[StBernard] Important Information on Protecting English in the Workplace

[Westley Annis]

Dear Friend,

       I wanted to share with you some information about a bill I recently
co-sponsored, the Protecting English in the Workplace Act.  This bill would
clarify that the 1964 Civil Rights Act does not prohibit employers from
having English-on-the-job rules. 

        Earlier this year, the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission
sued a Salvation Army thrift store in Massachusetts claiming that its
English-on-the-job policy was illegal despite the fact the Salvation Army
gave two non-English speaking employees a year's notice before implementing
the policy in order to provide them with the necessary time to learn
English. In 2003, the EEOC sued another Salvation Army thrift store over its
English-in-the workplace policy, but a federal judge ruled that the
Salvation Army's policy was perfectly legal. 

        Claims against workplace English rules have increased from 32 cases
in 1996 to 228 in 2002, according to the EEOC, and that is despite the fact
that our federal courts have consistently upheld the right of employers to
require English as the primary language in the workplace and that Congress
has not passed a law making it illegal for an employer to require English in
the workplace. 

        Employers have a right to ensure their employees communicate in a
common language in the workplace in order to ensure worker safety and
protect against harassment.  In fact, 77 percent of Americans say they
believe employers should have the right to require the use of English in the
workplace.

        As your senator, I will continue to push this bill in the U.S.
Senate to ensure that activists and sympathetic courts don't strip common
sense from the workplace - like allowing a business or small businessman to
require English as the primary language to improve the company's efficiency,
safety and ability to assist, you - the consumer.   

Sen. David Vitter