Re: English-only policy
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
edit: are you saying immigrants shouldn't have to learn english b/c it's not the official us language?

[/ QUOTE ]

Imigrants should not be required to learn english. Also employers should not have to hire (or continue to employ) those that don't speak english. Everyone should be allowed to do what they want.

[/ QUOTE ]


why not?

if they shouldn't be required to learn english, they shouldn't expect to be able to function in a country without learning the language spoken by all of its citizens.

[/ QUOTE ]

Whether they should expect it or not, many people DO function in the US without knowing english.

Re: English-only policy
 

[ QUOTE ]
A lot of jobs have someone who knows Spanish given an advantage over someone who doesn't if they have to deal with customers.

[/ QUOTE ]

So what?

If people don't want to learn a second language? Fine. But they shouldn't complain when they are less marketable. Being able to communicate to a greater % of people is an asset to a business.

Re: English-only policy
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The two employees, who were clothes sorters, had been working at the Salvation Army for about five years before the Salvation Army decided to enforce their English language rule. One would think the Salvation Army would have a hard time proving that they weren't able to communicate with them if they had already been kept on for five years.

http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/pitt.../s_505139.html

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm not saying the Salvation army is right, but it's still ridiculous.

[/ QUOTE ]

why do you think they are wrong? how is it unreasonable to expect a worker to speak the official language of the country in which they live?

[/ QUOTE ]

What do you think the official language of the US is?

[/ QUOTE ]

Regardless of that, I don't see how any sane person can honestly disagree that the vast majority of American citizens speak English as a first language, therefore, it is in a businesses best interest to have employees who can communicate in English.

[/ QUOTE ]

That's funny because you were just complaining about the state's Spanish course. So let's use your own words here: I don't see how any sane person can honestly disagree that a significant number of American citizens speak Spanish as a first language, therefore, it is in a state's best interest to have employees who can communicate in Spanish.

Please tell me how my logic is flawed? It is your own logic after all.

Re: English-only policy
 

[ QUOTE ]
My problem is with the "mandatory" part of it [regarding Spanish skills for a job]. ... As to the OP, I also believe that a business is certainly entitled to require all employees to speak English.

[/ QUOTE ]

Hypocrisy ftw.

Re: English-only policy
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The two employees, who were clothes sorters, had been working at the Salvation Army for about five years before the Salvation Army decided to enforce their English language rule. One would think the Salvation Army would have a hard time proving that they weren't able to communicate with them if they had already been kept on for five years.

http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/pitt.../s_505139.html

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm not saying the Salvation army is right, but it's still ridiculous.

[/ QUOTE ]

why do you think they are wrong? how is it unreasonable to expect a worker to speak the official language of the country in which they live?

[/ QUOTE ]

What do you think the official language of the US is?

[/ QUOTE ]

Regardless of that, I don't see how any sane person can honestly disagree that the vast majority of American citizens speak English as a first language, therefore, it is in a businesses best interest to have employees who can communicate in English.

[/ QUOTE ]

That's funny because you were just complaining about the state's Spanish course. So let's use your own words here: I don't see how any sane person can honestly disagree that a significant number of American citizens speak Spanish as a first language, therefore, it is in a state's best interest to have employees who can communicate in Spanish.

Please tell me how my logic is flawed? It is your own logic after all.

[/ QUOTE ]

OK, here it is. I'm amazed you can't grasp this concept. It is a positive to have employees who can communicate in Spanish. However, it is imperative that you be able to communicate in English!

I have no problem with people who can speak 5 languages, but if you are living in America, and hope to be a functioning member of American life, English should be one of those five!

I never said being bilingual wasn't a positive, what I said was that if you can't communicate using the language most Americans use, you're not a valuable asset to an employer in America.

Edited to add:

Don't forget, I already fluently speak English, Spanish is to be my second language (third if you count American Sign Language as a language).

I don't work with anyone who cannot speak English. All employees are required to.

Re: English-only policy
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
My problem is with the "mandatory" part of it [regarding Spanish skills for a job]. ... As to the OP, I also believe that a business is certainly entitled to require all employees to speak English.

[/ QUOTE ]

Hypocrisy ftw.

[/ QUOTE ]

Its not hypocrisy, it's common sense. What language are you communicating in now?

I certainly wouldn't hire someone who to work for me who couldn't communicate with me or my customers.

Re: English-only policy
 

[ QUOTE ]
It is a positive to have employees who can communicate in Spanish. However, it is imperative that you be able to communicate in English!

[/ QUOTE ]

Why because you say so? Did you just declare an official state language for all of America right here on 2+2? Is that now the law of the land? Sorry, dude, but you don't get to tell every business and state/local govt in America which language it MUST conduct its business in.

Re: English-only policy
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
My problem is with the "mandatory" part of it [regarding Spanish skills for a job]. ... As to the OP, I also believe that a business is certainly entitled to require all employees to speak English.

[/ QUOTE ]

Hypocrisy ftw.

[/ QUOTE ]

Its not hypocrisy, it's common sense. What language are you communicating in now?

I certainly wouldn't hire someone who to work for me who couldn't communicate with me or my customers.

[/ QUOTE ]

But some of your customers speak Spanish so again your logic fails. Or rather you just justified the very policy you are railing against.

Oh and LOL at using what language we're using here on a private poker forum as some sort of point in this debate. Muy loco, hombre.

Re: English-only policy
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
It is a positive to have employees who can communicate in Spanish. However, it is imperative that you be able to communicate in English!

[/ QUOTE ]

Why because you say so? Did you just declare an official state language for all of America right here on 2+2? Is that now the law of the land? Sorry, dude, but you don't get to tell every business and state/local govt in America which language it MUST conduct its business in.

[/ QUOTE ]

I never said I did. I simply said that if a business owner won't hire someone who can't speak English, good for him. He's got an advantage over someone who will when I need whatever service he provides.

A business owner has the right to hire whomever he chooses.

A question to you. If I have two otherwise equally qualified candidates apply for a job, with the exception that one cannot speak English, so I go with the one who can, would you support that candidates right to sue me for not hiring him, because I instead chose the other candidate?

Re: English-only policy
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
My problem is with the "mandatory" part of it [regarding Spanish skills for a job]. ... As to the OP, I also believe that a business is certainly entitled to require all employees to speak English.

[/ QUOTE ]

Hypocrisy ftw.

[/ QUOTE ]

Its not hypocrisy, it's common sense. What language are you communicating in now?

I certainly wouldn't hire someone who to work for me who couldn't communicate with me or my customers.

[/ QUOTE ]

But some of your customers speak Spanish so again your logic fails. Or rather you just justified the very policy you are railing against.

Oh and LOL at using what language we're using here on a private poker forum as some sort of point in this debate. Muy loco, hombre.

[/ QUOTE ]

Again, please quote the post where I said being bilingual wasn't a positive. I've repeatedly said that being bilingual is a plus.

If some of my customers speak Spanish, someone who is bilingual will have an advantage if I require that, but it still doesn't change the fact that the majority of my customers will speak English.

Re: English-only policy
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
It is a positive to have employees who can communicate in Spanish. However, it is imperative that you be able to communicate in English!

[/ QUOTE ]

Why because you say so? Did you just declare an official state language for all of America right here on 2+2? Is that now the law of the land? Sorry, dude, but you don't get to tell every business and state/local govt in America which language it MUST conduct its business in.

[/ QUOTE ]

I never said I did. I simply said that if a business owner won't hire someone who can't speak English, good for him. He's got an advantage over someone who will when I need whatever service he provides.

A business owner has the right to hire whomever he chooses.

A question to you. If I have two otherwise equally qualified candidates apply for a job, with the exception that one cannot speak English, so I go with the one who can, would you support that candidates right to sue me for not hiring him, because I instead chose the other candidate?

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm not debating about suing for a right to work without knowing English. I'm debating your attempt to rail against mandatory Spanish training for your job while at the same time advocating support for a mandatory English policy for another job. You can't have it both ways. And appealing to majority doesn't justify your hypocrisy. In some locales, Spanish is the majority anyway.

Re: English-only policy
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
My problem is with the "mandatory" part of it [regarding Spanish skills for a job]. ... As to the OP, I also believe that a business is certainly entitled to require all employees to speak English.

[/ QUOTE ]

Hypocrisy ftw.

[/ QUOTE ]

Its not hypocrisy, it's common sense. What language are you communicating in now?

I certainly wouldn't hire someone who to work for me who couldn't communicate with me or my customers.

[/ QUOTE ]

But some of your customers speak Spanish so again your logic fails. Or rather you just justified the very policy you are railing against.

Oh and LOL at using what language we're using here on a private poker forum as some sort of point in this debate. Muy loco, hombre.

[/ QUOTE ]

Again, please quote the post where I said being bilingual wasn't a positive. I've repeatedly said that being bilingual is a plus.

If some of my customers speak Spanish, someone who is bilingual will have an advantage if I require that, but it still doesn't change the fact that the majority of my customers will speak English.

[/ QUOTE ]

Look above at what I quoted. You clearly claimed to have a problem with the mandatory Spanish training for your job. So I already quoted what you are looking for. Read the rest of your post I replied to for the rest.

Re: English-only policy
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
It is a positive to have employees who can communicate in Spanish. However, it is imperative that you be able to communicate in English!

[/ QUOTE ]

Why because you say so? Did you just declare an official state language for all of America right here on 2+2? Is that now the law of the land? Sorry, dude, but you don't get to tell every business and state/local govt in America which language it MUST conduct its business in.

[/ QUOTE ]

I never said I did. I simply said that if a business owner won't hire someone who can't speak English, good for him. He's got an advantage over someone who will when I need whatever service he provides.

A business owner has the right to hire whomever he chooses.

A question to you. If I have two otherwise equally qualified candidates apply for a job, with the exception that one cannot speak English, so I go with the one who can, would you support that candidates right to sue me for not hiring him, because I instead chose the other candidate?

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm not debating about suing for a right to work without knowing English. I'm debating your attempt to rail against mandatory Spanish training for your job while at the same time advocating support for a mandatory English policy for another job. You can't have it both ways. And appealing to majority doesn't justify your hypocrisy. In some locales, Spanish is the majority anyway.

[/ QUOTE ]

OK, I'm amazed you can't see the difference. I'm bothered by the fact that I'm forced to take it, but guess what, I'm an adult, I did it anyway.

I also support the right of an employer to fire your ass for refusing to learn English, or Spanish, for that matter.

For the record, I also support the right of an employer to not hire you in the first place for that very reason.

Re: English-only policy
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
It is a positive to have employees who can communicate in Spanish. However, it is imperative that you be able to communicate in English!

[/ QUOTE ]

Why because you say so? Did you just declare an official state language for all of America right here on 2+2? Is that now the law of the land? Sorry, dude, but you don't get to tell every business and state/local govt in America which language it MUST conduct its business in.

[/ QUOTE ]

I never said I did. I simply said that if a business owner won't hire someone who can't speak English, good for him. He's got an advantage over someone who will when I need whatever service he provides.

A business owner has the right to hire whomever he chooses.

A question to you. If I have two otherwise equally qualified candidates apply for a job, with the exception that one cannot speak English, so I go with the one who can, would you support that candidates right to sue me for not hiring him, because I instead chose the other candidate?

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm not debating about suing for a right to work without knowing English. I'm debating your attempt to rail against mandatory Spanish training for your job while at the same time advocating support for a mandatory English policy for another job. You can't have it both ways. And appealing to majority doesn't justify your hypocrisy. In some locales, Spanish is the majority anyway.

[/ QUOTE ]

OK, I'm amazed you can't see the difference. I'm bothered by the fact that I'm forced to take it, but guess what, I'm an adult, I did it anyway.

I also support the right of an employer to fire your ass for refusing to learn English, or Spanish, for that matter.

For the record, I also support the right of an employer to not hire you in the first place for that very reason.

[/ QUOTE ]

I do see the difference. You speak English. That's the difference. So you supported English-language requirements and had a problem with Spanish-language requirements. It appears now however that you are softening your stance somewhat. Maybe you are realizing that your position was untenable after all.

Re: English-only policy
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
My problem is with the "mandatory" part of it [regarding Spanish skills for a job]. ... As to the OP, I also believe that a business is certainly entitled to require all employees to speak English.

[/ QUOTE ]

Hypocrisy ftw.

[/ QUOTE ]

Its not hypocrisy, it's common sense. What language are you communicating in now?

I certainly wouldn't hire someone who to work for me who couldn't communicate with me or my customers.

[/ QUOTE ]

But some of your customers speak Spanish so again your logic fails. Or rather you just justified the very policy you are railing against.

Oh and LOL at using what language we're using here on a private poker forum as some sort of point in this debate. Muy loco, hombre.

[/ QUOTE ]

Again, please quote the post where I said being bilingual wasn't a positive. I've repeatedly said that being bilingual is a plus.

If some of my customers speak Spanish, someone who is bilingual will have an advantage if I require that, but it still doesn't change the fact that the majority of my customers will speak English.

[/ QUOTE ]

Look above at what I quoted. You clearly claimed to have a problem with the mandatory Spanish training for your job. So I already quoted what you are looking for. Read the rest of your post I replied to for the rest.

[/ QUOTE ]

I still didn't see anywhere in there where I said that being bilingual wasn't a plus. As a matter of fact, this is from that very post, which you snipped:

[ QUOTE ]
My problem is with the "mandatory" part of it. I certainly have no problem with those who've freely taken the courses being looked upon highly when a promotion comes up, as speaking Spanish is a skill, just as taking additional law courses, combat courses, or fitness courses.


[/ QUOTE ]

Re: English-only policy
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
It is a positive to have employees who can communicate in Spanish. However, it is imperative that you be able to communicate in English!

[/ QUOTE ]

Why because you say so? Did you just declare an official state language for all of America right here on 2+2? Is that now the law of the land? Sorry, dude, but you don't get to tell every business and state/local govt in America which language it MUST conduct its business in.

[/ QUOTE ]

I never said I did. I simply said that if a business owner won't hire someone who can't speak English, good for him. He's got an advantage over someone who will when I need whatever service he provides.

A business owner has the right to hire whomever he chooses.

A question to you. If I have two otherwise equally qualified candidates apply for a job, with the exception that one cannot speak English, so I go with the one who can, would you support that candidates right to sue me for not hiring him, because I instead chose the other candidate?

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm not debating about suing for a right to work without knowing English. I'm debating your attempt to rail against mandatory Spanish training for your job while at the same time advocating support for a mandatory English policy for another job. You can't have it both ways. And appealing to majority doesn't justify your hypocrisy. In some locales, Spanish is the majority anyway.

[/ QUOTE ]

OK, I'm amazed you can't see the difference. I'm bothered by the fact that I'm forced to take it, but guess what, I'm an adult, I did it anyway.

I also support the right of an employer to fire your ass for refusing to learn English, or Spanish, for that matter.

For the record, I also support the right of an employer to not hire you in the first place for that very reason.

[/ QUOTE ]

I do see the difference. You speak English. That's the difference. So you supported English-language requirements and had a problem with Spanish-language requirements. It appears now however that you are softening your stance somewhat. Maybe you are realizing that your position was untenable after all.

[/ QUOTE ]

It has nothing to do with me speaking English, and everything to do with the fact that probably 97%-98% of the people I come into contact with on any given day speak English.

Re: English-only policy
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
My problem is with the "mandatory" part of it [regarding Spanish skills for a job]. ... As to the OP, I also believe that a business is certainly entitled to require all employees to speak English.

[/ QUOTE ]

Hypocrisy ftw.

[/ QUOTE ]

Its not hypocrisy, it's common sense. What language are you communicating in now?

I certainly wouldn't hire someone who to work for me who couldn't communicate with me or my customers.

[/ QUOTE ]

But some of your customers speak Spanish so again your logic fails. Or rather you just justified the very policy you are railing against.

Oh and LOL at using what language we're using here on a private poker forum as some sort of point in this debate. Muy loco, hombre.

[/ QUOTE ]

Again, please quote the post where I said being bilingual wasn't a positive. I've repeatedly said that being bilingual is a plus.

If some of my customers speak Spanish, someone who is bilingual will have an advantage if I require that, but it still doesn't change the fact that the majority of my customers will speak English.

[/ QUOTE ]

Look above at what I quoted. You clearly claimed to have a problem with the mandatory Spanish training for your job. So I already quoted what you are looking for. Read the rest of your post I replied to for the rest.

[/ QUOTE ]

I still didn't see anywhere in there where I said that being bilingual wasn't a plus. As a matter of fact, this is from that very post, which you snipped:

[ QUOTE ]
My problem is with the "mandatory" part of it. I certainly have no problem with those who've freely taken the courses being looked upon highly when a promotion comes up, as speaking Spanish is a skill, just as taking additional law courses, combat courses, or fitness courses.


[/ QUOTE ]

[/ QUOTE ]

Your bolded type doesn't help your case. It's nice that you have no problem with freely taken Spanish training. But you also DID have a problem with mandatory Spanish training while at the same time supporting mandatory English requirements. So you are being obtuse by trying to get around this fact by these quotes which are not germane to this point.

Re: English-only policy
 

[ QUOTE ]

Your bolded type doesn't help your case. It's nice that you have no problem with freely taken Spanish training. But you also DID have a problem with mandatory Spanish training while at the same time supporting mandatory English requirements. So you are being obtuse by trying to get around this fact by these quotes which are not germane to this point.

[/ QUOTE ]

OK, now I don't even know what I'm being accused of anymore, so I'll let you take over. Who, according to me, would require mandatory English training?

Re: English-only policy
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
It is a positive to have employees who can communicate in Spanish. However, it is imperative that you be able to communicate in English!

[/ QUOTE ]

Why because you say so? Did you just declare an official state language for all of America right here on 2+2? Is that now the law of the land? Sorry, dude, but you don't get to tell every business and state/local govt in America which language it MUST conduct its business in.

[/ QUOTE ]

I never said I did. I simply said that if a business owner won't hire someone who can't speak English, good for him. He's got an advantage over someone who will when I need whatever service he provides.

A business owner has the right to hire whomever he chooses.

A question to you. If I have two otherwise equally qualified candidates apply for a job, with the exception that one cannot speak English, so I go with the one who can, would you support that candidates right to sue me for not hiring him, because I instead chose the other candidate?

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm not debating about suing for a right to work without knowing English. I'm debating your attempt to rail against mandatory Spanish training for your job while at the same time advocating support for a mandatory English policy for another job. You can't have it both ways. And appealing to majority doesn't justify your hypocrisy. In some locales, Spanish is the majority anyway.

[/ QUOTE ]

OK, I'm amazed you can't see the difference. I'm bothered by the fact that I'm forced to take it, but guess what, I'm an adult, I did it anyway.

I also support the right of an employer to fire your ass for refusing to learn English, or Spanish, for that matter.

For the record, I also support the right of an employer to not hire you in the first place for that very reason.

[/ QUOTE ]

I do see the difference. You speak English. That's the difference. So you supported English-language requirements and had a problem with Spanish-language requirements. It appears now however that you are softening your stance somewhat. Maybe you are realizing that your position was untenable after all.

[/ QUOTE ]

It has nothing to do with me speaking English, and everything to do with the fact that probably 97%-98% of the people I come into contact with on any given day speak English.

[/ QUOTE ]

Who cares what % you come into contact with. Your employer has deemed it a requirement to have some basic spanish skills. And you've already stated you support mandatory employer language requirements (in this case, for English). So I guess your position is that employer language requirements are fine so long as you, DblBarrelJ, approve.

Re: English-only policy
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]

Your bolded type doesn't help your case. It's nice that you have no problem with freely taken Spanish training. But you also DID have a problem with mandatory Spanish training while at the same time supporting mandatory English requirements. So you are being obtuse by trying to get around this fact by these quotes which are not germane to this point.

[/ QUOTE ]

OK, now I don't even know what I'm being accused of anymore, so I'll let you take over. Who, according to me, would require mandatory English training?

[/ QUOTE ]

If you haven't figured that out by now, then there's no point in discussing further. You are either intentionally obtuse or just ignorant.

Re: English-only policy
 

Kaj,

Man he agrees with you. It's over. Stop trying to make an argument for the sake of arguing.

Re: English-only policy
 

[ QUOTE ]
Kaj,

Man he agrees with you. It's over. Stop trying to make an argument for the sake of arguing.

[/ QUOTE ]

If by "agrees with me" you mean he has repeatedly obfuscated the point I raised and feigned incomprehension, then ok. It would be a lot easier if he'd just say he agrees, however, rather than keep moving the goal posts until he pretends he doesn't know what we're talking about.

Out.

Re: English-only policy
 

[ QUOTE ]
Kaj,

Man he agrees with you. It's over. Stop trying to make an argument for the sake of arguing.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'm not so sure I do, I'm pretty sure deep down he agrees with the right of a person to file suit over being looked over for a job because they can't speak English, but to the point of what's been posted, I think I pretty much do.

It was just random bitching on my part, and I think he took it to be a militant "The government doesn't have the right to force me to do X" rant.

Re: English-only policy
 

[ QUOTE ]
I'm pretty sure deep down he agrees with the right of a person to file suit over being looked over for a job because they can't speak English

[/ QUOTE ]

Considering I made absolutely no comment in this thread regarding this issue, that was a huge (and completely blind) leap.

Of course I agree with the right of a person to bring suit.

I also agree that they should lose this suit every single time.

Re: English-only policy
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
I'm pretty sure deep down he agrees with the right of a person to file suit over being looked over for a job because they can't speak English

[/ QUOTE ]

Considering I made absolutely no comment in this thread regarding this issue, that was a huge (and completely blind) leap.

Of course I agree with the right of a person to bring suit.

I also agree that they should lose this suit every single time.

[/ QUOTE ]

Then wtf are you yelling at me for? Damn!

Re: English-only policy
 

[ QUOTE ]
Thats a good point. I guess that is one of the bad things about having a job which doesn't require special training or education. You also will get fired much quickly for things like being chronically ill as compared to highly trained professionals. Do you think their should be laws that don't allow employers to discriminate on the basis of knowing spanish? Seems ridiculous to me.

[/ QUOTE ]

here in america,

if you know english but not spanish you can be legally
discriminated against.

if you know spanish but not english you cannot be legally discriminated against.

see?

throw in the minors in case you don't get it.

english onlys are american citizens born here.
spanish onlys are illegal aliens not born here, mostly.

therefore, it is easy to see that illegal aliens > american citizens.

how can american citizens not resent that?

Re: English-only policy
 

DblBarrelJ,

I think you should be forced to take Chinese classes because one day you may run into someone who doesn't speak English. I also think you should be forced to take Japanese classes for the same reason. Better study up on that French because you might run into one of those french-canadians hopping the border. Best throw in some Vietnamese because you never know.

What do you do for a living again?

Re: English-only policy
 

[ QUOTE ]
DblBarrelJ,

I think you should be forced to take Chinese classes because one day you may run into someone who doesn't speak English. I also think you should be forced to take Japanese classes for the same reason. Better study up on that French because you might run into one of those french-canadians hopping the border. Best throw in some Vietnamese because you never know.

What do you do for a living again?

[/ QUOTE ]

Law enforcement, LOL. I should probably study up on the many different African dialects as well, "just in case".

Honestly, I really don't have a big problem with mandatory Spanish, it was just random bitching about a small hindrance in my own life, and I guess Kaj took it personally for some reason.

Re: English-only policy
 

i ask again, why shouldn't immigrants have to learn english?

Re: English-only policy
 

[ QUOTE ]
i ask again, why shouldn't immigrants have to learn english?

[/ QUOTE ]

Because [censored] you that's why. Why should someone be forced to do something just because them not doing it makes you uncomfortable? I think it's probably in the best interests of immigrants to learn the majority language of the country they travel to but if they don't want to that's their decision.

Re: English-only policy
 

[ QUOTE ]
i ask again, why shouldn't immigrants have to learn english?

[/ QUOTE ]

why should they?

Re: English-only policy
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
i ask again, why shouldn't immigrants have to learn english?

[/ QUOTE ]

Because [censored] you that's why. Why should someone be forced to do something just because them not doing it makes you uncomfortable? I think it's probably in the best interests of immigrants to learn the majority language of the country they travel to but if they don't want to that's their decision.

[/ QUOTE ]

We agree it's their own business whether they choose to learn English or not. We don't agree that they are entitled to a job without speaking English.

Re: English-only policy
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
DblBarrelJ,

I think you should be forced to take Chinese classes because one day you may run into someone who doesn't speak English. I also think you should be forced to take Japanese classes for the same reason. Better study up on that French because you might run into one of those french-canadians hopping the border. Best throw in some Vietnamese because you never know.

What do you do for a living again?

[/ QUOTE ]

Law enforcement, LOL. I should probably study up on the many different African dialects as well, "just in case".

Honestly, I really don't have a big problem with mandatory Spanish, it was just random bitching about a small hindrance in my own life, and I guess Kaj took it personally for some reason.

[/ QUOTE ]

Then maybe you shouldn't have spent a half dozen posts defending that random bitching through arguments that were easily shown to be lacking. Next time just say its random bitching and not based on anything any more substantive.

Edit: And aren't you a cop in Texas? Yeah, it's absurd to imagine a cop in Texas running across anybody who might speak Spanish. I'm sure it's just as likely as some African language as you are now pretending. It's funny that a cop used the statement "Everyone I work with speaks English" in this thread -- like duh, genius, I am also sure every criminal in Texas speaks English, too.

Ad hominem: The fact that the state gives people who reason as well as you a gun and authority should be enough to convice many to anarchism.

Re: English-only policy
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
i ask again, why shouldn't immigrants have to learn english?

[/ QUOTE ]

Because [censored] you that's why. Why should someone be forced to do something just because them not doing it makes you uncomfortable? I think it's probably in the best interests of immigrants to learn the majority language of the country they travel to but if they don't want to that's their decision.

[/ QUOTE ]

We agree it's their own business whether they choose to learn English or not. We don't agree that they are entitled to a job without speaking English.

[/ QUOTE ]

Noone is entitled to a job. But if they can get a job without being able to speak english good luck to them.

Re: English-only policy
 

[ QUOTE ]
OK, here it is. I'm amazed you can't grasp this concept. It is a positive to have employees who can communicate in Spanish. However, it is imperative that you be able to communicate in English!

I have no problem with people who can speak 5 languages, but if you are living in America, and hope to be a functioning member of American life, English should be one of those five!

I never said being bilingual wasn't a positive, what I said was that if you can't communicate using the language most Americans use, you're not a valuable asset to an employer in America.

[/ QUOTE ]

The people who hire people who can't speak english disagree with you.

Re: English-only policy
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]


We agree it's their own business whether they choose to learn English or not. We don't agree that they are entitled to a job without speaking English.

[/ QUOTE ]

Noone is entitled to a job. But if they can get a job without being able to speak english good luck to them.

[/ QUOTE ]

They got the job. Are they entitled to keep it?
Is this the employer's decision?

Re: English-only policy
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]


We agree it's their own business whether they choose to learn English or not. We don't agree that they are entitled to a job without speaking English.

[/ QUOTE ]

Noone is entitled to a job. But if they can get a job without being able to speak english good luck to them.

[/ QUOTE ]

They got the job. Are they entitled to keep it?
Is this the employer's decision?

[/ QUOTE ]

Noone is entitled to anyone elses resources unless stipulated in a contract or a parent child relationship. Employers have the right (in morality not in law) to hire and fire any person at any time for any reason as long as they aren't breaking any contracts they've signed.

Re: English-only policy
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
My problem is with the "mandatory" part of it [regarding Spanish skills for a job]. ... As to the OP, I also believe that a business is certainly entitled to require all employees to speak English.

[/ QUOTE ]

Hypocrisy ftw.

[/ QUOTE ]

Its not hypocrisy, it's common sense. What language are you communicating in now?

I certainly wouldn't hire someone who to work for me who couldn't communicate with me or my customers.

[/ QUOTE ]

But some people *would* hire someone who can't speak english. Often, this does not cause an inability to communicate with the boss, and often, these people don't directly interact with customers. What's so horrible about that?

Re: English-only policy
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
It is a positive to have employees who can communicate in Spanish. However, it is imperative that you be able to communicate in English!

[/ QUOTE ]

Why because you say so? Did you just declare an official state language for all of America right here on 2+2? Is that now the law of the land? Sorry, dude, but you don't get to tell every business and state/local govt in America which language it MUST conduct its business in.

[/ QUOTE ]

I never said I did. I simply said that if a business owner won't hire someone who can't speak English, good for him. He's got an advantage over someone who will when I need whatever service he provides.

A business owner has the right to hire whomever he chooses.

A question to you. If I have two otherwise equally qualified candidates apply for a job, with the exception that one cannot speak English, so I go with the one who can, would you support that candidates right to sue me for not hiring him, because I instead chose the other candidate?

[/ QUOTE ]

Has anyone seen the goalposts?

Re: English-only policy
 

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]


We agree it's their own business whether they choose to learn English or not. We don't agree that they are entitled to a job without speaking English.

[/ QUOTE ]

Noone is entitled to a job. But if they can get a job without being able to speak english good luck to them.

[/ QUOTE ]

They got the job. Are they entitled to keep it?

[/ QUOTE ]

No.

[ QUOTE ]
Is this the employer's decision?

[/ QUOTE ]

Both the employer and the employee have the "entitlement" to end the employment at any time for any reason.