, an employer in virtually any setting can argue that the mere possibility of an emergency at some point in the future requires everyone to speak English.</p><p>If the law were written as you interpret it, then I would probably agree with you.  However, lawyers tend to run with the language and interpret it as it's written, not as it was "meant" to be.</p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> <item><title>By: Amanda</title><link>http://www.calemployeerightsblog.com/2010/06/06/tennessee-passes-meanspirited-english-law/comment-page-1/#comment-123273</link> <dc:creator>Amanda</dc:creator> <pubDate>Mon, 06 Feb 2012 17:36:49 +0000</pubDate> <guid
isPermaLink="false">http://www.calemployeerightsblog.com/?p=313#comment-123273</guid> <description>The bill is not mean spirited... I actually followed the links to the bill itself and it says that they are only required to speak english in instances that it is required to get required work accomplished or when it poses an unsafe work environment to not speak english. It is perfectly reasonable. It also says that if the job does not require english to be spoken the person can have an interpreter with them during the interview process.</description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>The bill is not mean spirited... I actually followed the links to the bill itself and it says that they are only required to speak english in instances that it is required to get required work accomplished or when it poses an unsafe work environment to not speak english. It is perfectly reasonable. It also says that if the job does not require english to be spoken the person can have an interpreter with them during the interview process.</p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> <item><title>By: Cali Hater</title><link>http://www.calemployeerightsblog.com/2010/06/06/tennessee-passes-meanspirited-english-law/comment-page-1/#comment-36685</link> <dc:creator>Cali Hater</dc:creator> <pubDate>Mon, 16 Aug 2010 20:17:30 +0000</pubDate> <guid
isPermaLink="false">http://www.calemployeerightsblog.com/?p=313#comment-36685</guid> <description>Keep all of the Illegals in your state then and see how well you do ! All of the idiots that come here and decide to keep speaking their native tounges, you house them all and be happy then !</description> <content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Keep all of the Illegals in your state then and see how well you do ! All of the idiots that come here and decide to keep speaking their native tounges, you house them all and be happy then !</p> ]]></content:encoded> </item> </channel> </rss>
<!-- Performance optimized by W3 Total Cache. Learn more: http://www.w3-edge.com/wordpress-plugins/

Page Caching using disk: enhanced

Served from: www.calemployeerightsblog.com @ 2012-02-07 09:34:24 -->
