David T. Harmon and Mariya Gonor are co-chairs of the Executive Compensation and Employment Strategies Group at Norris McLaughlin P.A.
On March 1, President Donald Trump signed an executive order declaring English the official language of the United States. Depending on who you ask, this is either a long-overdue move toward national unity or a concerning shift that could marginalize non-English speakers. But let’s cut to the chase: What does this actually mean for employers and employees?
Can businesses now require employees to speak only English at work? Can your boss suddenly ban Spanish, Mandarin or any other language from the break room? Not so fast.
The law hasn’t changed — and neither have the risks
While the executive order makes a symbolic statement, it doesn’t rewrite employment law yet. At this time, the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission has long held that “English-only” workplace policies can be discriminatory under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 if they unfairly target employees based on national origin. That rule was not suspended with the executive order.
Let’s be clear: A blanket rule that forces employees to speak only English at all times is presumed illegal under EEOC guidelines. Why? Because a person’s primary language is often deeply tied to their cultural and ethnic identity. Prohibiting it in the workplace can create a hostile environment and limit job opportunities for non-native English speakers.
That means if your employer suddenly places a “Speak English Only” sign on the break room door, they could be opening themselves up to a big legal headache.
When can employers enforce English-only rules?
There are very few situations where an employer can legally require employees to speak only English — and even then, the rule must be narrowly tailored to a legitimate business need. Some examples where this might hold up in court include:
- Safety concerns. If employees work in a hazardous environment where communication is critical (think: an industrial site with flammable materials), requiring a common language could be justified.
- Customer service. If employees interact with customers who only speak English, an English-speaking requirement while performing job duties could be legal.
- Efficiency in teamwork. If a project requires multiple employees to collaborate, and some only speak English, a limited English-only rule while working on that task might be okay.
- Supervision requirements. If a supervisor only speaks English and needs to evaluate an employee’s performance in an English-speaking role, an English-only rule could be justifiable.
Notice the pattern? English-only rules must be necessary, not just convenient. And, importantly, they cannot extend beyond job duties. Employers cannot prohibit employees from speaking another language during breaks or personal conversations.
State laws add another layer of complexity
Federal law isn’t the only thing employers need to worry about. Some states, like New York and New Jersey, have similar limitations against English-only workplace policies. Thus, even if the administration were to do away with EEOC’s long-standing precedent, employers still must comply with state law addressing the issue.
- New York: The state’s Department of Labor explicitly warns that English-only rules can be unlawful, especially if they’re used to discriminate against employees based on their national origin. A policy banning certain languages (e.g., a “No Chinese” rule) would be a clear violation.
- New Jersey: Courts have ruled that language requirements aren’t automatically discriminatory under the state’s Law Against Discrimination (LAD), but if an employee can prove the rule was a proxy for national origin discrimination, the employer could be in trouble.
The bottom line
Trump’s executive order may be headline-grabbing, but when it comes to workplace policies, it doesn’t override existing employment laws. Employers cannot suddenly require English-only workplaces without a strong, legal justification.
For employees, this means your rights remain intact. If your employer enforces an unreasonable English-only rule, you may have legal recourse.
For employers, if you are wondering whether Trump’s executive order gives you a green light to implement English-only rules, the short answer is: Tread carefully.
Before enforcing any language policy, ask yourself the following four questions:
- Do I have a legitimate business need? If not, you could be violating federal and state laws.
- Am I applying the rule fairly? Selectively banning certain languages could be a sign of discrimination.
- Have I informed employees of the policy? If you enforce a language rule, employees must know when it applies and what the consequences are for violating it.
- Have I explored alternatives? If your concern is efficiency or communication, there may be other ways to address it without banning languages outright.
