Is it against the law to treat employees differently because they have a foreign accent? It is lawful only if the accent materially interferes with being able to do the job. Generally, an employer may only base an employment decision on accent if effective oral communication in English is required to perform job duties and the individual’s foreign accent interferes with his or her ability to communicate orally in English. However, our economy is now dominated by service oriented job positions. So the likelihood of needing to speak English clearly and effectively is pretty much becoming the norm. So experiencing discrimination based on having a strong accent is a real possibility because it does hinder communication with customers and coworkers.
There have been a few cases involving lawsuits against companies who have tried to take advantage of their employees. In a case called Fragante v the city of Honolulu, 1984, the plaintiff, Fragante, was denied a position as supervisor of a dental laboratory where his accent did not interfere with his ability to perform supervisory tasks. The company cited: As we indicated in your interview, our clerks are constantly dealing with the public and the ability speak clearly is one of the most important skills required for the position. Therefore, while we were impressed with your educational and employment history, we felt the applicants we selected would be better able to work in our office because of their communication skills. In summary, the court record conclusively shows that Fragante was passed over because of the deleterious effect of his Filipino accent on his ability to communicate orally, not merely because he had such an accent.
In the case of Sirajullah v Illinois State Medical Inter-Insurance Exchange, 1989, an insurance company decided not to renew the plaintiff’s medical malpractice insurance because his accent might have impeded the Insurer’s ability to defend a malpractice suit against him.
An article in the HuffPost business and the records obtained from Iowa’s office of Motor Vehicle Enforcement and the state court system in August 2011, show that a Utah truck driver contends global shipping giant FedEx had him fired because he speaks with a Russian accent.
Ismail Aliyev said his trouble started when a weigh station in Iowa gave his company a warning, but not a citation, about his Russian accent. One of the requirements of holding a commercial driver’s license is the ability to communicate. “Fed Ex just decided they didn’t want to deal with him or even talk to him.” the lawsuit was filed in the U.S. District Court in Salt Lake City.
In New York, the New York Times reported in January 1992, that Indian-born employee Rambhai Patel was dismissed from his job at Eiki Internation Inc. of Laguna Niquel because he speaks English with an accent. the EEOC charged that in dismissing Patel from his job, Eiki International said his accent wasn’t good for the image of the company, which sells audio-visual aids. Federal officials said that violates federal law prohibiting discrimination on the basis of national origin.
Some of the above cases in which people felt discriminated against due to their accents did sue their employers successfully. However, the people involved had to go through so much aggravation and humiliation. These are people who have achieved the difficult task of learning to speak another language and deserve better treatment.
By Ela Britchkow, Speech and Language Pathologist
©2016 Ela Britchkow[/vc_column_text][/vc_column][/vc_row]
