|
In the wake of recent world events, the Equal Employment Opportunity
Commission and state governments have expressed renewed concern about
rising instances of national origin discrimination, particularly
against individuals who are-or are believed to be-Muslim, Arab, South
Asian or Sikh.
Most employers
are aware
that refusing to hire or promote an individual based upon the country
that he is from or the fact that she shares a common ancestry with
people from a particular place is a violation of Title VII of the Civil
Rights Act of 1964 (Title VII). This type of blatant discrimination is
usually easy to spot.
What many
business do not
fully understand, however, is that certain outwardly "neutral"
policies, practices or decisions can have an unfair impact on specific
categories of employees. Even if you do not intend to discriminate, you
may be held liable for actions that have a disproportionate impact on
one or more protected categories of worker if you cannot demonstrate
that the requirement is job related and serves a legitimate business
purpose. If your practices are challenged in court, it will generally
be up to you as the employer to show that there were valid reasons for
your decisions.
There are
several components of national origin discrimination to which you
should pay particular attention when setting rules or policies or
making other employment decisions.
- Foreign
accents. You are restricted from making employment decisions based
on a person's foreign accent unless the accent genuinely affects the
ability to perform job duties. In other words, the accent must be such
as to interfere with communications skills and effective communications
skills must be necessary for the job. Teaching and telemarketing
positions are among those that may require effective oral
communications skills, but you must always look at individual
circumstances to determine whether a worker's accent realistically bars
this person from doing an effective job.
- English
fluency requirements. Similar to the rules regarding foreign
accents,
you can only require employees to be fluent in English if fluency is a
real and reasonable requirement for the job. While English fluency may
reasonably be required of a sales person, it is harder to argue that
fluency is needed for a janitorial position.
- English-only
rules. Be careful before adopting policies requiring employees to
speak English only at the workplace. These policies are allowable if
they are not implemented for discriminatory reasons and the rule is
needed in order for the business to run safely and efficiently.
Allowable reasons may include communications with customers and
co-workers who speak only English; emergencies where people must speak
a common language to ensure
safety; and co-operative work assignments where a common language will
enhance
efficiency. Therefore, while a policy requiring bank tellers to speak
English to
the bank's English-speaking customers is appropriate, a policy
requiring the same tellers to speak only English during breaks is
unacceptable. Policies that allow some foreign languages to be spoken
and not others are likewise impermissible. If you adopt an English-only
rule, you must notify employees of the rule, as well as the
consequences for violation.
- Citizenship
reqirements. Title VII does not specifically outlaw discrimination
based upon citizenship, but it does prohibit using citizenship as a
pretext for discriminating on the basis of national origin. If you
choose to adopt a rule excluding non-citizens, be sure to adhere to the
rule consistently, and not keep one group out while admitting another.
- Height
and weight requirements. Establishing specific height and weight
requirements for designated positions may violate the national origin
provisions of Title VII if the standards imposed impact specific ethnic
groups. Height and weight requirements must bear a legitimate
relationship to successful performance of the job.
|