U.S. District Court for the Western District of New York: Speak-

Daily Record (Rochester, NY), Mar 6, 2007 by Helen Nguyen

A lawsuit brought by the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) alleging a company terminated a worker because he was Cuban and could not speak fluent English can move forward, the U.S. District Court for the Western District of New York ruled recently in Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, Rodriguez-Perez v. SSM & RC, Inc.

Under 29 CFR Section 1606.7, a company implementing a speak- English-only rule "disadvantages an individual's employment opportunities on the basis of national origin."

The district court therefore denied the employer's motion to dismiss EEOC's suit.

Case background

From October to December 2003, Juan Rodriguez-Perez was employed as a roofer by Spring Sheet Metal and Roofing Co., a roofing and construction company in Rochester. Spring Sheet Metal is owned by SSM & RC, Inc.

Rodriguez-Perez is Cuban, and acknowledges he does not speak English well, but said it did not prevent him from performing his job successfully.

He alleged the foreman fired him in December 2003 for speaking Spanish in the workplace. He claimed the foreman told him the company needed employees who could speak and understand English fluently.

Discrimination claims

In 2005, the EEOC filed a lawsuit against Spring Sheet Metal.

The EEOC alleged the company violated Title VII of the Civil Rights Act by requiring its employees to speak English.

In 2006, Rodriguez-Perez filed his own suit, alleging the company discriminated and retaliated against him because of his national origin. He also asserted a state claim under New York Executive Law Section 296(1)(a) for national origin discrimination.

Spring Sheet Metal filed a motion to dismiss the EEOC's and Rodriguez-Perez's claims, arguing he was terminated because he did not speak English well - not because of his national origin. Specifically, it contended the language a person speaks should not be equated with a person's national origin.

District court's discussion

Speak-English-only rule

In denying Spring Sheet Metal's motion to dismiss, the district court referred to the Speak-English-only rule, a regulation enacted by the EEOC under 29 CFR Section 1606.7.

The regulation states: "A rule requiring employees to speak only English at all times in the workplace is a burdensome term and condition of employment. ... Prohibiting employees at all times, in the workplace, from speaking their primary language ... disadvantages an individual's employment opportunities on the basis of national origin. It may also create an atmosphere of inferiority, isolation and intimidation based on national origin which could result in a discriminatory working environment."

The regulation also states that if an employer believes a speak- English-only rule is necessary for certain times of the workday, it "should inform its employees of the general circumstances when speaking only in English is required and of the consequences of violating the rule."

The court determined 29 CFR Section 1606.7 "tips the balance in favor" of the EEOC's and Rodriguez-Perez's claims.

"[T]he court finds that both plaintiffs have alleged intentional discrimination on the basis of Mr. Rodriguez-Perez's inability to speak English," Judge Charles J. Siragusa wrote in his Feb. 15 decision. "Under the interpretation of the English-only-rule ... this 'disadvantages an individual's employment opportunities on the basis of national origin,'" 29 CFR Section 1606.7(a).

"For now ... the complaints may go forward as pled," the judge concluded.