Some jobs require not just bilingual ability, but fluency in a particular language other than English. Hiring for that specific skill isn’t discrimination.
Recent case: Hamida worked as a social worker for the Illinois Department of Human Services. When budget cuts required layoffs, Hamida was among those who lost their jobs.
She sued, alleging that she had been passed over for a job that required foreign language proficiency, and that she spoke two foreign languages, including Farsi and Darai.
The department explained it selected a less-senior social worker who speaks Spanish because it needed a fluent speaker of Spanish, not just any language.
The court threw out the case, citing the irrational argument Hamida put forth—essentially that any second language was good enough for the bilingual position. (Naficy v. Illinois Department of Human Services, No. 11-2144, 7th Cir., 2012)
- Firing those with obsolete skills isn't age bias
- Butler County contemplates settling bias claims
- Court nixes Section 1983 protection for age bias cases
- USERRA: Beware any reference to military service when justifying discipline
- 'Will work for less!' Be wary of reduced-comp pleas from desperate employees