Ask HR: Can Employers Require Workers to Speak Only English?

​SHRM President and Chief Executive Officer Johnny C. Taylor, Jr., SHRM-SCP, is answering HR questions as part of a series for USA Today.

Do you have an HR or work-related question you'd like him to answer? Submit it here. 

I work at a customer service center. One of our customers witnessed me speaking Arabic to another associate and complained to management. We were told to only speak English while on duty. Can my employer require us to speak English at work? –Eryn

Johnny C. Taylor, Jr.: Many employers have general English language requirements when necessary for employee safety and effective operation. However, your employer may run into some trouble by applying an English-only workplace policy to all instances.

Knowing if your dialogue with your colleague pertained to business functions would be helpful. If so, your employer might have some leeway in how it is carried out. Conveying business-related information to staff or communicating with English-speaking customers may necessitate workers speaking English to communicate effectively in a common language. Regulating language outside such scenarios likely serves no legitimate business function and is generally discouraged.

The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission sees English-only mandates as "a burdensome condition of employment" that risks drawing its scrutiny. Additionally, limiting employees from speaking their native language can create an "atmosphere of inferiority, isolation, and intimidation based on national origin." It can also exemplify discrimination based on national origin in violation of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act.

Government regulations aside, English-only policies can send a poor message to the workforce and customers. They serve to exclude people from the workplace. This runs counter to the tenets of diversity, equity and inclusion, which seek to broaden businesses' market and talent recruitment reach. What happens when a customer speaks another language? Wouldn't it be advantageous for the business if a worker could talk with them in their native language? Again, people need to communicate to conduct business effectively, so using a shared language makes sense. But having flexibility allows companies to adapt to nuanced situations and welcome a diverse workforce.

Verify with your management and HR teams the details of their workplace English-only policy. Is it a written policy or a verbal mandate? Does it delineate between work-related and other communication? I hope this sheds some light on your employer's rights and limits in regulating language use in the workplace.

I am a strategic planner for an engineering design firm. I also do some business consulting on the side. I appeared on a local news segment in my role as a consultant and made a comment that my employer viewed as critical of their operation. I was disciplined by HR, which impacted my performance review and ultimately hurt my performance bonus. Is my company allowed to do this? –Gil

 Johnny C. Taylor, Jr.: The short answer here is: It depends. Which local laws, company policies, or employment agreements apply must be considered to determine whether your conduct warrants such disciplinary action.

For instance: Do your employer's policies forbid you from holding a second job while working for them? If so, your consulting work may be a violation. Even if this isn't the case, employers often have policies prohibiting employees from running a competing business. If your business crosses that line, you may be in breach.

While I can't speak to the details of your on-air commentary, take a closer look at your statements to specify what you said, what you meant and how your employer interpreted it. Did you refer to your employer or their work explicitly or implicitly? Your employers' policies around these scenarios often use broad language, leaving enforcement up to interpretation. Ask your HR team to clarify which policies you violated.

Some states limit employers' ability to discipline employees for lawful off-duty conduct. If this isn't the case, your employer may have the right to act, especially if it affects the organization's brand.

Ultimately, you may have a valid claim if you didn't breach any policy or employment agreements and did not expressly discuss your company's business—particularly if your employer's conclusion was tainted by an incomplete or biased investigation. Hopefully, this clarifies your concerns. Best of luck.