Garcia v. Spun Steak Co.: Speak-English-Only Rules and the Demise of Workplace Pluralism Casenote 1 Asian Law Journal 1994

1 Asian L. J. 155 (1994)
Garcia v. Spun Steak Co.: Speak-English-Only Rules and the Demise of Workplace Pluralism

handle is hein.journals/aslj1 and id is 159 raw text is: Garcia v. Spun Steak Co.: Speak-
English-Only Rules and the Demise
of Workplace Pluralism
Edward M. Chent
The increasing number of Asian Pacific Islander and Latino immi-
grants to the United States has fueled the recent swell of litigation over
language rights in the workplace. Under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of
1964, language-based discrimination-including accent discrimination and
rules prohibiting the use of non-English languages in the workplace-is a
form of national origin discrimination. This Casenote examines Garcia v.
Spun Steak Co., a 1993 Ninth Circuit decision which rejected the plaintiffs'
claims that the company's Speak-English-Only rule had a disproportion-
ately adverse effect on its Latino employees. The author finds that the
Ninth Circuit's ruling displayed insensitivity to the unique nexus between
language and national origin identity. Speak-English-Only rules have a
disparate impact on language minorities because they suppress a core
aspect of ethnic identity, impair communication, and create an atmosphere
of inferiority, isolation and intimidation. Furthermore, the author explains
that the court improperly rejected the Equal Employment Opportunity
Commission Guidelines which presume such rules have a disparate impact
on nonnative English speakers. Finally, the author concludes that the
Garcia decision has grave implications for cultural and linguistic pluralism
in the United States.
I. LmRODUCTION
At Pomona Valley Community Hospital, Adelaida Dimaranan, a
Filipina nurse who speaks both Tagalog and English, was told that
she could not speak Tagalog on the job, even during her breaks, in
the cafeteria, or on the phone. When Dimaranan refused to comply
with this rule, she was demoted to a lower-paying position.'
t Staff Counsel, American Civil Liberties Union Foundation of Northern California. A.B.,
1975, University of California, Berkeley; J.D., 1979, Boalt Hall School of Law, University of
California, Berkeley. Copyright 0 1994 by Asian Law JournaL
Along with the Employment Law Center and the law firm of Coblentz, Cahen, McCabe & Breyer,
Mr. Chen represents the plaintiffs in Garcia v. Spun Steak Co., discussed herein.
1. Dimaranan v. Pomona Valley Hosp. Medical Ctr., 775 F. Supp. 338 (C.D. Cal. 1991) (finding
that defendant's no Tagalog rule was not motivated by an intent to discriminate on the basis of
national origin and that the rule could not be said to have a disparate impact because it was not in the
first instance facially neutral). See also Sarah Henry, Fighting Words, L.A. Tmms MAO., June 10, 1990,
at 10, 10.

What Is HeinOnline?

HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing thousands of academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.

Short-term subscription options include 24 hours, 48 hours, or 1 week to HeinOnline.

What Is HeinOnline?

Purchase Access

Contact Us

Log In

NEED HELP?

CONTACT US

Get started

Subscribe to our Newsletter