Thread: ProEnglish Testimony: the EEOC and English-on-the job Rules

STATEMENT OF

K.C. McALPIN
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR

PROENGLISH

FOR THE

U. S. COMMISSION ON CIVIL RIGHTS

Briefing on

Specifying English as the Common Language of the Workplace

Friday, December 12, 2008



“Language is perhaps the strongest, perhaps most enduring link which unites menâ€

This happens, I know first hand, and the EEOC doesn't really care about American citizens.

By doing so, the EEOC is not only trampling on the rights of employers. It also is violating the civil rights of employees to work in a non-hostile environment, in which they are protected from racial and ethnic slurs and all forms of harassment including sexual harassment.

Why isn't ICE called in on my these case, where employers and undocumented immigrants are abusing American citizens. Treason in our country everywhere.

IMO, The EEOC is another Washington, DC mockery of justice.

The following complete list of references should follow Mr. McAlpin's statement to the Commission above. My apologies for not including them all originally.


"Thank you for the opportunity to present our views.

1. See references: Exhibit A.
2. Ibid.

3. Ibid.

4. 53 of 193 UN member nations according to Information Please Almanac, Ethnologue.com – project of SIL International, CIA World Fact Book – 2006, and UN member nation Internet websites.

5. See case references: Exhibit A.

6. Ibid.

7. Exhibit C. See also Exhibit B.

8. Ibid.

9. Waters v. Churchill, 511 U.S. 661, 114 S. Ct. 1878, 1886 (1994) (employer may prohibit employees from cursing, and may require them to be polite to customers).

10. Price Waterhouse v. Hopkins, 490 U.S. 228 (1989) (“preservation of an employer’s remaining freedom of choiceâ€