Summarize the key elements in the case. What legal statute(s) apply to the case? (See the list at the beginning of Exercise 17 for the 6 major federal laws.) What issue(s) must the court decide in the

                                                                                       Unlawful Language Discrimination

Language discrimination is one of the most common forms of prejudice and favoritism in workplaces. It can be considered as a mode of national origin partiality. Language discrimination is defined as the biased treatment of a person because of the nature of their speech that includes vocabulary, syntax, and accent (Klein, 2017). Besides, it involves the ability or inability of an individual to speak one language as a substitute for the other. As a mode of national origin discrimination, it is considered unlawful. The illegality of language discrimination depends on whether an individual was hired, promoted or fired as a result of the way they use language. This paper uses a case study that involves Lia Lee, a Laotian-American who felt that she was not promoted because of the nature of her speech (accent) to elaborate on the Federal statutes that can be applied to her case. Also, the issues the court must decide in her case and the verdict that can be delivered by the judge.

            In her case, Lia Lee wanted to be promoted from being a teller to working at the customer service desk in the Federal and State Bank but she was not promoted on grounds that her English was insufficient. She filed a lawsuit alleging the bank of unlawful discrimination based on her accent. Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 can be used in Lee's case. It is a set of Federal laws that are meant to protect employees from prejudice based on their nationality or race (Weiss, 2019). However, language discrimination focuses only on the nature of an individual's speech but not their appearance or color. Some government institutions and Federal courts argue that discriminating individuals based on language may be a form of racial discrimination owing to the fact that, for most people, the primary language is intently linked to their race and place of origin. Therefore, discriminating upon an individual based on their language or nature of speech can be considered as national origin discrimination which is unlawful.

            Before the court proceedings or delivering the verdict the Federal agency called Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) must investigate Ms. Lee's situation and test her proficiency in English (which involves the way she speaks or writes in English). If the Federal and State Bank denied Lee a promotion because of her proficiency in English, the company must provide a nondiscriminatory and legitimate reason for rejecting her application.  The EEOC agency helps in the interpretation and enforcement of laws that prohibit discrimination (Herndon, 2018). The agency also points out the level fluency required in company vary from one position or job to another (Craft et al., 2020). For instance, in any company, the fluency levels required in the warehousing departments are not the same as the customer service department, which means that uniform fluency requirements may be unlawful. Whether the rejection of Lee’s application is illegal or not, depends on her qualifications, the nature customer service department and whether her proficiency in English will harm her performance at the customer service desk.

            When delivering the verdict a judge must consider the available evidence. The Federal and State bank must provide legitimate and nondiscriminatory evidence for failing to promote Lia Lee to a customer service position because of her accent, fluency, and proficiency. Besides, they must prove that Lee’s qualifications did not match the nature of the anticipated position and that her accent or English proficiency would harm her performance at the customer care desk. If Lee’s accent does not affect her ability to communicate successfully in English then forcing her to be fluent may violate Title IV.

                                                                                                    References

Craft, J. T., Wright, K. E., Elizabeth Weissler, R., & Queen, R. M. (2020). Language and Discrimination: Generating Meaning, Perceiving Identities, and Discriminating Outcomes. Annual Review of Linguistics, 6.

Herndon, J. D. R. (2018). Equal Employment Opportunity Commission v. 2103 Restaurant Group LLC, et al.

Klein, J. M. (2017). Employment Discrimination Law.

Weiss, J. T. (2019). Civil Rights Act of 1964, Title VII. The Encyclopedia of Women and Crime, 1-3.