Language Jail
The Los Angeles Times reports that California’s legislature is considering a bill that prohibits a business from refusing to do business with someone that doesn’t speak English. From the article: “Speaking a native language is protected in cases of employment and housing under existing California law, but that protection does not cover consumer issues.” OK, it’s California; but, really!
First, why wouldn’t most businesses do business with such people? And if they don’t want to, don’t the discriminated against have a ready remedy, going down the street?
Apparently the law had its genesis in the LPGA’s failed and ill-advised attempt to make all of its players speak English – American sponsors are said to like the winners of their participants to be able to talk to the pro-am players, the crowd and the TV audience if they win. (An interesting point given Yang’s win last weekend at the PGA Championship over a “half” foreigner, Woods.)
But, how do you write such a law; and, once written, how do you enforce it.
A guy walks into my office and I don’t understand a word he says. He doesn’t understand me; but, for some reason wants to retain my legal services? He leaves, he and I are frustrated. I’ve violated the new law?
Let’s take it down a level or too. I’m not a lawyer, I’m a waiter. A guy comes in speaking and reading no English. He looks at the menu not understanding it and starts talking to me in a language I don’t understand. He’s pissed and departs. Or I’m frustrated and stalk away. I’m guilty?
Another approach, legal. Language is not a fundamental right under the Constitution. I know that is a bad sentence. Another try – the right to communicate and do business, despite inability to speak English isn’t a fundamental, or any kind of, right under the Constitution.
Should business people that only speak English try their best to do business with people that don’t speak English? Yes, if they want to earn a living. Should they go to jail if they can’t or won’t communicate in another language? I’m thinking no.
7 comments:
I'm not anti-immigration or anything like that -after all, if it weren't for immigration and my ancestors taking advantage of that well over 100 years ago now, my parents would probably have never met and well, we know I wouldn't be here either then, right?
But truth be told, I am really getting a little tired of the demands being put upon everyone to be able to communicate in upteen different languages. If I were to leave here, my homeland, and move to any other country, on any other continent, could or should I expect the all those people who are residents there to learn English? I think not although many other countries do teach English as a second language early on to the children now. But here, people come to this country and expect us to assimilate to them, their cultures, etc., and often do not take any steps to do that with our language -which technically, I believe is English, is it not. They come here wanting work, wanting more and better education, better healthcare benefits too in many cases, but all too often, anymore, it seems they want this to be their "old country." I have no problem with people maintaining, remembering, various cultural aspects from their homeland, ethnic traditions -geez, I do that too when my kids and I remember and observe certain holiday traditions of our Swedish ancestors. But, when my ancestors came here it was for them, like when a couple take their wedding vows and pledge to "Forsake all others" as the immigrants of that era left behind the old country language and learned to adjust as best they could to the English and to adopt the culture too of America also as best they could. I don't believe in being rude to people because they don't understand the language but whose responsibility is this, ultimately -the immigrant's or the residents'? Or are businesses expected to have a translator on hand, who can speak every language there is to accomodate people then? Boy, wouldn't that boost the prices for services and goods in a hell of a hurry though?
Didn't mean to turn this into a rant Dave, but the buck has to stop someplace on this issue is my theory.
While I think the CA proposed law is dumb, I'm not at all a fan of the English only movement.
When it comes to language, I'm a market driven kind of guy. You need to learn something to get what you want, do it. Don't want it that bad, be lazy.
Dave - I assume your last comment refers to the immigrants not the business - right?
Check out your fellow blogger. http://proenglishusa.blogspot
California isn't broke enough already? A hamburger stand will have to have translators on standby? (Of course, in Chicago, I promise you that the fancy stores on Michigan Avenue that cater to foreign tourists do have people available to communicate with just about anyone who has a charge card... but it would be insane to impose this as a requirement generally.)
On the broader issue, I'm pretty much with Jeni here: Most of our ancestors came here to be Americans -- not to be a whatever-in-exile. Our ancestors were eager to assimilate... even when those with whom they'd cast their lot refused to hire them or made rude or even cruel remarks.
This has changed, and not entirely for the better: I think some ethnic groups have been poorly served by 'leaders' who fail to stress that the ticket out of poverty is printed in English. My wife... who speaks fluent Spanish... agrees with me. (I married a wise Latina years before it was popular.)
On the other hand, I've too often seen my mother-in-law taken advantage of because she speaks with an accent.
I am going to have to go and think about this one. I might have to blog about it on Monday. LOL.
It started by allowing them to be migrant workers. It got worse by allowing them to get welfare. Then we have given them the option on automated phone systems to have someone speaking a foreign language to assist them, and so on and so forth. See where I am going... the next step is for it to be mandatory for small business owners to speak their language.
Great issue to bring up.
Hey guys,
Jay, the link doesn't go anywhere, even if I add .com. As to just illegals, no, it works both ways, each side chooses what it wants for its betterment or detriment.
Jenn, they are migrants because we created a place they want to be. Do a word search on the blog for illegal, migrant or illegal. We are the cause of the problem you are worried about.
Jeni and Curmudgeon, if we talked to an illegal, I doubt we'd find someone unwilling to assimilate.
"[I]f we talked to an illegal, I doubt we'd find someone unwilling to assimilate."
I suspect we talk to illegals most every day... at least in Chicago and, I daresay, probably Atlanta as well.
Some illegals are here to assimilate. Some are here to send money home and to go back when they have accumulated enough. I don't have a problem with either of these... not as individuals.
No, I was thinking more of the immigrant communities that are here legally but aren't assimilating as their predecessors did. I don't think the leaders of these communities are doing them any favors by not encouraging assimilation.
We can preserve the best of our ancestors' traditions, and their languages, and still be 100% American. What the heck's wrong with that?
Post a Comment