Does Your Dispatcher Speak English?

[LDB]

Not such a wild idea. If I was hired and put to work, preformed as expected, Then was fired because the employer didn't like Irish, Catholics, Jewis, or any other group anymore, You better believe he would be in a heap of trouble.

So if an employer hires you and pays you on time every time and provides a safe work environment and you just quit because you didn't like Irish, Catholics, Jewis, or any other group anymore then you should be in big trouble, right? The government should sanction you, bring you up before the EEOC, fine you, whatever.

 

[Turtle]

So if an employer hires you and pays you on time every time and provides a safe work environment and you just quit because you didn't like Irish, Catholics, Jewis, or any other group anymore then you should be in big trouble, right? The government should sanction you, bring you up before the EEOC, fine you, whatever.

The employer is the one in charge who has the power over the employee. Equating the two as being equal for the purposes of discrimination, sexual harassment, etc., is absurd.

 

[LDB]

It's okay if you disagree.

 

[cheri1122]

"For factory workers, not so much"??? That's absolutely absurd - the necessity to be able to communicate effectively in the operation of a production facility should be blindingly obvious to anyone that's ever been around a factory, but I'll offer one example why and it's one we should all be familiar with: the packaging of hazmat. If a lower level employee in the shipping dept can't understand the instructions being given by his supervisor or co-workers on how this is done, somebody gets in big trouble.

Um, I spent [too many] years working in a factory. Turtle explained pretty well that the EEOC makes a distinction between when fluency in English matters, and when it doesn't. They don't claim that it doesn't matter, just that it doesn't always matter. But it's hard to be outraged over common sense, eh?


Where is that stated?

In the first post, when you said " but to Barack Hussein Obama, the inability to communicate with one's fellow workers isn't a problem."
That's not blaming the Obama 'regime', that's blaming the POTUS personally.
That "liberals did it to Bush" is deflection, plain & simple.

 

[cheri1122]

The second part could have been summed up as saying that you have a pointless anecdotal story and to PM you if anyone wants to be bored.

Sent from my SCH-I535 using EO Forums mobile app

Personal insult, totally uncalled for.
BTW: if pointless boring anecdotes are off limits, some people should have been notified about 25,000 posts ago.

 

[muttly]

"For factory workers, not so much"??? That's absolutely absurd - the necessity to be able to communicate effectively in the operation of a production facility should be blindingly obvious to anyone that's ever been around a factory, but I'll offer one example why and it's one we should all be familiar with: the packaging of hazmat. If a lower level employee in the shipping dept can't understand the instructions being given by his supervisor or co-workers on how this is done, somebody gets in big trouble.

In the first post, when you said " but to Barack Hussein Obama, the inability to communicate with one's fellow workers isn't a problem."
That's not blaming the Obama 'regime', that's blaming the POTUS personally.
That "liberals did it to Bush" is deflection, plain & simple.

Obama is responsible. It's his administration. His inner circle of cronies hand picked members to serve in the EEOC. So when someone in EEOC or any other Department does anything, it ultimately is the responsibility of the administration that hired them. The buck stops with the President. As stated earlier, if he doesn't approve, here merely can just pick up his phone or his pen.

 

[Turtle]

It's okay if you disagree.

No, Leo, it's not okay if you disagree. You're trying to equate someone in a subordinate position as being equal to someone in a dominant position of power. That's asinine (stupid, foolish, brainless, senseless, idiotic, imbecilic, ridiculous, ludicrous, absurd, nonsensical, silly, witless, inane, empty-headed). Someone in a subordinate position cannot discriminate, extort or harass someone in a superior position. It's impossible But a superior can, with ease. That's why laws exist to prevent someone in a superior position from doing it.

 

[RLENT]

It's okay if you disagree.

Sure ... but in a quite dissimilar way to it being "ok" for someone to decide to be an idiot ...

 

[Turtle]

Obama is responsible. It's his administration. His inner circle of cronies hand picked members to serve in the EEOC. So when someone in EEOC or any other Department does anything, it ultimately is the responsibility of the administration that hired them. The buck stops with the President. As stated earlier, if he doesn't approve, here merely can just pick up his phone or his pen.

But why would, or why should, Obama disapprove? The EEOC is acting according to federal law (which, by the way, has been federal law for way longer than Obama has been president). It's not like this is the first language case that has ever come up or that none of these types of cases ever came up before Obama was elected. There isn't anything unique or even remarkable about this case to warrant Obama's attention, or yours, for that matter. It's a routine, rather boring case.

There are plenty of factory jobs where English is a requirement, and plenty where it is not. So why the desperation to make something remarkable out of something unremarkable? Obama does plenty on his own to be hammered over without having to make up stuff to hammer him about.

And hammering him over inconsequential crap does nothing other than dilute what he should rightly get hammered over. People get so tired over the nonsensical hammering that when the legitimate criticism arises they dismiss it as much ado about nothing, as the boy who cried wolf, they tune it out. Making a mountain out of a mole hill is bad enough, but when you craft mountains out of flat ground by screaming, "Obama's responsible! Obama's responsible!" over every little inane thing, people think you're an idiot because you're acting idiotic, and no one is going to take you seriously except other idiots. Do you really want to be perceived as an idiot?

I mean how many times have we seen on these very boards people just go bat crap crazy over something Obama did or didn't do that turned out to be nothing at all? Like the time people capped their pants over Obama being the first president in like 900 years not to visit Arlington National Cemetery on Memorial Day, ignoring that Reagan and Bush hardly ever went there and Obama actually went to the Lincoln National Cemetery instead. Or the time Obama decided to go after that rancher in Nevada and steal his cattle, except it turns out Mister Patriot American Rancher lost a dozen court cases and refuses to pay grazing fees because he don't wanna anymore. It's that kind of crap, and this EEOC case crap that just gets old, and people tune it out. And as a result, they tune out crap they should be paying close attention to, like Fast & Furious, the NSA, dead investigative reporters, and a really long list of other crap that's important. Congratulations.

 

[Ragman]

Ya know, in all of this, something dawned on me. The employees were "fired". This would indicate to me, they had to be HIRED. This company HIRED people that did not speak English, then fired them after the fact. Hmmmmm

 

[skyraider]

Way to much time on our hands.

 

[LDB]

Yeah, why should laws be equal for everyone.

 

[guido4475]

Personal insult, totally uncalled for.
BTW: if pointless boring anecdotes are off limits, some people should have been notified about 25,000 posts ago.

Contraction at its finest.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I717 using EO Forums mobile app

 

[muttly]

But why would, or why should, Obama disapprove? The EEOC is acting according to federal law (which, by the way, has been federal law for way longer than Obama has been president). It's not like this is the first language case that has ever come up or that none of these types of cases ever came up before Obama was elected. There isn't anything unique or even remarkable about this case to warrant Obama's attention, or yours, for that matter. It's a routine, rather boring case.

There are plenty of factory jobs where English is a requirement, and plenty where it is not. So why the desperation to make something remarkable out of something unremarkable? Obama does plenty on his own to be hammered over without having to make up stuff to hammer him about.

And hammering him over inconsequential crap does nothing other than dilute what he should rightly get hammered over. People get so tired over the nonsensical hammering that when the legitimate criticism arises they dismiss it as much ado about nothing, as the boy who cried wolf, they tune it out. Making a mountain out of a mole hill is bad enough, but when you craft mountains out of flat ground by screaming, "Obama's responsible! Obama's responsible!" over every little inane thing, people think you're an idiot because you're acting idiotic, and no one is going to take you seriously except other idiots. Do you really want to be perceived as an idiot?

I mean how many times have we seen on these very boards people just go bat crap crazy over something Obama did or didn't do that turned out to be nothing at all? Like the time people capped their pants over Obama being the first president in like 900 years not to visit Arlington National Cemetery on Memorial Day, ignoring that Reagan and Bush hardly ever went there and Obama actually went to the Lincoln National Cemetery instead. Or the time Obama decided to go after that rancher in Nevada and steal his cattle, except it turns out Mister Patriot American Rancher lost a dozen court cases and refuses to pay grazing fees because he don't wanna anymore. It's that kind of crap, and this EEOC case crap that just gets old, and people tune it out. And as a result, they tune out crap they should be paying close attention to, like Fast & Furious, the NSA, dead investigative reporters, and a really long list of other crap that's important. Congratulations.

Whether the EEOC is following the law is debatable. Many would argue they are misinterpreting,misapplying and perverting the law. It appears like this has gone back to 2009,which by coincidence is when Obama took office. Again, he is ultimately responsible. It's his administration. HE chooses who is in his inner circle. That inner circle or minions make decisions on who will head various departments like the IRS, the Justice department , the labor department, and the EEOC to name a few. They also choose Federal judges that may hear the cases that certain departments might bring forth in various lawsuits. So to absolve Obama of any responsibility with regards to what his various agencies do, is naive. Some can tune the crap out and say that elections don't have consequences, and delude themselves by saying Obama and his minions' decisions won't trickle down and affect me. Say that to the Tea Party groups, the health care company, or the company in Wisconsin, to name a few.You don't have to be an Einstein to see it. One can also put there head in the sand , refuse to see the connection, and look like a pencil necked pea brain or a big dummy.
U.S. Sues American Co. For Requiring Workers to Speak English | Judicial Watch
Federal Gov?t Sues Wisconsin Company, Says English-Language Requirement is 'Discrimination' | CNS News

 

[davekc]

I would to some degree fault the company for hiring non English speaking people in the first place if they felt that should be a requirement. Can't fire someone that was never hired.

 

[layoutshooter]

I would to some degree fault the company for hiring non English speaking people in the first place if they felt that should be a requirement. Can't fire someone that was never hired.

They would be sued for NOT hiring them. It is a sick country that demands that employers must hire unqualified people, and not being able to read and write conversational Standard American English IS unqualified, in the first place.

There are HUNDREDS of languages spoken in the US right now, there MUST be a "standard" applied, other wise, everything will grind to a halt. It is impossible for everyone to be able to speak and write every language spoken in the United States. It cannot be done. It is, however, MORE than possible, to have ONE language that everyone works in, and outside of work they can do, and speak, as they please. What we have now is a total joke.

 

[Turtle]

Whether the EEOC is following the law is debatable.

Everything is debatable. But if you read the law, it's not all that debatable, and plenty of judges, liberal and conservative alike, have agreed.

Many would argue they are misinterpreting,misapplying and perverting the law.

Yes, I'm sure many would.

It appears like this has gone back to 2009,which by coincidence is when Obama took office.

It appears that way because you are getting your facts from a biased source with an agenda you agree with, and have made no attempt to get at the real facts because what you've already found agrees with you and that's good enough. The real facts are the English-Only rules have been a part of the US Code of Federal Regulations since July 1, 2000 and were placed officially into the EEOC regulations when they were updated in the EEOC Compliance Manual Section 13: National Origin Discrimination on December 2, 2002. But, I'm quite confident that these pesky little facts won't get in your way.

Again, he is ultimately responsible. It's his administration. HE chooses who is in his inner circle. That inner circle or minions make decisions on who will head various departments like the IRS, the Justice department , the labor department, and the EEOC to name a few. They also choose Federal judges that may hear the cases that certain departments might bring forth in various lawsuits. So to absolve Obama of any responsibility with regards to what his various agencies do, is naive.

All of which is a deflection from the issue, and is an attempt to create a mountain out of something that doesn't exist. Like I said, this case is not unique, unusual, rare, or remarkable in any way. You're simply using it to manufacture a reason to scream, "Obama is responsible for this travesty of justice!" despite no travesty existing, and despite Obama not even being responsible for the decision to bring the suit.

Some can tune the crap out and say that elections don't have consequences, and delude themselves by saying Obama and his minions' decisions won't trickle down and affect me.

Nobody, least of all me, is saying anything of the sort. What I'm saying is that Obama isn't responsible for the day-to-day decisions of all of the federal agencies that he is responsible for. Versus you wanting to blame each and every decision these agencies make which you do not agree with on Obama personally.

Say that to the Tea Party groups, the health care company, or the company in Wisconsin, to name a few. You don't have to be an Einstein to see it.

Tea Party groups, yep. Health care company, nope. Wisconsin plastics company, nope. Got any other examples of where Obama has influenced the EEOC in language discrimination cases?

One can also put there head in the sand , refuse to see the connection, and look like a pencil necked pea brain or a big dummy.

So are you gonna maintain that there were no English-only cases before Obama was elected, and that they didn't start up until 2009, coincidentally when Obama first took office? Like I said, Obama does enough stuff on his own that are worthy of blaming him for without desperately having to make up stuff or grasp for stuff that's not even there.

 

[Turtle]

I would to some degree fault the company for hiring non English speaking people in the first place if they felt that should be a requirement. Can't fire someone that was never hired.

It depends on why they were actually fired. Not on the claims made by those who were fired, but the real, actual reason they were fired. It's highly unlikely that someone who can't speak English would be hired in speaking English were a requirement, just like someone isn't likely to be hired if they don't posses any other required skill. The plaintiffs are claiming discrimination, despite the fact that other Asians and Latinos still work there, and that other Asians and Latinos have been hired since their firing. The company claims the workers were fired for substandard performance. Some people, without having heard the facts of the case, have already figured out who is telling the truth and which claims carry the most weight. These are not people I'd want to have as jury of my peers.

Back in the 80s in Nashville I hired a girl from Peking to work in the restaurant. She spoke as much English as I do Mandarin. The language barrier did not affect her job performance. If it did I'd have fired her (just as soon as I could make her understand she had been fired ).

 

[layoutshooter]

I guess I don't understand this. I have NEVER worked a job, at any level, where a lack of the ability to understand everyone involved was NOT important. In many jobs I have worked that lack of understanding could have cost lives, or caused severe injury, at the very least.

If I could not tell my employee to "Please straighten up the ice lure rack" and have then know what that meant, it would affect performance. Not to mention that if they did not speak "Detroitese" they would have NO idea what a customer would be looking for.

 

[Turtle]

They would be sued for NOT hiring them. It is a sick country that demands that employers must hire unqualified people, and not being able to read and write conversational Standard American English IS unqualified, in the first place.

There are HUNDREDS of languages spoken in the US right now, there MUST be a "standard" applied, other wise, everything will grind to a halt. It is impossible for everyone to be able to speak and write every language spoken in the United States. It cannot be done. It is, however, MORE than possible, to have ONE language that everyone works in, and outside of work they can do, and speak, as they please. What we have now is a total joke.

Yes, it is a total joke. And as strong as the desire is for some to blame it all on Obama, this goes directly back the advent of multiculturalism. Before that, immigrants made a concerted effort to learn the language and the customs. Most took great pride in the accomplishment. Not anymore. Now they take pride in themselves, rather than their accomplishments, and are encouraged to do so.

It's like whenever someone says they are proud of being gay, I always respond with, "Congratulations, that's quite an accomplishment, being gay. Did you have to work really hard to achieve your gayness?" It really ticks them off.

But I digress. There are some jobs where speaking English really doesn't matter. There are some jobs where you can be deaf and dumb and be able to perform quite well. Including factory jobs. There are other jobs where speaking and understanding English is critical to safety or job performance.