English Only Rules Must Be Justified by Business Necessity

According to EEOC guidelines, an employer may impose an “English only” rule where it is adopted for non-discriminatory reasons, and is justified by business necessity or safety concerns. An employer may not prohibit employees from speaking another language during break periods, or when the language being spoken does not make a difference in job performance. Doing so may be evidence of national origin discrimination.

Examples of business necessity and safety concerns provided by the EEOC include: communications with customers, co-workers or supervisors who only speak English; emergency situations in which employees must speak a common language to promote safety; and cooperative work assignments where the rule is needed to promote efficiency.

In evaluating business necessity, the federal district court of Connecticut has held that an “English only” rule may be imposed only if it is “vital” to the business, not merely because it is beneficial or convenient. EEOC v. Beauty Enterprises, Inc., 2005 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 25869 (D. Conn. 2005).

As some 45 million Americans speak a language other than English at home, and some 10.5 million speak little or no English, employers will increasingly face communication challenges in the workplace. Handling them thoughtfully and within legal boundaries will be necessary to avoid national origin based discrimination claims.