Comments on: Is the U.S. Government Out to Undermine English? http://www.stoptheaclu.com/2007/05/02/is-the-us-government-out-to-undermine-english/ Beating Them With Their Own Sickle And Hammer Sun, 22 Nov 2009 07:25:23 -0500 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.2 hourly 1 By: Jeff Molby http://www.stoptheaclu.com/2007/05/02/is-the-us-government-out-to-undermine-english/comment-page-1/#comment-62941 Jeff Molby Thu, 03 May 2007 19:03:59 +0000 http://stoptheaclu.dreamhosters.com/archives/2007/05/02/is-the-us-government-out-to-undermine-english/#comment-62941 Sure, there are many jobs where language skills are legitimate requirements. There are also many jobs where it's not. The fact that these men adequately performed the job for six years makes it unlikely that the requested language skills were actually necessary. Sure, there are many jobs where language skills are legitimate requirements. There are also many jobs where it’s not. The fact that these men adequately performed the job for six years makes it unlikely that the requested language skills were actually necessary.

]]> By: Brujo Blanco http://www.stoptheaclu.com/2007/05/02/is-the-us-government-out-to-undermine-english/comment-page-1/#comment-62940 Brujo Blanco Thu, 03 May 2007 18:35:33 +0000 http://stoptheaclu.dreamhosters.com/archives/2007/05/02/is-the-us-government-out-to-undermine-english/#comment-62940 I disagree the EEOC does not have jurisdiction. There are positions in employment now that require one to be able to speak English fluently to even apply. Austic, TX school system require principals to speak Spanish fluently. In fact they gave them a year to become fluent or get fired. Not reduced to teacher status but you don't have a job you are outa here. The Salvation Army gave them a chance and they did not perform as required. I disagree the EEOC does not have jurisdiction. There are positions in employment now that require one to be able to speak English fluently to even apply. Austic, TX school system require principals to speak Spanish fluently. In fact they gave them a year to become fluent or get fired. Not reduced to teacher status but you don’t have a job you are outa here.

The Salvation Army gave them a chance and they did not perform as required.

]]> By: Jeff Molby http://www.stoptheaclu.com/2007/05/02/is-the-us-government-out-to-undermine-english/comment-page-1/#comment-62939 Jeff Molby Thu, 03 May 2007 01:35:22 +0000 http://stoptheaclu.dreamhosters.com/archives/2007/05/02/is-the-us-government-out-to-undermine-english/#comment-62939 Ok, let's experiment a bit and spin this story the other way. These gentleman held their jobs for 6 years at a level of English proficiency below what was <b>required</b> to do the job? SA kept them on the payroll for six years even though they were unable to perform their duties? I suppose that's possible, but I think it's much more likely that the men performed well enough to earn their paychecks. If that's the case, it means that english proficiency wasn't really a <em>requirement</em>, so the EEOC does have some jurisdiction over the matter. Ok, let’s experiment a bit and spin this story the other way. These gentleman held their jobs for 6 years at a level of English proficiency below what was required to do the job? SA kept them on the payroll for six years even though they were unable to perform their duties? I suppose that’s possible, but I think it’s much more likely that the men performed well enough to earn their paychecks. If that’s the case, it means that english proficiency wasn’t really a requirement, so the EEOC does have some jurisdiction over the matter.

]]>