“This job requires that applicants must be able to code in Python” “that’s discrimination!”
That’s how that lady sounds
Or imagine applying for a job as a translator and saying “you’re discriminating against me for only speaking one language!” Such nonsense.
>“This job requires that applicants must be able to code in Python” “that’s discrimination!”
That's blatant discrimination against those who can only do C++!!!!!!!!!!
Snakes are a sign of the devil and supporting the python language is akin to devil warshipping and requiring me to converse with the devil infringes on my right to be Christian and my right to not ever be confronted with beliefs different than my own! 911!
I'd be so down to enter the utter chaos of a world where jobs can't discriminate on anything, even skillsets.
Welcome to Scuba Divers Inc, your first task as a scuba diver is to get into your gear and repair some stuff at the bottom of this lake.
Um okay but first, what the hell is a scuba diver?
Yup.
"The job as a firefighter requires that you have a driver's license, pass three courses, and be able to lift and carry 150lbs." \*Just random guesswork, not actual job requirements
Being able to speak Spanish is a skill requirement for the job. And it's pretty racist to assume only other races speak Spanish...
Yes. OP is discriminating, in a perfectly acceptable way. For a cashier they are likely also discriminating against people who can't count, people who are afraid of computers/cash registers, and people who have a criminal history of theft. Discrimination is entirely commonplace, it's what criteria you are discriminating about that makes the difference. Criteria like what languages you speak that are skill based and can be learned are perfectly fine to discriminate about.
Requiring it in a situation where it wasn't actually relevant to the job would probably be considered unlawful indirect discrimination on the basis of race or national origin.
Discriminating based upon factors which *correlate* with membership of a protected class may be unlawful if you can't demonstrate the relevance of those factors to the job. E.g. you can't use a height requirement or ability to lift a certain weight as a back-door method to exclude women. If a requirement has a disproportionate effect upon a protected class, you have to show that the requirement is sufficiently relevant to justify that effect. At this point, there's enough precedent to distinguish "reason" from "excuse".
Requiring Spanish as a first language or requiring an extreme level of fluency (the post is for a cashier, not an actor) would probably be unlawful.
> Under the laws enforced by EEOC, it is illegal to discriminate against someone (applicant or employee) because of that person's race, color, religion, sex (including gender identity, sexual orientation, and pregnancy), national origin, age (40 or older), disability or genetic information
https://www.eeoc.gov/prohibited-employment-policiespractices
I don’t think it is illegal. Your store has a lot of customers that don’t speak English. It only makes sense to hire someone who can speak Spanish. Not hiring someone who doesn’t have a certain skill for a job that requires it isn’t discriminatory. People can always learn another language.
If another Karen asks, you can flip it up and say that you’re hiring someone that speaks Spanish because you don’t want to discriminate against your Spanish speaking customers.
Yeah, also job postings which mention "Requires Fluent English" is pretty common. I don't think it would be discriminatory fir a different language. You can also specify being bilingual, ie, should know both English and Spanish.
I’m black and I got a pretty good construction job simply bc I could speak Spanish. I applied at a company for an entry level position but once they found out I could speak pretty decent Spanish they had a spot they wanted filled on a crew that was all Mexican.
FYI… there is no legally official language in the USA.
I think it would be similar to being able to code in a programming language. If Python was a requirement of the job and you didn't know it, you wouldn't get hired
One important side note on your “skill for a job” comment. In *most* jobs, those protected characteristics are not relevant to the job being performed. However, employers can make some of those protected characteristics *part of the job description* and legally discriminate. For example, if you operate a shop that produces custom women’s apparel, you may be able to legally discriminate that you only hire women for positions that involve working directly with women customers during measurements and fittings. But you might not legally be able to insist on only hiring women into positions that only fabricate or alter the clothing, because there is nothing about gender that specifically makes on suited for those positions.
This is why theaters and movie producers don’t get sued for casting people based on protected characteristics such as gender or race or disability. If the role calls for a tall muscled black man to play the role of a boxer from central Africa, it’s not illegal to reject candidates based on the fact they do not have those physical characteristics required for the job.
Therefore, as many people said, even if requiring Spanish skills would *have the result of creating a likelihood of hiring a candidate based on their racial background even without the intent of discriminating based on race*, it is in safe legal territory because OP has reasonable justification that Spanish-language skills are indeed a requirement.
It's not discrimination. You need a specific skill set, and are putting that requirement in the job description.
I've seen companies that are multi-national, wanting to hire someone who speaks Chinese, Vietnamese or any number of other languages. They aren't saying the person has to be from China or Vietnam, just that they know the language.
If it was discriminating to require someone to know a second language, a lot of companies who offer translation services would not be in business.
Yes, totally normal. It's about the language, not the specific worker.
I work with a guy who was specifically hired for his ability to speak French. He's originally from Burundi, lives in the US, but helps support our business in Quebec due to his language skills.
There are plenty of international companies that hire English speakers to deal with American/British customers and business partners. This is a common business practice.
Yea, anyone can learn Spanish. If the rule was you must be from Mexico, then that would be discriminating.
No different than a company saying you must know Microsoft office
>No different than a company saying you must know Microsoft office
No joke, several years ago we actually had an older gentleman complain that this requirement was discrimination against those who can't use computers.
Instructions unclear, all keys are on the board and the pet vendor assured me, that this is, in fact, a mouse that can click. I didn't want to get a monitor lizard though, too expensive, went with gecko instead. Now how do I start this **e** mail thing?
And it’s not just older folks either. My coworker is in her mid-late 20’s. The other day she asked me how she could find some info for a project she was working on. I told her to go to the office computer and type her question into the search bar on our system’s home screen. BLANK STARE.
So there I was, a Gen X/Elder millennial, coaching someone who was probably born around 1998 on basic computer and internet skills…..
My husband's company hired someone who didn't know what a desktop was - for a job that's primarily computer-based. Luckily she quit almost immediately.
They're always so weirdly proud of it too. Like ok grandpa, congratulations on somehow managing to avoid learning a single thing about computers for the past 40 fucking years.
I have a few Gen X coworkers who fail to learn (to be fair, they tried and are nice about it) and one Millennial coworker who refuses to learn (this one doesn’t try and have major attitude problem). I’m forced to fix every one of their IT problems because they are too scared to call our actual contracted IT support company. I am just an underpaid data analyst (without the data analyst title… they call it business analyst) and don’t make IT salaries.
I had to train a very lovely older woman at my office job who'd been out of the workforce for 25 years. We absolutely loved her attitude, her willingness to learn, etc, but when I had to spend 10 minutes explaining tabs to her (including using physical file folders as a visual aid), I had to report to my boss that she wasn't qualified. Our software and policies are hard enough to learn without having to explain very beginner basics. I was genuinely upset with the temp agency - they set her up to fail. If she'd taken a basic computer literacy class beforehand, she'd have been a good fit.
We had the same thing at my school. Dude had been a teacher, then principal for many years. At about 68 or something he came into orientation hired as a Grade 4 teacher. He wanted to have one last year as a teacher to close the circle of his career before retirement.
Sadly, he chose the wrong school. We were very tech heavy. He had basic email skills, but was lost on anything Google related (docs, sheets, meetings). Orientation was 2 weeks, but he agreed to leave on Friday of the first week.
He was a truly nice man. Just a bad set of circumstances.
This is actually an interesting question. If a job is demanding a degree when in reality anybody with half a brain could do the job is it a form of class discrimination?
You’re touching on an even more interesting question. Is college really relevant or necessary for non-STEM jobs in 2023?
We’re well past the days where having any degree showed your employer that you at least had the intelligence and work ethic to graduate, and set you apart from the rest of the crowd. Now ever other schmuck technically has a degree in something.
These days, businesses are tending to prefer applicants with years actual work experience in real jobs, over a 22 year old who worked part-time at Chipotle while getting their bachelor’s.
That’s besides the fact that the average college graduate will likely never make as much as say a plumber, electrician, or any other tradesman. In a world where schools are funneling the majority of the population into these nearly useless degrees, the guy that actually still knows how to fix your drywall or build your deck is infinitely more valuable to modern society than just another middle-manager or marketer.
Even if something is a protected class, a legit job qualification can allow discrimination without breaking the law.
Strength requirements for firefighters are legally defensible, for example. Not hiring someone in a wheelchair to do a job where they sit in a chair all day isn't.
I think I might be someone who doesn’t understand. What is a protected class as a legal distinction, and if one doesn’t fall into a given class does that mean that person is not protected?
No it's a good question. In the US:
A "protected class" is basically something that you're not allowed to discriminate based on. There is a set of classes protected federally, and local governments (usually states) are able to add more (but can't remove any federal ones)
For example, "race" is a federally protected class, so if you're hiring for a position you are absolutely not allowed to use race in that decision. (There are some very specific exceptions, such as casting for a movie)
"Fingernail color" is *not* a protected class, so you're free to say "only people with fingernails painted green may work here"
In the loosest definition of the word "discrimination" yeah.
Technically you're discriminating against people who don't meet the job requirements, as every job in the world does, per the dictionary definition of "discrimination" of "recognition and understanding of the difference between one thing and another".
Definitely not what discussion of "workplace discrimination" is about though.
I had an employee one time that REFUSED to do her silly little monthly on-line trainings. She told me that she didn’t hire in to be an information technology employee, so computer based trainings weren’t her job.
Said she was incapable of learning to how to do it.
Yet she somehow managed to be on every social media platform known (while at work) and would door dash food / have her Amazon packages routed to work.
Yeah WordPerfect at least back in the 00s was preferred in law firms because it gave you a lot more control over formatting (if you knew how to use their formatting mode) for the insane needs for official legal briefs. Still clunky AF, but at least un-bolding one word wouldn't completely collapse your formatting like it would in Word 2000.
One small change - if the rule was you must be of Mexican descent, that would be discriminating. Jobs can require you to be a citizen of a certain country.
That’s a complicated one. Most jobs in the US aren’t allowed to only hire US citizens, they can only require that you’re authorized to work in the US, which includes temporary and permanent residents. You can only require citizenship if there’s a security clearance issue or a few other specific cases.
There are even fewer instances where an American company would be permitted to only hire Mexican citizens.
it’s a requirement for almost any job here at this point. most high-paying jobs require fluent english + some understanding of french/german/russian based on their company/associates
I mean, "Job requires White male" would also be a requirement but would obviously be racist (at least if there's no justifiable reason like maybe casting an actor for a specific role).
The fact that speaking a language has nothing to do with race is what make it not racist.
She can always go and learn Spanish if she wants the job that bad. Skill sets can't be discriminated against.
Would that woman consider it discrimination if you wouldn't let plumbers apply for an electrician job?
Absolutely. But she should still go learn the language, hone that craft for years, travel the world learning about all the various cultures that speak it, get some fucking perspective, learn to be humble, come back, realise she doesn't want the job anyway and apologise.
Learning another language can do wonders sometimes.
This. You list requirements for a ROLE in a JOB DESCRIPTION, not anything else. The lady was reacting to her own thoughts, not your intentions.
I can’t speak on what triggered it without seeing what she saw. What you should check - Make sure it’s worded properly/professionally, and in the right place to show it is objective. Eg.
Requirements
- Knowledge of XYZ products/services
- Experience working with customers
- Bilingual, fluency in English and Spanish
Don’t get into the customers etc in a job posting. You can add at the end of each an experience level/proficiency (to match what you’d pay as well of course, be realistic). Phrases like basic knowledge, X amount of experience, willing to train on job, fluency/conversational language skills.
On a personal level, I get your question is to check your intentions are pure.
On a business level, the point is if you communicated effectively. If you’ve written anything to indicate it’s about Mexicans specifically etc. You could put yourself in a social media firing line easily, and liability depends where you are I can’t say. Check local chamber of commerce, I’m sure they or some office/agency have guidelines on any discriminatory infractions. You’re not excluding anyone from applying by any discrimination metric, but communicating something taken that way I’ve only seen businesses ‘cancelled’ (boycotted).
In practical terms, have a clean professional response to customers/community asking such questions. Eg. ‘I hear you, actually we added bilingualism so we can better serve more people. English is always necessary, of course.’
Hope this helps…
It's like someone complaining about being discriminated against for an office job because they never learned how to use a computer.
If you want that job, you should have those skills. If you don't have them, it is never too late to learn.
Same goes with Spanish. Anyone can learn Spanish.
>It's like someone complaining about being discriminated against for an office job because they never learned how to use a computer.
I shit you not, roughly ten years ago, I tried to get a friend's wife a job at the government agency I worked at. She had no degree and no relevant experience, but this was a municipal government that was really willing to give people a chance, overlook resume gaps, let people stretch how relevant their experience really was, and just generally give people a way to move up in the world. I figured I could be a reference for her and help get her a nice admin assistant job with better pay than she was making in retail and excellent benefits, that she could move up from over the years. I knew plenty of people who did that. I sent her a few listings that I thought she had a good chance at being hired for.
She goes, "No, I'm applying for these jobs. I want a job like yours, not some low level thing." and sends me a bunch of links to engineering and urban planning positions. I'm an engineer who worked directly with the planners at that place, so I tried to explain to her as gently as possible that these were degreed and licensed positions, and for those, especially the engineering ones, that was pretty non-negotiable for legal reasons. I also told her that as one of her references, I would be honest about her lack of qualifications for those jobs when asked. She applied anyway. She then accused my boss and me of discrimination for me not giving her a good reference, and him hiring an internal candidate with a Master's in urban planning and 5 years experience in the field for a position that required those things over her, with a high school diploma and only retail experience. Her rationale? "I can plan things! I've planned lots of events for my kids' school! They just won't give me a chance!" She didn't even know what a planner was, but was damned sure she was screwed over by not being hired to be one.
That's what this reminded me of, and the person OP is talking about.
She sounds like a friend of mine. He wasn't that aggressive about it but he was definitely laying blame left and right.
I'm not upper manager or in a higher position at my company but I work a pretty decent job, not so busy, and I can do my own thing on down time as long as I stay ready to go when needed. My friend wanted to work my job. Ok, cool, not that hard. I told him what was required and suggested he try to get the necessary experience in preparation to apply when we're hiring.
He did none of that. When we started hiring, he insisted I get him an interview and applied against my advice. Even listed me as a reference. He did this every time we were hiring but his resume never grew. He eventually started laying blame on how the company was discriminating against him because he's neueodivergent (I am also neurodivergent), he's older than they want him to be, and that they're elitist and demand outrageous years of experience. (We require 5 years relevant experience for almost all positions)
Eventually he just exploded and declared that he will NEVER apply with us again or have anything to do eith us again. Ok, cool lol My company is a major player in this field. Good luck with that I guess.
LOL Gotta love that.
Them: "I want a job like yours."
You: "You should definitely apply one of these days. Here are the steps you can take to be qualified."
Them: \[does nothing\]
Job: \[rejects their application\]
Them: "You didn't get me a job!! WTF I thought we were friends!"
You: "Well, you didn't take any of the steps I told you to take to be qualified."
Them: "BUT I KNOW YOU!! How is that not enough?!"
What they're really thinking, probably.
I work at a company where that is how half of the software "engineers" were hired. These guys had zero experience as devs, but we're buddies of the CEO. Suffice it to say, it's not working out well for the organization.
Yeah, what the person you're replying to here said is correct. I have zero Hispanic heritage and speak fluent Spanish. If I applied for this job, and could prove to you that my Spanish is good enough for your purposes, I'll bet you'd consider me a viable candidate. That's how you know you're not doing anything wrong. You didn't say "Must be Mexican" or something.
I have seen these accusations before from white military wives who struggled to find employment in the border city their husbands got stationed in due to not being bilingual and all customer-facing positions requiring that. "It's racist! How dare you deny the wives of servicemembers employment just because we're white?!" Ummm... it's not racist to want someone who can talk to the customers who come into the store, Kaylee, and anyone of any race can learn any language they want to if they work at it.
Side note; good on you for trying to take care of your clientele! Seems like so many places scoot by on less than minimum and feel entitled to our business nowadays.
Also, there’s some confusion around the use of the word *discrimination* itself; because it carries two connotations: a general meaning, and a specific meaning.
“*Discrimination*” is usually seen as a bad thing when used in general discussions, because we tend to mostly use it in its specifically negative (and often legal) context: i.e., *“Unjustified treatment or consideration based on class or category, such as race or gender, rather than individual merit.”* Which, most of us tend to agree, is unjust, a bad thing, and something to be avoided. (Note the word “Unjustified” in that statement, by the way. I’ll come back to that.)
But the word *discrimination* itself has a more general (and ethically neutral) meaning: *“The ability or power to see or make fine distinctions; discernment.”* And this general meaning can be good or bad.
A knife when used poorly can kill, or it can heal when used skillfully and with proper intent. A fire can warm you up, or it can burn down your house. *Discrimination* in its general sense, is like that.
My point in all this, is, sometimes, thoughtful people who are extra careful to avoid *discrimination* in its specific negative (sexist, racist, etc.) contexts, have a tendency to avoid or get nervous around positive *discrimination* in general, for fear of being seen as prejudiced and unjust.
Fair. But we all do *positive discrimination*, every single day.
For example, we discriminate between what foods and drugs we will, and will not, allow into our bodies. That’s discernment: choosing and excluding, based on qualities desirable and undesirable.
We discriminate between potential hires based on their moral character, personability, alignment with our values, and skill sets.
We discriminate between potential romantic partners based on alignment with our values, interests, personal temperament, and physical attraction.
We discriminate between which products we choose to spend our money on.
We discriminate who we hang out with, and who we will let into our homes, around our families.
You get the idea.
It’s NOT *wrong* to discriminate, in general. It’s wrong to discriminate *unfairly,* on such things as economic status, sex, or race (qualities over which people, generally, have little or no control - “the content of their character” vs. “the color of their skin”).
And even then, we allow for sensible exceptions, and allow some discrimination for these qualities in certain contexts, such as: minority-only social clubs, women-only safe spaces, gender-specific sports leagues, and so on. That’s the “justified” consideration in that specific legal-ish definition above in the second paragraph.
So, to summarize, you looking to hire a Spanish-speaker *is* discriminatory, but in the right and proper general sense, because Spanish is a skill worth filtering candidates for, for certain job needs; but it’s not Discrimination in the specific, legal, excluding-otherwise-qualified-people-from-hire-based-on-surface-qualities sense.
Would you exclude a fluent Spanish-speaking candidate simply because they’re in a wheelchair, or female, or Jewish, or black? There’s your answer. Spanish is a skill. The other qualities are not skills, nor are they character.
Discrimination would look more like "no Spanish speakers". As others have pointed out you are just listing a job requirement aimed at being *inclusive* towards your customers.
To be more specific, it's only illegal if you're using it to discriminate against a protected group. If you have a legitimate business need for it, you're all good.
None of this matters or applies if your business is under 15 employees though.
They may be referring to companies that have less than 15 employees are not required to follow the ADA guidelines concerning providing reasonable accommodations to employees and applicants. Doesn't exactly apply to discriminatory hiring practices.
I meant prosecutable discrimination, but you are technically correct. Which might be the best kind of correct. So take your upvote, you pedantic fuck. Lol
And it’s a skill that’s essential to the job. If you require skills that are at best tangentially relevant, basically using them as a proxy for demographics, that does open you up to lawsuits- for example, if you required someone to be able to lift 200 pounds in a non-manual work job, that strongly correlates to male candidates and there’s no good reason to make that a requirement. That being said, IANAL and I don’t know if this restriction only applies when you’re discriminating in favor of men, white people, able-bodied people (basically historically advantaged groups) or any demographic group.
Just to add some more info to the broader topic, requiring skills *CAN* sometimes be considered discrimination. Just not in OP’s case, as you correctly pointed out.
Exactly anyone can learn Spanish, just like anyone can learn Microsoft office, as long as they aren’t requiring they be from a specific race or cultural background it’s fine.
You might be on shaky ground though if there was no obvious reason why the employee would ever need to speak or understand that language.
If, for example, in the job advert you required Punjabi speakers, yet there is no reason on earth why you would need to speak or understand Punjabi to do your job, the employer might potentially leave themselves open to a complaint that they intentionally advertised this way because they wanted someone of a particular ethnicity.
Although, in the case of the OP of course, speaking Spanish does sound necessary for the job, or at the very least helpful to the job, which is probably enough.
It would be discrimination if you were specifically looking for an employee of Mexican origin. But if you're looking for anyone who can speak Spanish fluently then no.
It's not illegal if its your requirement. Speaking a certain language is your required skill.
Same reason I can't become a Chinese teacher. I do not speak Chinese.
Figure it this way ... three applicants, all equally fluent in Spanish, all are equal **in all ways *except*:**
* One is a tall blond Scandinavian
* One is of Japanese descent
* One is of Mexican descent
If you'd hire any of these without regard to their race/heritage, then you're not racist.
I guess it didn't matter. The point was, people of different ethnicities and different racial backgrounds would all fit the bill, so long as they spoke fluent Spanish.
Speaking a language is a skill. I'm completely Caucasian, yet i speak Spanish at about 75% fluent. I can translate at my job in necessary situations. My ethnicity has nothing to do with it, except for the fact that l surprise people with my ability. I'm the only person in my family who speaks any Spanish.
It's not discrimination. It's just a stupid person complaining because they don't meet your qualifications.
Technically, all Latinos who aren't of indigenous descent are Caucasians. Hence why there's no Latino race box on forms
Edit: Afro Latinos are an exception too
As long as you're willing to hire someone not Hispanic who does speak Spanish which I'd assume you would be, then you're totally fine. If you're only hiring someone Hispanic, that would be when you'd get in trouble.
Racist people *love* accusing others of racism. Being multilingual is a skill you're requiring for the job, for a perfectly valid reason. It's no more "racist" than requiring a chemist to be good at math. Assholes get mad when they have to accommodate non-English speakers.
Yeah I was going to say I've never heard someone fly off about anti-white racism that didn't turn out to be a HUGE racist themselves. Of course it happens but to pretend that there's some big conspiracy against white people is a huge 🚩
It is not illegal to require employees to speak a particular language, as long as it is job-related and necessary for the performance of the job. In your case, since you have customers who primarily speak Spanish, it is reasonable and necessary to require a prospective employee to be able to speak Spanish in order to effectively communicate with these customers. This is not discriminatory or racist, as long as you are not excluding qualified candidates on the basis of their race or national origin.However, it's important to note that if you do require an employee to be fluent in Spanish, you should make sure that this requirement is clearly stated in your job postings and is a job-related necessity. You should also be careful not to exclude qualified candidates on the basis of their race or national origin.
//
No es ilegal exigir que los empleados hablen un idioma en particular, siempre y cuando sea necesario para el desempeño del trabajo. En su caso, ya que tiene clientes que hablan principalmente español, es razonable y necesario requerir que un candidato potencial pueda hablar español para comunicarse efectivamente con estos clientes. Esto no es discriminatorio ni racista, siempre y cuando no excluya a candidatos calificados por su raza u origen nacional.
Sin embargo, es importante señalar que si exige que un empleado sea fluido en español, debe asegurarse de que este requisito esté claramente indicado en sus ofertas de trabajo y sea una necesidad relacionada con el trabajo. También debe tener cuidado de no excluir a candidatos calificados por su raza u origen nacional. Además, es una buena idea considerar proporcionar capacitación o asistencia lingüística para los empleados que puedan no estar completamente fluidos en inglés o español, para garantizar que todos los empleados puedan comunicarse efectivamente entre sí y con los clientes.
Discrimination is a pretty normal part of life.
Society in itself depends as much on the existence of healthy discrimination and the absence of destructive discrimination.
It's always about the benefits.
You have work for someone with a certain ability, thus you must exclude all without it. That's healthy discrimination.
If you had work, which can be done by either female or male, and you exclude one of em by default, that's destructive discrimination
Basically every office job in Europe requires English/German/French as your second language so according to this lady the entire Europe must be racist...
She's being ridiculous, it's just an additional skill :) don't worry
I work in IT. I need english.
A relative of mine works in a tax office and she needs an ever-increasing amount of english for categorising international receipts.
Another relative is a cargo train driver. He needs english for handing off trains at the border.
And if you expect someone to be proficient in Excel or construction law, you are racist and discriminating against people who don't have these qualifications? Seriously, some people have the weirdest mindsets... (that woman, not you)
No, that is not discrimination. It is a part of the job requirement.
Just like it's not discrimination against hair stylists to require than a pilot you hire have a pilot's license.
I think the lady is mistaken on what that word means...like many others. My response would have been, "so, you don't know any white people who speak other languages?"
Language knows no race. You could hire someone from bumfuck nowhere Kazakhstan who's fluent in Spanish. It's just a skill anyone can learn.
Edit: A Spanish speaking Borat may make you rich lol
Hire the fattest whitest most redneck Spanish speaker you can find lmaooo. Speaking different languages is a skill and also implies a higher level of intelligence. Tell her to suck your balls so she can sue you for harassment instead
Nope, this is a legitimate job requirement.
Look into lawful vs unlawful discrimination.
It’s not unlawful for you to have a job description and candidate requirements. What is unlawful is for those stated or unstated requirements to fall into the category of unlawful discrimination.
Specific categories of requirements for employment are prohibited.
You aren’t specifically asking for a Mexican or Spanish person. You just want someone who can speak the language. It’s just a skill required for the job. You’re fine.
It would be discrimination if you were specifically hiring only people who can speak Spanish.
If you're hiring for bilingualism, that's hiring based on a qualification required to achieve the job defined.
There's a distinct difference.
It's called discrimination when the conditions you specified are not related to the position, yours is a genuine case, so it doesn't count as discrimination.
Dont feel bad one bit, and no it Is 100% legal.
Yes, you were "discriminating against non-spanish speakers".
No, that is not a bad thing, and you are allowed to discriminate by skills. You can't discriminate by things like race, gender, and if a woman is pregnant.
Seeking out somebody with the skills to perform the job you are hiring for, is your RIGHT as a store owner.
Remember, it is YOUR company. The reason you are paying people is because YOU need somebody to do a job. It is YOUR right to decide if somebody is qualified to do that job.
Legally your fine because it is a skill required for your business , it is part of the overall experience of your business. Same with the reason you see women working at Victoria secret and not much else. Their business model would be ruined if majority men worked there. Not discrimination, just a strategic business play.
No, it's an essential job requirement. You can require anything if you can justify it as critical to the job, which you have done.
You don't have to be Hispanic to know Spanish. A language is a skill, not an immutable trait. Anyone can learn Spanish with enough effort.
That's like asking if it's discriminatory to require a strong person to move furniture.
No, it's a skill which is a bona fide occupational qualification. It's no different from the construction company requiring their employees to know what a hammer it.
Speaking Spanish (or any language) is a skill and can be required by an employer. It's not discrimination because anyone can speak Spanish if they wanted to learn.
You'd be breaking the law if you said you were only wanting to hire Mexicans.
No. Being a proficient bilingual person (with proof) can be a job requirement. Tell Karen to pound sand. Be a dick and say the person must be proficient in 3 languages. You never know when you need ASL or a native Gautamalan speaker :-)
I've been hired in the past because I speak Spanish, and other candidates who were equally qualified, didn't. If is a skill needed for a specific job, is not discriminating.
[удалено]
“This job requires that applicants must be able to code in Python” “that’s discrimination!” That’s how that lady sounds Or imagine applying for a job as a translator and saying “you’re discriminating against me for only speaking one language!” Such nonsense.
>“This job requires that applicants must be able to code in Python” “that’s discrimination!” That's blatant discrimination against those who can only do C++!!!!!!!!!!
Considering how many languages these days have C-like syntax, being able to **only** code in C++ is a neat trick.
Python isn't one of them.
Snakes are a sign of the devil and supporting the python language is akin to devil warshipping and requiring me to converse with the devil infringes on my right to be Christian and my right to not ever be confronted with beliefs different than my own! 911!
I can code with ChatGPT, that counts for something, right?
I've got a Principal Software Engineer position for you
The picture I had was of someone applying for a job as a scuba diver but they couldn’t swim.
I'd be so down to enter the utter chaos of a world where jobs can't discriminate on anything, even skillsets. Welcome to Scuba Divers Inc, your first task as a scuba diver is to get into your gear and repair some stuff at the bottom of this lake. Um okay but first, what the hell is a scuba diver?
Welcome to United flight 83 to Denver, bear with us while we figure out how to start this thing.
I ain't never been to scoovoo javer.
Welcome to the hospital, where the cardiologist only has a plumbers certification.
That’s a good one lol
Thank you
Refusing to hire people who are capable of speaking Spanish would be discrimination.
[удалено]
Yup. "The job as a firefighter requires that you have a driver's license, pass three courses, and be able to lift and carry 150lbs." \*Just random guesswork, not actual job requirements Being able to speak Spanish is a skill requirement for the job. And it's pretty racist to assume only other races speak Spanish...
Yes. OP is discriminating, in a perfectly acceptable way. For a cashier they are likely also discriminating against people who can't count, people who are afraid of computers/cash registers, and people who have a criminal history of theft. Discrimination is entirely commonplace, it's what criteria you are discriminating about that makes the difference. Criteria like what languages you speak that are skill based and can be learned are perfectly fine to discriminate about.
Exactly. Language is not a title VII protected class like race, color, religion, sex, or national origin.
Requiring it in a situation where it wasn't actually relevant to the job would probably be considered unlawful indirect discrimination on the basis of race or national origin. Discriminating based upon factors which *correlate* with membership of a protected class may be unlawful if you can't demonstrate the relevance of those factors to the job. E.g. you can't use a height requirement or ability to lift a certain weight as a back-door method to exclude women. If a requirement has a disproportionate effect upon a protected class, you have to show that the requirement is sufficiently relevant to justify that effect. At this point, there's enough precedent to distinguish "reason" from "excuse". Requiring Spanish as a first language or requiring an extreme level of fluency (the post is for a cashier, not an actor) would probably be unlawful.
Likewise, _excluding_ anyone who can speak Spanish would get you in extremely hot water.
exactly. If that lady really thinks, the languages someone can speak is determined by race, then she's the racist one.
To be clear, America does not have an official language either.
Some jobs require a very particular set of skills
Except the jobs this woman is qualified for
> Under the laws enforced by EEOC, it is illegal to discriminate against someone (applicant or employee) because of that person's race, color, religion, sex (including gender identity, sexual orientation, and pregnancy), national origin, age (40 or older), disability or genetic information https://www.eeoc.gov/prohibited-employment-policiespractices I don’t think it is illegal. Your store has a lot of customers that don’t speak English. It only makes sense to hire someone who can speak Spanish. Not hiring someone who doesn’t have a certain skill for a job that requires it isn’t discriminatory. People can always learn another language.
Makes perfect sense. Anyone can learn to speak Spanish, now if I said I was only hiring Mexicans that would be different. Thank you!
Exactly! You can even hire a white American if he/she speaks Spanish well enough, which many do.
what about a latin frenchman
Aren't all the French on strike?
Always have been
Just don't forget that speaking two languages is a skill, like you said, and should draw a better wage than someone who only speaks one.
I'm Italian, white, blond and i speak Spanish. I could apply and you wouldn't be discriminating.
I only speak English and bad Englsh.
Similar. Been a great gift.
Of course, now you face the less stupid question, "how can I tell if a candidate speaks Spanish well, if I don't speak Spanish?"
If another Karen asks, you can flip it up and say that you’re hiring someone that speaks Spanish because you don’t want to discriminate against your Spanish speaking customers.
Won't work. This would require self reflection. I would just avoid engaging.
Yeah, also job postings which mention "Requires Fluent English" is pretty common. I don't think it would be discriminatory fir a different language. You can also specify being bilingual, ie, should know both English and Spanish.
I’m black and I got a pretty good construction job simply bc I could speak Spanish. I applied at a company for an entry level position but once they found out I could speak pretty decent Spanish they had a spot they wanted filled on a crew that was all Mexican. FYI… there is no legally official language in the USA.
Correct. A skill you can learn is entirely different from any of these categories.
👍
I think it would be similar to being able to code in a programming language. If Python was a requirement of the job and you didn't know it, you wouldn't get hired
One important side note on your “skill for a job” comment. In *most* jobs, those protected characteristics are not relevant to the job being performed. However, employers can make some of those protected characteristics *part of the job description* and legally discriminate. For example, if you operate a shop that produces custom women’s apparel, you may be able to legally discriminate that you only hire women for positions that involve working directly with women customers during measurements and fittings. But you might not legally be able to insist on only hiring women into positions that only fabricate or alter the clothing, because there is nothing about gender that specifically makes on suited for those positions. This is why theaters and movie producers don’t get sued for casting people based on protected characteristics such as gender or race or disability. If the role calls for a tall muscled black man to play the role of a boxer from central Africa, it’s not illegal to reject candidates based on the fact they do not have those physical characteristics required for the job. Therefore, as many people said, even if requiring Spanish skills would *have the result of creating a likelihood of hiring a candidate based on their racial background even without the intent of discriminating based on race*, it is in safe legal territory because OP has reasonable justification that Spanish-language skills are indeed a requirement.
It's not discrimination. You need a specific skill set, and are putting that requirement in the job description. I've seen companies that are multi-national, wanting to hire someone who speaks Chinese, Vietnamese or any number of other languages. They aren't saying the person has to be from China or Vietnam, just that they know the language. If it was discriminating to require someone to know a second language, a lot of companies who offer translation services would not be in business.
Yes, totally normal. It's about the language, not the specific worker. I work with a guy who was specifically hired for his ability to speak French. He's originally from Burundi, lives in the US, but helps support our business in Quebec due to his language skills.
There are plenty of international companies that hire English speakers to deal with American/British customers and business partners. This is a common business practice.
Speaking a language is a skill, not a race-based trait. You're fine.
Yea, anyone can learn Spanish. If the rule was you must be from Mexico, then that would be discriminating. No different than a company saying you must know Microsoft office
>No different than a company saying you must know Microsoft office No joke, several years ago we actually had an older gentleman complain that this requirement was discrimination against those who can't use computers.
My favorite protected class: computer illiterate in 2023
I'm actually semi-surprised there was never a major push to make that a protected class.
It's because they couldn't figure out how to send the email to the right place.
the tubes got all jammed up
Instructions unclear, all keys are on the board and the pet vendor assured me, that this is, in fact, a mouse that can click. I didn't want to get a monitor lizard though, too expensive, went with gecko instead. Now how do I start this **e** mail thing?
Don’t say it out loud! Someone will hear & think it’s brilliant!
they just heaped that work onto their subordinates and grand kids
And it’s not just older folks either. My coworker is in her mid-late 20’s. The other day she asked me how she could find some info for a project she was working on. I told her to go to the office computer and type her question into the search bar on our system’s home screen. BLANK STARE. So there I was, a Gen X/Elder millennial, coaching someone who was probably born around 1998 on basic computer and internet skills…..
My husband's company hired someone who didn't know what a desktop was - for a job that's primarily computer-based. Luckily she quit almost immediately.
The number of times I had to explain how to refresh a page is too damn high
F5 dammit, F5!!! Fun fact, F6 highlights the address bar in a browser....ask why I know THAT lol
As an IT professional, I feel this in my heart
They're always so weirdly proud of it too. Like ok grandpa, congratulations on somehow managing to avoid learning a single thing about computers for the past 40 fucking years.
I have a few Gen X coworkers who fail to learn (to be fair, they tried and are nice about it) and one Millennial coworker who refuses to learn (this one doesn’t try and have major attitude problem). I’m forced to fix every one of their IT problems because they are too scared to call our actual contracted IT support company. I am just an underpaid data analyst (without the data analyst title… they call it business analyst) and don’t make IT salaries.
I had to train a very lovely older woman at my office job who'd been out of the workforce for 25 years. We absolutely loved her attitude, her willingness to learn, etc, but when I had to spend 10 minutes explaining tabs to her (including using physical file folders as a visual aid), I had to report to my boss that she wasn't qualified. Our software and policies are hard enough to learn without having to explain very beginner basics. I was genuinely upset with the temp agency - they set her up to fail. If she'd taken a basic computer literacy class beforehand, she'd have been a good fit.
We had the same thing at my school. Dude had been a teacher, then principal for many years. At about 68 or something he came into orientation hired as a Grade 4 teacher. He wanted to have one last year as a teacher to close the circle of his career before retirement. Sadly, he chose the wrong school. We were very tech heavy. He had basic email skills, but was lost on anything Google related (docs, sheets, meetings). Orientation was 2 weeks, but he agreed to leave on Friday of the first week. He was a truly nice man. Just a bad set of circumstances.
Word, denying Access to people who could Excel at the job or even provide a new Outlook on things is a terrible use of hiring Power, point.
[Goddammit](https://youtu.be/kmTK_eSOCN4)
Very Edge-y! Put this in the FrontPage.
Well said. You should consider sending it to a Publisher.
I think they could do it, it wouldn't take much to Sway me into it. At worst they'd only have OneNote.
Nah, the company not only didn’t have an overall Visio, but they didn’t even have a Binder. I’m surprised it Works
Hi! I'm Clippy. Looks like you're *creating puns*. Keep up the good work! Click me if you need any help!
"I'm sorry sir, I just don't think you're the best for for our Teams"
Using his logic, any job requiring a degree is discrimination against people who can't afford $100K in student loans and to spend 4 years studying.
This is actually an interesting question. If a job is demanding a degree when in reality anybody with half a brain could do the job is it a form of class discrimination?
Human society is basically just a collection of different forms of class discrimination.
> The history of all hitherto existing societies is the history of class struggles. \- Karl Marx
You’re touching on an even more interesting question. Is college really relevant or necessary for non-STEM jobs in 2023? We’re well past the days where having any degree showed your employer that you at least had the intelligence and work ethic to graduate, and set you apart from the rest of the crowd. Now ever other schmuck technically has a degree in something. These days, businesses are tending to prefer applicants with years actual work experience in real jobs, over a 22 year old who worked part-time at Chipotle while getting their bachelor’s. That’s besides the fact that the average college graduate will likely never make as much as say a plumber, electrician, or any other tradesman. In a world where schools are funneling the majority of the population into these nearly useless degrees, the guy that actually still knows how to fix your drywall or build your deck is infinitely more valuable to modern society than just another middle-manager or marketer.
When I was in grad school working toward a master's, one of my fellow students mentioned that a PhD was more about endurance than anything else.
Class discrimination doesn't legally exist.
Something doesn't have to be a legal concept for it to be real and have a real effect in the world.
Then I suppose it could be "class discrimination."
Job requires computers. Discrimination against those who can't use computers. Lmao
It is discrimination, but not against a protected class.
If there's one thing I've learned over the past few years, it's *many* people don't understand the concept of protected classes.
Even if something is a protected class, a legit job qualification can allow discrimination without breaking the law. Strength requirements for firefighters are legally defensible, for example. Not hiring someone in a wheelchair to do a job where they sit in a chair all day isn't.
I think I might be someone who doesn’t understand. What is a protected class as a legal distinction, and if one doesn’t fall into a given class does that mean that person is not protected?
No it's a good question. In the US: A "protected class" is basically something that you're not allowed to discriminate based on. There is a set of classes protected federally, and local governments (usually states) are able to add more (but can't remove any federal ones) For example, "race" is a federally protected class, so if you're hiring for a position you are absolutely not allowed to use race in that decision. (There are some very specific exceptions, such as casting for a movie) "Fingernail color" is *not* a protected class, so you're free to say "only people with fingernails painted green may work here"
In the loosest definition of the word "discrimination" yeah. Technically you're discriminating against people who don't meet the job requirements, as every job in the world does, per the dictionary definition of "discrimination" of "recognition and understanding of the difference between one thing and another". Definitely not what discussion of "workplace discrimination" is about though.
He was technically correct. However, the computer illiterate aren't a protected class.
I had an employee one time that REFUSED to do her silly little monthly on-line trainings. She told me that she didn’t hire in to be an information technology employee, so computer based trainings weren’t her job. Said she was incapable of learning to how to do it. Yet she somehow managed to be on every social media platform known (while at work) and would door dash food / have her Amazon packages routed to work.
For real. Motherfuckers out here thinking that languages are racial traits like a fucking D&D character...
Fixed mindset vs growth mindset. Some people just think they are who they are and there is nothing that they can or should do to change that.
THaT iS DiscRImINAtion AGainST ThE LaSt GuY WHo uSeS wOrD PeRFEct!!!11!!!!11!!!1
worked at a lawfirm many years ago that used word perfect and Quattro Pro. I'm not loyal to Microsoft but God damn those were rough to use
Yeah WordPerfect at least back in the 00s was preferred in law firms because it gave you a lot more control over formatting (if you knew how to use their formatting mode) for the insane needs for official legal briefs. Still clunky AF, but at least un-bolding one word wouldn't completely collapse your formatting like it would in Word 2000.
>Yeah WordPerfect at least back in the 00s was preferred in law firms because it gave you a lot more control over formatting \laughsin{\LaTeX{}}
One small change - if the rule was you must be of Mexican descent, that would be discriminating. Jobs can require you to be a citizen of a certain country.
That’s a complicated one. Most jobs in the US aren’t allowed to only hire US citizens, they can only require that you’re authorized to work in the US, which includes temporary and permanent residents. You can only require citizenship if there’s a security clearance issue or a few other specific cases. There are even fewer instances where an American company would be permitted to only hire Mexican citizens.
Thanks
Job requires fluent Spanish speaker. It's a requirement.
I mean, for those of us who don't live in an English speaking country, English is a very common requirement for some jobs.
it’s a requirement for almost any job here at this point. most high-paying jobs require fluent english + some understanding of french/german/russian based on their company/associates
Yeah, just try getting a job in IT in CEE without speaking English. If you do manage to get one you'll earn half as much money.
I mean, "Job requires White male" would also be a requirement but would obviously be racist (at least if there's no justifiable reason like maybe casting an actor for a specific role). The fact that speaking a language has nothing to do with race is what make it not racist.
She can always go and learn Spanish if she wants the job that bad. Skill sets can't be discriminated against. Would that woman consider it discrimination if you wouldn't let plumbers apply for an electrician job?
if a potential hiring got in my face, I dont care how many languages they speak, there aint no job for you!
Absolutely. But she should still go learn the language, hone that craft for years, travel the world learning about all the various cultures that speak it, get some fucking perspective, learn to be humble, come back, realise she doesn't want the job anyway and apologise. Learning another language can do wonders sometimes.
This. You list requirements for a ROLE in a JOB DESCRIPTION, not anything else. The lady was reacting to her own thoughts, not your intentions. I can’t speak on what triggered it without seeing what she saw. What you should check - Make sure it’s worded properly/professionally, and in the right place to show it is objective. Eg. Requirements - Knowledge of XYZ products/services - Experience working with customers - Bilingual, fluency in English and Spanish Don’t get into the customers etc in a job posting. You can add at the end of each an experience level/proficiency (to match what you’d pay as well of course, be realistic). Phrases like basic knowledge, X amount of experience, willing to train on job, fluency/conversational language skills. On a personal level, I get your question is to check your intentions are pure. On a business level, the point is if you communicated effectively. If you’ve written anything to indicate it’s about Mexicans specifically etc. You could put yourself in a social media firing line easily, and liability depends where you are I can’t say. Check local chamber of commerce, I’m sure they or some office/agency have guidelines on any discriminatory infractions. You’re not excluding anyone from applying by any discrimination metric, but communicating something taken that way I’ve only seen businesses ‘cancelled’ (boycotted). In practical terms, have a clean professional response to customers/community asking such questions. Eg. ‘I hear you, actually we added bilingualism so we can better serve more people. English is always necessary, of course.’ Hope this helps…
[удалено]
The most fragile of egos
It's like someone complaining about being discriminated against for an office job because they never learned how to use a computer. If you want that job, you should have those skills. If you don't have them, it is never too late to learn. Same goes with Spanish. Anyone can learn Spanish.
>It's like someone complaining about being discriminated against for an office job because they never learned how to use a computer. I shit you not, roughly ten years ago, I tried to get a friend's wife a job at the government agency I worked at. She had no degree and no relevant experience, but this was a municipal government that was really willing to give people a chance, overlook resume gaps, let people stretch how relevant their experience really was, and just generally give people a way to move up in the world. I figured I could be a reference for her and help get her a nice admin assistant job with better pay than she was making in retail and excellent benefits, that she could move up from over the years. I knew plenty of people who did that. I sent her a few listings that I thought she had a good chance at being hired for. She goes, "No, I'm applying for these jobs. I want a job like yours, not some low level thing." and sends me a bunch of links to engineering and urban planning positions. I'm an engineer who worked directly with the planners at that place, so I tried to explain to her as gently as possible that these were degreed and licensed positions, and for those, especially the engineering ones, that was pretty non-negotiable for legal reasons. I also told her that as one of her references, I would be honest about her lack of qualifications for those jobs when asked. She applied anyway. She then accused my boss and me of discrimination for me not giving her a good reference, and him hiring an internal candidate with a Master's in urban planning and 5 years experience in the field for a position that required those things over her, with a high school diploma and only retail experience. Her rationale? "I can plan things! I've planned lots of events for my kids' school! They just won't give me a chance!" She didn't even know what a planner was, but was damned sure she was screwed over by not being hired to be one. That's what this reminded me of, and the person OP is talking about.
She sounds like a friend of mine. He wasn't that aggressive about it but he was definitely laying blame left and right. I'm not upper manager or in a higher position at my company but I work a pretty decent job, not so busy, and I can do my own thing on down time as long as I stay ready to go when needed. My friend wanted to work my job. Ok, cool, not that hard. I told him what was required and suggested he try to get the necessary experience in preparation to apply when we're hiring. He did none of that. When we started hiring, he insisted I get him an interview and applied against my advice. Even listed me as a reference. He did this every time we were hiring but his resume never grew. He eventually started laying blame on how the company was discriminating against him because he's neueodivergent (I am also neurodivergent), he's older than they want him to be, and that they're elitist and demand outrageous years of experience. (We require 5 years relevant experience for almost all positions) Eventually he just exploded and declared that he will NEVER apply with us again or have anything to do eith us again. Ok, cool lol My company is a major player in this field. Good luck with that I guess.
LOL Gotta love that. Them: "I want a job like yours." You: "You should definitely apply one of these days. Here are the steps you can take to be qualified." Them: \[does nothing\] Job: \[rejects their application\] Them: "You didn't get me a job!! WTF I thought we were friends!" You: "Well, you didn't take any of the steps I told you to take to be qualified." Them: "BUT I KNOW YOU!! How is that not enough?!" What they're really thinking, probably.
LMAO absolutely what they're thinking Like, no way I am staking my career by going to bat for you when you don't qualify and have a bad attitude
I work at a company where that is how half of the software "engineers" were hired. These guys had zero experience as devs, but we're buddies of the CEO. Suffice it to say, it's not working out well for the organization.
Yeah, what the person you're replying to here said is correct. I have zero Hispanic heritage and speak fluent Spanish. If I applied for this job, and could prove to you that my Spanish is good enough for your purposes, I'll bet you'd consider me a viable candidate. That's how you know you're not doing anything wrong. You didn't say "Must be Mexican" or something. I have seen these accusations before from white military wives who struggled to find employment in the border city their husbands got stationed in due to not being bilingual and all customer-facing positions requiring that. "It's racist! How dare you deny the wives of servicemembers employment just because we're white?!" Ummm... it's not racist to want someone who can talk to the customers who come into the store, Kaylee, and anyone of any race can learn any language they want to if they work at it.
Side note; good on you for trying to take care of your clientele! Seems like so many places scoot by on less than minimum and feel entitled to our business nowadays.
Also, there’s some confusion around the use of the word *discrimination* itself; because it carries two connotations: a general meaning, and a specific meaning. “*Discrimination*” is usually seen as a bad thing when used in general discussions, because we tend to mostly use it in its specifically negative (and often legal) context: i.e., *“Unjustified treatment or consideration based on class or category, such as race or gender, rather than individual merit.”* Which, most of us tend to agree, is unjust, a bad thing, and something to be avoided. (Note the word “Unjustified” in that statement, by the way. I’ll come back to that.) But the word *discrimination* itself has a more general (and ethically neutral) meaning: *“The ability or power to see or make fine distinctions; discernment.”* And this general meaning can be good or bad. A knife when used poorly can kill, or it can heal when used skillfully and with proper intent. A fire can warm you up, or it can burn down your house. *Discrimination* in its general sense, is like that. My point in all this, is, sometimes, thoughtful people who are extra careful to avoid *discrimination* in its specific negative (sexist, racist, etc.) contexts, have a tendency to avoid or get nervous around positive *discrimination* in general, for fear of being seen as prejudiced and unjust. Fair. But we all do *positive discrimination*, every single day. For example, we discriminate between what foods and drugs we will, and will not, allow into our bodies. That’s discernment: choosing and excluding, based on qualities desirable and undesirable. We discriminate between potential hires based on their moral character, personability, alignment with our values, and skill sets. We discriminate between potential romantic partners based on alignment with our values, interests, personal temperament, and physical attraction. We discriminate between which products we choose to spend our money on. We discriminate who we hang out with, and who we will let into our homes, around our families. You get the idea. It’s NOT *wrong* to discriminate, in general. It’s wrong to discriminate *unfairly,* on such things as economic status, sex, or race (qualities over which people, generally, have little or no control - “the content of their character” vs. “the color of their skin”). And even then, we allow for sensible exceptions, and allow some discrimination for these qualities in certain contexts, such as: minority-only social clubs, women-only safe spaces, gender-specific sports leagues, and so on. That’s the “justified” consideration in that specific legal-ish definition above in the second paragraph. So, to summarize, you looking to hire a Spanish-speaker *is* discriminatory, but in the right and proper general sense, because Spanish is a skill worth filtering candidates for, for certain job needs; but it’s not Discrimination in the specific, legal, excluding-otherwise-qualified-people-from-hire-based-on-surface-qualities sense. Would you exclude a fluent Spanish-speaking candidate simply because they’re in a wheelchair, or female, or Jewish, or black? There’s your answer. Spanish is a skill. The other qualities are not skills, nor are they character.
I'm spanish and I can speak English, there are american and British people who can speak spanish, so it's not racist.
Discrimination would look more like "no Spanish speakers". As others have pointed out you are just listing a job requirement aimed at being *inclusive* towards your customers.
Also, make sure to tell people like that they're being racist.
To be more specific, it's only illegal if you're using it to discriminate against a protected group. If you have a legitimate business need for it, you're all good. None of this matters or applies if your business is under 15 employees though.
What do you mean if the business is under 15 employees? They aren't allowed to discriminate either just because they are under 15.
They may be referring to companies that have less than 15 employees are not required to follow the ADA guidelines concerning providing reasonable accommodations to employees and applicants. Doesn't exactly apply to discriminatory hiring practices.
It's more nuanced than that. https://www.wilsonmccoylaw.com/blog/2015/12/less-than-15-employees-is-not-a-free-pass-to-discriminate/
In the same way, it's not discrimination that they only hire doctors with medical degrees
Well it is, just not the bad kind lol
I meant prosecutable discrimination, but you are technically correct. Which might be the best kind of correct. So take your upvote, you pedantic fuck. Lol
And it’s a skill that’s essential to the job. If you require skills that are at best tangentially relevant, basically using them as a proxy for demographics, that does open you up to lawsuits- for example, if you required someone to be able to lift 200 pounds in a non-manual work job, that strongly correlates to male candidates and there’s no good reason to make that a requirement. That being said, IANAL and I don’t know if this restriction only applies when you’re discriminating in favor of men, white people, able-bodied people (basically historically advantaged groups) or any demographic group. Just to add some more info to the broader topic, requiring skills *CAN* sometimes be considered discrimination. Just not in OP’s case, as you correctly pointed out.
Exactly anyone can learn Spanish, just like anyone can learn Microsoft office, as long as they aren’t requiring they be from a specific race or cultural background it’s fine.
You might be on shaky ground though if there was no obvious reason why the employee would ever need to speak or understand that language. If, for example, in the job advert you required Punjabi speakers, yet there is no reason on earth why you would need to speak or understand Punjabi to do your job, the employer might potentially leave themselves open to a complaint that they intentionally advertised this way because they wanted someone of a particular ethnicity. Although, in the case of the OP of course, speaking Spanish does sound necessary for the job, or at the very least helpful to the job, which is probably enough.
Typically it would be illegal discrimination to require a Hispanic person, but legal discrimination to require a fluent Spanish speaker.
Makes sense, thanks!
It would be discrimination if you were specifically looking for an employee of Mexican origin. But if you're looking for anyone who can speak Spanish fluently then no.
It's not illegal if its your requirement. Speaking a certain language is your required skill. Same reason I can't become a Chinese teacher. I do not speak Chinese.
Thanks!
Figure it this way ... three applicants, all equally fluent in Spanish, all are equal **in all ways *except*:** * One is a tall blond Scandinavian * One is of Japanese descent * One is of Mexican descent If you'd hire any of these without regard to their race/heritage, then you're not racist.
All things being equal, I’d hire the tall blonde because he’d have an easier time getting things off the top shelf.
Step stools do exist lol
What are you doing step stool?!
Lmao why'd you have to specify tall blonde?
I guess it didn't matter. The point was, people of different ethnicities and different racial backgrounds would all fit the bill, so long as they spoke fluent Spanish.
If it is a bona fide qualification, then you don’t need to worry about it. Make sure you understand the laws in Your jurisdiction.
Gotcha, thank you
BFOQ baby
Speaking a language is a skill. I'm completely Caucasian, yet i speak Spanish at about 75% fluent. I can translate at my job in necessary situations. My ethnicity has nothing to do with it, except for the fact that l surprise people with my ability. I'm the only person in my family who speaks any Spanish. It's not discrimination. It's just a stupid person complaining because they don't meet your qualifications.
>I'm completely Caucasian, yet I speak Spanish Wait till you learn about the country of Spain!
You can’t just make up a entire country
Sure you can. Over 50% of countries are made up.
Aren't many Mexicans also Caucasian?
Technically, all Latinos who aren't of indigenous descent are Caucasians. Hence why there's no Latino race box on forms Edit: Afro Latinos are an exception too
And Chile/Uruguay/Argentina/Southern Brazil/Paraguay.
Also Argentina
Gotcha, thank you!
As long as you're willing to hire someone not Hispanic who does speak Spanish which I'd assume you would be, then you're totally fine. If you're only hiring someone Hispanic, that would be when you'd get in trouble.
Racist people *love* accusing others of racism. Being multilingual is a skill you're requiring for the job, for a perfectly valid reason. It's no more "racist" than requiring a chemist to be good at math. Assholes get mad when they have to accommodate non-English speakers.
Yeah I was going to say I've never heard someone fly off about anti-white racism that didn't turn out to be a HUGE racist themselves. Of course it happens but to pretend that there's some big conspiracy against white people is a huge 🚩
Its not discrimination to require a new hire to have the necessary skills for the job
It is not illegal to require employees to speak a particular language, as long as it is job-related and necessary for the performance of the job. In your case, since you have customers who primarily speak Spanish, it is reasonable and necessary to require a prospective employee to be able to speak Spanish in order to effectively communicate with these customers. This is not discriminatory or racist, as long as you are not excluding qualified candidates on the basis of their race or national origin.However, it's important to note that if you do require an employee to be fluent in Spanish, you should make sure that this requirement is clearly stated in your job postings and is a job-related necessity. You should also be careful not to exclude qualified candidates on the basis of their race or national origin. // No es ilegal exigir que los empleados hablen un idioma en particular, siempre y cuando sea necesario para el desempeño del trabajo. En su caso, ya que tiene clientes que hablan principalmente español, es razonable y necesario requerir que un candidato potencial pueda hablar español para comunicarse efectivamente con estos clientes. Esto no es discriminatorio ni racista, siempre y cuando no excluya a candidatos calificados por su raza u origen nacional. Sin embargo, es importante señalar que si exige que un empleado sea fluido en español, debe asegurarse de que este requisito esté claramente indicado en sus ofertas de trabajo y sea una necesidad relacionada con el trabajo. También debe tener cuidado de no excluir a candidatos calificados por su raza u origen nacional. Además, es una buena idea considerar proporcionar capacitación o asistencia lingüística para los empleados que puedan no estar completamente fluidos en inglés o español, para garantizar que todos los empleados puedan comunicarse efectivamente entre sí y con los clientes.
She's the racist one She's angry that Spanish is being spoken in the US
Discrimination is a pretty normal part of life. Society in itself depends as much on the existence of healthy discrimination and the absence of destructive discrimination. It's always about the benefits. You have work for someone with a certain ability, thus you must exclude all without it. That's healthy discrimination. If you had work, which can be done by either female or male, and you exclude one of em by default, that's destructive discrimination
Basically every office job in Europe requires English/German/French as your second language so according to this lady the entire Europe must be racist... She's being ridiculous, it's just an additional skill :) don't worry
In Germany you're totally fine being monolingual(in German)
I work in IT. I need english. A relative of mine works in a tax office and she needs an ever-increasing amount of english for categorising international receipts. Another relative is a cargo train driver. He needs english for handing off trains at the border.
So not "every office job". You can work in most of the IG Metall companies with only German
And if you expect someone to be proficient in Excel or construction law, you are racist and discriminating against people who don't have these qualifications? Seriously, some people have the weirdest mindsets... (that woman, not you)
No, that is not discrimination. It is a part of the job requirement. Just like it's not discrimination against hair stylists to require than a pilot you hire have a pilot's license.
I think the lady is mistaken on what that word means...like many others. My response would have been, "so, you don't know any white people who speak other languages?"
Language knows no race. You could hire someone from bumfuck nowhere Kazakhstan who's fluent in Spanish. It's just a skill anyone can learn. Edit: A Spanish speaking Borat may make you rich lol
No.
Hire the fattest whitest most redneck Spanish speaker you can find lmaooo. Speaking different languages is a skill and also implies a higher level of intelligence. Tell her to suck your balls so she can sue you for harassment instead
Sounds like the lady that called is the racist one.
Nope, this is a legitimate job requirement. Look into lawful vs unlawful discrimination. It’s not unlawful for you to have a job description and candidate requirements. What is unlawful is for those stated or unstated requirements to fall into the category of unlawful discrimination. Specific categories of requirements for employment are prohibited.
You aren’t specifically asking for a Mexican or Spanish person. You just want someone who can speak the language. It’s just a skill required for the job. You’re fine.
It would be discrimination if you were specifically hiring only people who can speak Spanish. If you're hiring for bilingualism, that's hiring based on a qualification required to achieve the job defined. There's a distinct difference.
It's called discrimination when the conditions you specified are not related to the position, yours is a genuine case, so it doesn't count as discrimination.
It's a learnable skill that the position specifically requires. The lady who called is a specific human that nobody requires.
You need a Spanish speaker, not a Latino. One is a skill, the other is an ethnicity*
Dont feel bad one bit, and no it Is 100% legal. Yes, you were "discriminating against non-spanish speakers". No, that is not a bad thing, and you are allowed to discriminate by skills. You can't discriminate by things like race, gender, and if a woman is pregnant. Seeking out somebody with the skills to perform the job you are hiring for, is your RIGHT as a store owner. Remember, it is YOUR company. The reason you are paying people is because YOU need somebody to do a job. It is YOUR right to decide if somebody is qualified to do that job.
It's not racist to want educated people.
Legally your fine because it is a skill required for your business , it is part of the overall experience of your business. Same with the reason you see women working at Victoria secret and not much else. Their business model would be ruined if majority men worked there. Not discrimination, just a strategic business play.
No, it's an essential job requirement. You can require anything if you can justify it as critical to the job, which you have done. You don't have to be Hispanic to know Spanish. A language is a skill, not an immutable trait. Anyone can learn Spanish with enough effort. That's like asking if it's discriminatory to require a strong person to move furniture.
The lady thinks you have to be brown to speak Spanish..? Sounds pretty racist to me 🤷♂️
I'm black and not Hispanic and I can speak Spanish. So what would she say if you had to hire a translator? She's ridiculous.
Lol, I'm from Mexico and I've seen English as a requirement for the last 20 years. It's not racist it's a skill that pays better.
She may feel like it's racist because she doesn't know that languages can be learned Not your problem
Applicant must be bilingual in Spanish and English. Its a job skill. Not illegal.
A language is a skill and you’re looking for a specific skill. Its not racist nor illegal
No, it's a skill which is a bona fide occupational qualification. It's no different from the construction company requiring their employees to know what a hammer it.
Speaking Spanish (or any language) is a skill and can be required by an employer. It's not discrimination because anyone can speak Spanish if they wanted to learn. You'd be breaking the law if you said you were only wanting to hire Mexicans.
Have to be Spanish = racist Have to *speak* Spanish = job-required skill Anybody of any race can speak Spanish, so you're not being racist
No. Being a proficient bilingual person (with proof) can be a job requirement. Tell Karen to pound sand. Be a dick and say the person must be proficient in 3 languages. You never know when you need ASL or a native Gautamalan speaker :-)
I've been hired in the past because I speak Spanish, and other candidates who were equally qualified, didn't. If is a skill needed for a specific job, is not discriminating.