Case Assignment 2

EEOC v. WC&M Enterprises, Inc.
Student’s Name
Institutional Affiliation
Personally, I concur with the argument that preventing a group from speaking their native language violates their right to cultural expression. The International Covenant on Civil and Political Rights (ICCPR) identifies the cultural rights that an individual or community should enjoy. These include the right to enjoying one’s culture, professing and practicing one’s religion, and using your own language in communication. In the case, Spun Steak Co., the defendant, prohibits Garcia and Buitrago, the plaintiffs, from speaking Spanish. Even though the decision would increase the productivity of the company and enhance the safety of workers, it violates their right to cultural expression.
Notably, employees have a “right” to express their culture in the workplace. However, they should exercise the right while adhering to the company’s code of ethics. This implies that exercising the right to express one’s culture should not intimidate, dominate, or exclude other employees, or worse still subject the firm to a costly and serious hindrance to productivity. Consequently, exercising the right in the workplace should be in line with the principle of reasonable accommodation as noted by Henrard (2012, p. 62)
I agree with the court that an English-only rule is not abusive per se to those whose primary language is not English. Rather than merely focusing on the evidence for English-only policy to justify a course of action for disparate impact, it is essential to consider the business justification for the decision since “an employer must always provide a business justification for such a rule” (Bennett-Alexander & Hartman, 2018, p.

358). To that end, I do not believe that such a rule creates a “class system” of languages in the workplace since it only serves to streamline operations and processes, as well as create harmony rather than placing the language of one group above that of other groups.
References
Bennett-Alexander, D., B., Hartman, L. (2018). Employment Law for Business (9th ed). New York, NY: McGraw Hill.
Henrard, K. (2012). Duties of reasonable accommodation in relation to religion and the European court of human rights: a closer look at the prohibition of discrimination, the freedom of religion and related duties of state neutrality. Erasmus L. Rev., 5, 59.