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.