[lg policy] Canada: Employees lose Via Rail language policy challenge

Dave Sayers dave.sayers at CANTAB.NET
Sat Jun 19 11:24:32 UTC 2010 

Some other interesting refs on the tensions of between existing 
‘authentic’ native speakers and new second-language learners:

Lyster, R. 1987. Speaking immersion. Canadian Modern Language Review 
43(4): 701–717.

Robert, E. 2009. Accommodating ‘‘new’’ speakers? An attitudinal 
investigation of L2 speakers of Welsh in south-east Wales. International 
Journal of the Sociology of Language 195: 93–116.

I think there's a fairly weighty sociolinguistic literature on 
'authenticity' more generally.

Dave

--
Dr. Dave Sayers
Honorary Research Fellow
School of the Environment and Society
Swansea University
d.sayers at swansea.ac.uk
http://swansea.academia.edu/DaveSayers



On 19:59, Julia deBres wrote:
> Re: 'Pakeha (non-Maori) speaks Maori: how wonderful', I see your point 
> but this would only be the attitude among a very small proportion of 
> New Zealanders, because:
>
> a) some Maori don't appreciate Pakeha speaking Maori (bad experiences 
> in the past, suspicion about motivations, feeling that Pakeha are 
> trying to take over the language like they took over the land, 
> discomfort about Pakeha being able to speak Maori when most Maori 
> cannot, etc).
>
> b) many (perhaps most) Pakeha not only wouldn't view it as a 
> 'wonderful' thing than Pakeha could speak Maori, because they see the 
> language as 'useless', 'dying', 'only spoken by 0.00000001% of the 
> world's population', etc, but would actually dislike it - because 
> perceptions of the language being valued by other Pakeha would seem to 
> signify some kind of a power shift in the status of this previously 
> (and still) oppressed language, in comparison to English.  It's like 
> the English Only movement in the USA - members of powerful groups 
> often feel threatened by minority languages even when those languages 
> pose no objective threat at all.  Resistance is a big part of the picture.
>
> So the only ones who would actually think it 'wonderful' for a Pakeha 
> person to speak Maori are a small proportion of non-Maori New 
> Zealanders with positive attitudes towards the Maori language, and a 
> certain proportion of Maori New Zealanders who think of the language 
> as something that should be available to all.  For these people, sure, 
> 'wonderful', for the rest the very opposite.
>
> Maybe this is particularly the case with national indigenous languages 
> that have been caught up in power struggles with colonial majority 
> languages for centuries - I expect more New Zealanders would find it 
> cool for a New Zealander to be able to speak Bengali for example.
>
> But I think this is a general phenomenon regarding the attitudes of 
> majority language speakers towards minority languages, and it is more 
> or less what I wrote my PhD about:
>
> http://researcharchive.vuw.ac.nz/handle/10063/687
>
> Julia
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> *From:* Anthea Fraser Gupta <A.F.Gupta at leeds.ac.uk>
> *To:* Language Policy List <lgpolicy-list at groups.sas.upenn.edu>
> *Sent:* Sat, 19 June, 2010 12:06:18 PM
> *Subject:* RE: [lg policy] Canada: Employees lose Via Rail language 
> policy challenge
>
> Yes to both Julia and Stan. Most people learn languages because they 
> need them, and therefore the languages of the powerful are more likely 
> to be learned. Where multiple languages are needed, they get acquired.
>
> But I don't agree that members of powerful groups lose power by 
> speaking another language. On the contrary...
>
> As a general rule, if a member of a  lower prestige group (say, a 
> group associated with recent migration to a place, or an 'indigenous 
> minority') speaks the boss language that's routine, but if a boss 
> person speaks the lower group's language, that's praiseworthy. 
> Compare, for example:
>
> British Bengali speaks Bengali and English ("well, obviously")
> White English person speaks Bengali and English ("wonderful -- how 
> clever")
>
> Maori speaks Maori and English ("well, obviously -- nice that they've 
> kept their ancestral language")
> Pakeha speaks Maori and English ("wonderful!").
>
> Just supply your own examples.....
>
> Anthea
>
> *    *    *    *    *
> Anthea Fraser Gupta (Dr)
> School of English, University of Leeds, LS2 9JT
> <www.leeds.ac.uk/english/staff/afg 
> <http://www.leeds.ac.uk/english/staff/afg><http://www.leeds.ac.uk/english/staff/afg>>
> *    *    *    *    *
>
> ________________________________
> From: lgpolicy-list-bounces at groups.sas.upenn.edu 
> <mailto:lgpolicy-list-bounces at groups.sas.upenn.edu> 
> [lgpolicy-list-bounces at groups.sas.upenn.edu 
> <mailto:lgpolicy-list-bounces at groups.sas.upenn.edu>] On Behalf Of 
> Julia deBres [juliadebres at yahoo.com <mailto:juliadebres at yahoo.com>]
> Sent: 16 June 2010 06:58
> To: Language Policy List
> Subject: Re: [lg policy] Canada: Employees lose Via Rail language 
> policy challenge
>
> Isn't it just that members of powerful groups are less likely to 
> accommodate linguistically to members of less powerful groups?
>
> I'm not saying Francophones are powerless, but whatever the status of 
> French in Quebec, French speakers are up against the huge national and 
> international prestige of English, which gives them a reason to 
> accommodate and English speakers a reason not to try to accommodate.
>
> It seems the same everwhere:
>
> On the national level, Maori New Zealanders are more likely to speak 
> English than other New Zealanders are likely to speak Maori
> On the international level, (I understand) Polish people are more 
> likely to speak German than Germans are to speak Polish
>
> <Less powerful group> is more likely to speak <powerful language> than 
> <powerful group> is likely to speak <less powerful language>
>
> And it's not just that the English speakers have less of an incentive 
> to accommodate, it's also that they are likely to experience 
> resistance to doing it - because part of being in the powerful group 
> is working to retain that advantage and accepting a need to learn 
> French would feel like letting a little part of that power go.
>
>
> ________________________________
> From: Stan-sandy Anonby <stan-sandy_anonby at sil.org 
> <mailto:stan-sandy_anonby at sil.org>>
> To: Language Policy List <lgpolicy-list at groups.sas.upenn.edu 
> <mailto:lgpolicy-list at groups.sas.upenn.edu>>; Dave Sayers 
> <dave.sayers at cantab.net <mailto:dave.sayers at cantab.net>>
> Sent: Wed, 16 June, 2010 1:01:20 AM
> Subject: Re: [lg policy] Canada: Employees lose Via Rail language 
> policy challenge
>
> Good points, Dave,
>
> You're right. Language learning is difficult. Few people like language 
> learning.
>
> Just that the  French people, despite their anti-English laws, are far 
> more bilingual than the anglophones. It's just as difficult for them 
> to learn English as it is for us to learn French. And Quebec's laws 
> make it very hard for them to go to English immersion schools. In 
> English Canada, French immersion schools are free and ubiquitous. Yet 
> Quebecois often learn English, and we very seldom speak French.
>
> Stan
>
> On Tue, 15 Jun 2010 14:57:31 +0100
> Dave Sayers <dave.sayers at cantab.net 
> <mailto:dave.sayers at cantab.net><mailto:dave.sayers at cantab.net 
> <mailto:dave.sayers at cantab.net>>> wrote:
> >Tricky one this, and echoes many similar cases around the world. My main
> >problem (from a purely academic point of view!) is the assumption that
> >language learning is easy enough to do - and, more to the point, equally
> >easy for everyone. I'm not just talking about the 'critical period' of
> >language acquisition, but that some people are cognitively not as well
> >equipped for learning second languages, either due to specific learning
> >difficulties (which often go undiagnosed, e.g. dyslexia) or just through
> >regular variation in the ability to learn languages, not to mention
> >confidence in performing your newly acquired language.
> >
> >There's also a class issue of sorts here. Even if employees are
> >supported in learning French (or whatever other language in other
> >cases), I'm fairly sure there would be homework. Would that be easier or
> >harder in a poor household, where there might be all sorts of other
> >pressures? What about people who have responsibilities outside their
> >working hours, like unpaid care? These kinds of details can be 
> glossed over.
> >
> >Just to be clear, I'm not arguing on either side of this argument. As I
> >understand it there are a good deal of monolingual francophones in
> >Canada, which does create a more convincing case for requiring French
> >language proficiency in certain jobs (unlike other cases where that
> >rationale is missing, e.g. Wales). Still, I'd stick my neck out and
> >suggest it's not always about disinterest or distaste towards language
> >learning (though no doubt that's can be a factor).
> >
> >Dave
> >
> >
> >--
> >Dr. Dave Sayers
> >Honorary Research Fellow
> >School of the Environment and Society
> >Swansea University
> >d.sayers at swansea.ac.uk 
> <mailto:d.sayers at swansea.ac.uk><mailto:d.sayers at swansea.ac.uk 
> <mailto:d.sayers at swansea.ac.uk>>
> >http://swansea.academia.edu/DaveSayers
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >On -10/01/37 20:59,  wrote:
> >> <pre wrap>
> >> I'm Canadian. But on an emotional level, I just don't understand why
> >> my fellow anglos fight so hard not to speak French. I'm sure Via gives
> >> its employees all sorts of opportunity to learn the language. Why
> >> isn't this viewed as a boon, a privilege?
> >>
> >> I guess it's for two reasons:
> >> 1) Most people dislike learning languages that they really don't need
> >> to use.
> >> 2) Most people are only motivated to learn languages higher up the
> >> prestige ladder.
> >>
> >> Stan Anonby
> >>
> >> On Sun, 13 Jun 2010 12:18:31 -0400
> >>  Harold Schiffman <hfsclpp at gmail.com 
> <mailto:hfsclpp at gmail.com><mailto:hfsclpp at gmail.com 
> <mailto:hfsclpp at gmail.com>>> wrote:
> >> </pre><blockquote type=cite><pre wrap>
> >> Employees lose Via Rail language policy challenge
> >>
> >> James Kosowan/Canwest News Service
> >>
> >>
> >> Wednesday, Sept. 9, 2009
> >>
> >> OTTAWA -- Five Via Rail employees have lost a court battle claiming
> >> they should not have to speak French to work on routes in Western
> >> Canada because there are already enough bilingual employees to pick up
> >> the slack. Federal Court Justice Luc Martineau dismissed the veteran
> >> employees’ quest for financial compensation for the wages they say
> >> they lost because they were denied the most senior service jobs. The
> >> unilingual employees, who have all worked at Via for 24 years or more,
> >> are based in Winnipeg and Vancouver.
> >>
> >> The workers unsuccessfully challenged Via’s requirement for
> >> bilingualism for onboard service staff on the Western Transcontinental
> >> route between Toronto and Vancouver, which mainly serves Canadian and
> >> foreign tourists. “Via is an important instrument of government policy
> >> in transportation, employment and promotion of linguistic duality and
> >> bilingualism in Canada,” wrote Justice Martineau. A francophone
> >> travelling in Western Canada should have the same entitlement to
> >> service and emergency instructions in French, just as a unilingual
> >> anglophone travelling in Quebec would expect service in English,
> >> Justice Martineau said.
> >>
> >> The rulings were released Wednesday, less than one month after the
> >> railway came under fire following complaints emergency evacuation
> >> instructions had only been given in English, angering some francophone
> >> passengers travelling from Toronto to Ottawa. Via, a federal Crown
> >> corporation, adopted the bilingualism requirement for new employees in
> >> 1986 and the staffers say they have missed out on promotions and some
> >> were not given French language training to achieve bilingual status.
> >> They also argued that 75% of employees on the Western Transcontinental
> >> are bilingual, which ensures services can be provided in both official
> >> languages without affecting the futures of the unilingual workers. The
> >> judge noted that Via disputes the number.
> >>
> >> The employees were seeking, among other things, monetary compensation
> >> for lost wages and pension benefits and damages for what some
> >> described as “humiliation and embarrassment.”  The judge handed down
> >> five separate rulings, but he noted they affected dozens of other
> >> complainants. The five employees who challenged Via’s language policy
> >> in court were Mark Collins, Brian Norton, Margaret Temple, and Wendy
> >> Seesahai, who are all based in Winnipeg, and Brenda Bonner, who lives
> >> in Vancouver. They were seeking varying amounts in compensation and
> >> other damages. The highest claim came from Seesahai, who wanted
> >> $150,000.
> >>
> >>
> >> 
> http://www.nationalpost.com/news/Employees+lose+Rail+language+policy+challenge/1976879/story.html#ixzz0qkaxeR94
> >>
> >> --
> >> **************************************
> >> 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,
> >> and to write directly to the original sender of any offensive message.
> >> A copy of this may be forwarded to this list as well.  (H. Schiffman,
> >> Moderator)
> >>
> >> For more information about the lgpolicy-list, go to
> >> https://groups.sas.upenn.edu/mailman/
> >> listinfo/lgpolicy-list
> >> *******************************************
> >>
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> This message came to you by way of the lgpolicy-list mailing list
> >> lgpolicy-list at groups.sas.upenn.edu 
> <mailto:lgpolicy-list at groups.sas.upenn.edu><mailto:lgpolicy-list at groups.sas.upenn.edu 
> <mailto:lgpolicy-list at groups.sas.upenn.edu>>
> >> To manage your subscription unsubscribe, or arrange digest format:
> >> https://groups.sas.upenn.edu/mailman/listinfo/lgpolicy-list
> >> </pre></blockquote><pre wrap>
> >>
> >>
> >> </pre></body>
> >> </html>
> >> </html>
> >_______________________________________________
> >This message came to you by way of the lgpolicy-list mailing list
> >lgpolicy-list at groups.sas.upenn.edu 
> <mailto:lgpolicy-list at groups.sas.upenn.edu><mailto:lgpolicy-list at groups.sas.upenn.edu 
> <mailto:lgpolicy-list at groups.sas.upenn.edu>>
> >To manage your subscription unsubscribe, or arrange digest format: 
> https://groups.sas.upenn.edu/mailman/listinfo/lgpolicy-list
>
> _______________________________________________
> This message came to you by way of the lgpolicy-list mailing list
> lgpolicy-list at groups.sas.upenn.edu 
> <mailto:lgpolicy-list at groups.sas.upenn.edu><mailto:lgpolicy-list at groups.sas.upenn.edu 
> <mailto:lgpolicy-list at groups.sas.upenn.edu>>
> To manage your subscription unsubscribe, or arrange digest format: 
> https://groups.sas.upenn.edu/mailman/listinfo/lgpolicy-list
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> This message came to you by way of the lgpolicy-list mailing list
> lgpolicy-list at groups.sas.upenn.edu 
> <mailto:lgpolicy-list at groups.sas.upenn.edu>
> To manage your subscription unsubscribe, or arrange digest format: 
> https://groups.sas.upenn.edu/mailman/listinfo/lgpolicy-list
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listserv.linguistlist.org/pipermail/lgpolicy-list/attachments/20100619/9930cb83/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
_______________________________________________
This message came to you by way of the lgpolicy-list mailing list
lgpolicy-list at groups.sas.upenn.edu
To manage your subscription unsubscribe, or arrange digest format: https://groups.sas.upenn.edu/mailman/listinfo/lgpolicy-list

More information about the Lgpolicy-list mailing list