The
U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE CONTACT: Robert CaninoTuesday, September 19, 2000 (214) 655-3333 Toby Costas (214) 655-3335 TTY: (214) 655-3363
DALLAS - A speak-English-only policy implemented
by Premier Operator Services, Inc., a former long distance operator service,
constitutes national origin discrimination, Magistrate Judge Paul D. Stickney
has ruled, awarding 13 Hispanic employees over $700,000 in damages. The
decision by the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas, Dallas
Division, represents the largest monetary award ever obtained by the U.S. Equal
Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) in a lawsuit for English-only violations.
The rule enforced by the company, banning the
speaking of languages other than English at all times in the workplace
including lunch and other breaks discriminated against mostly Mexican-American
bilingual employees hired, ironically, for their ability to speak Spanish. The
Court held that the policy resulted in discrimination against workers based on
their national origin in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of
1964.
EEOC's lawsuit maintained that the Hispanic
workers were first hired for their ability to speak Spanish as a benefit to the
business, then told not to speak their native language at any time while on the
premises except to non-English speaking customers. The workers, some of whom
had previously received performance awards, were fired and retaliated against
after refusing to sign the restrictive language policy and filing
discrimination charges with EEOC.
"This significant ruling serves to remind us
that language differences must not make employees the target of mean-spirited
or even well-intended language policies when there is no real business
necessity or justification for such policies," said EEOC Chairwoman Ida L.
Castro. "The timing of this decision during our nation's celebration of
Hispanic Heritage Month makes it even more noteworthy as we focus on the value
of diversity in the workplace and all other areas of society."
The individual workers were awarded back pay for
wages lost as a result of their discharge, totaling approximately $59,000, and
an additional $50,000 each representing the maximum allowable recovery in this
case under the Civil Rights Act of 1991 for compensatory and punitive damages.
In deciding the case, Judge Stickney relied on
expert testimony from linguist Susan Berk- Seligson of the University of
Pittsburgh, who testified that "code switching" an unconscious habit
where persons who are bilingual switch from one language to another during
casual conversation makes it extremely difficult to completely suppress one's
primary language. The judge also rejected the idea that the policy and its
enforcement promoted harmony, or was needed to improve communication, stating,
"Quite the opposite...the policy served to create a disruption in the
workplace and feelings of alienation and inadequacy by...proven performers."
The court noted in the 22-page decision that the
company's language policy, posted on a sign at the entrance of the building
where the employees reported to work each day, was accompanied by a warning
that, "Absolutely no guns, knives or weapons of any kind" were
allowed on the premises, thereby "implying a combined concern about the
conduct of those persons who speak a language other than English" and
"setting the scene for stigmatization."
EEOC General Counsel C. Gregory Stewart said,
"Cases involving English-only rules, restrictive language policies, and
language or accent discrimination are litigation priorities for the Commission.
Employers must refrain from targeting workers for discrimination based on
myths, fears, and stereotypes regarding their primary language and country of
origin."
The ruling followed an abbreviated trial on July
28, 2000, at which the company did not appear. While Premier Operator Services
had declared bankruptcy prior to the trial, the court noted evidence presented
by EEOC that the President and CEO may have transferred assets from the company
and that the judgment could be enforced against successor employers. The suit
was filed in January 1998.
Robert Canino, Regional Attorney for EEOC's Dallas
District Office, said, "With the rapid growth of the Latino population in
Texas, California, Florida, New York, Illinois, and other large states, it
should be obvious to employers that bilingual workers are an asset to business.
Rather than implementing discriminatory workplace policies that alienate
language minorities, companies should embrace and promote diversity because it
makes good business sense."
EEOC has observed an increasing trend in
English-only charge filings since the agency started separately tracking such
charges in Fiscal Year 1996. Charges alleging national origin discrimination
based on English-only rules have skyrocketed from 77 charge filings in FY 1996
to 365 charge filings thus far in FY 2000. Earlier this month, EEOC reached a
$192,500 settlement in an English-only lawsuit against Illinois-based Watlow
Batavia, a subsidiary of Watlow Electrical Manufacturing Co. of St. Louis, on
behalf of eight Hispanic former workers in the assembly department of a plant
in suburban Chicago. EEOC's policy on English-only rules is set out in its
Guidelines on Discrimination Because of National Origin (Part 29, Code of
Federal Regulations, Section 1606.1).
In addition to enforcing Title VII, which
prohibits employment discrimination based on race, color, religion, sex or national
origin, EEOC enforces the Age Discrimination in Employment Act; the Equal Pay
Act; Title I of the Americans with Disabilities Act, which prohibits employment
discrimination against people with disabilities in the private sector and state
and local governments; prohibitions against discrimination affecting
individuals with disabilities in the federal government; and sections of the
Civil Rights Act of 1991. Further information about the Commission, including
its Guidelines on Discrimination Because of National Origin, is available on
the agency's web site at www.eeoc.gov.