New Zealand: Supermarket under fire for English only rule Published: 6:03PM Thursday April 02, 2009

[Harold Schiffman]

Supermarket under fire for English only rule  Published: 6:03PM
Thursday April 02, 2009


A Wellington supermarket is under fire for ordering workers to only
speak English. The Thorndon New World has told staff they may get a
warning if they break the rule and a notice to staff posted on the
supervisor's kiosk spells out the English language policy.
But both customers and experts are unimpressed by the notice.


"It seems pretty amazing, in New Zealand in this day and age when
we're such a multi-cultural country, it's the sort of thing you'd
expect in New Zealand in the 1930s," says employment law expert Peter
Cullen. The notice says foreign languages make customers and staff
uncomfortable.


"It is certainly discriminatory and I would like this company to look
again at its policies and remove that discrimination aspect from
them," says National Distribution Union president, Robert Reid.
Earlier in the week a sign was displayed telling staff if they were
caught speaking a different language they may get a warning, however
that notice has now come down.


Cullen says if a worker does get a warning for speaking a different
language "they should challenge it".Under human rights commission
guidelines, an English-only policy can only be justified for reasons
such as health and safety. Five years ago Auckland's Fort Richard
Laboratories brought in an English-only policy, saying it was a vital
in the manufacture of medical supplies.


Fort Richard says they were allowed to retain the policy after
discussions with the Human Rights Commission. New World told ONE News
the notices had been issued in error, staff wouldn't get disciplined
for speaking foreign languages and the matter was being investigated.

http://tvnz.co.nz/national-news/supermarket-under-fire-english-only-rule-2614438

-- 
**************************************
N.b.: Listing on the lgpolicy-list is merely intended as a service to
its members
and implies neither approval, confirmation nor agreement by the owner
or sponsor of
the list as to the veracity of a message's contents. Members who
disagree with a
message are encouraged to post a rebuttal. (H. Schiffman, Moderator)
*******************************************