HUMAN RESOURCES: Proper language
by Char Coburn
August 1, 2008
There’s something to be said for those wanting an ‘English-only’ plank in the ongoing immigration debate
For the past few weeks I’ve
been contemplating again tackling the ticklish subject of immigration. I was
prompted to do so after reading a couple of recent columns in the Reno Gazette Journal. Ruben
Navarrette’s column usually offers good food for thought, and the one I read is
no different. It ran right next to an editorial about English-only rules. In
some ways they offset each other — at least in my mind.
When I
think about this issue, I’ll admit that I get somewhat confused and conflicted.
I’ve heard it said that we are a nation of laws and those that break the law
must be held accountable. Then, I think of the person in a village in the
middle of a desolate country who wants only to have a better life and provide
for a family but has no way of doing so, other than crossing a border without
the legal right to do so. I recognize the contributions of the Hispanic
workforce — not just here on my property, but throughout the country. Then, I
read about the number of illegal immigrants who have not only broken the law by
coming into the United
States, but continue to break laws while
here. I’ve seen documents that support the position that our infrastructure is
suffering because of abuse by those here illegally. It’s quite the
conundrum.
One thing that’s certain is
that over the next 10 years employers in this country are going to be in
desperate need of workers. The “Boomers” are going to be retiring and with the
shrinking birth rate, there just aren’t enough help to take their places.
Having
said that, I still have a problem with individuals demanding certain things
without
acknowledging their responsibilities. According to Navarrette’s column, in
2006, the Hispanic community was asking for primarily for citizenship, arguing
that they have been productive members of the community since coming here
illegally. Now, some Hispanic groups are demanding an end to workplace raids
and a commitment from the next President that support of comprehensive
immigration reform will be a part of the first 100 days of the new
administration. There isn’t a whisper of acknowledgment of the initial
wrongdoing of entering the country illegally, or of responsibility to right
that wrong. Navarrette quotes Christine Neumann-Ortiz, executive director of
Voces de la Frontera, an immigrant rights organization, that a new round of
demands include “access to health care for all and good jobs” and an end to the
Iraq
war.
Suffice
to say Navarrette thinks it is a mistake for these activists to reach beyond
the 2006 goal of winning citizenship for illegal immigrants, at least at this
time.
Meanwhile,
the newspaper article that ran along with the Navarrette column tackled the
contentious issue of whether voting ballots should be printed in a variety of
languages or solely in English. The editorial said that the target of the
English-only ballot is the Hispanic community. It goes on to state that the
rule would also adversely affect individuals who speak Chinese, Tagalog, or an
African or Middle Eastern language.
Reading
between the lines on both these opinion pieces, I think the problem is the
perception by some that Hispanics, whether here legally or illegally, are
reluctant to fully become “Americans,” and learn to read, write and speak in
the predominate language of the county, which is English.
From
the human resources perspective, I must admit there are difficulties involved
with hiring non-English speaking employees. I’ve had applicants come in who are
unable to speak any English. There is quite often another person with them who
translates for them. This language barrier can be difficult, especially when it
comes to safety and service issues. But English-only rules can get an employer
into hot water, depending on how they are enforced. There are no easy
answers.
Don’t
look toward either the Democratic or Republican parties for a solution to the
illegal immigration question. Both sides have vastly different views on the
issue. Both have good and bad ideas. A compromise needs to be struck, but
extremes never want to negotiate. It also seems neither candidate for President
wants to tackle illegal immigration right now — Homeland Security has placed a
bigger burden on human resources to assure that illegal persons are not
employed.
The
problem is that we need the employees. I think the compromise must allow for
accountability for those who came here illegally, perhaps in the form of
affordable fines, delayed citizenship and forfeited social security benefits.
And then, for those who want to come here in the future, a mechanism must be in
place whereby they can do so without waiting years. Mandatory schooling and an
ongoing reporting process to assure that immigrants are remaining a productive
part of our society might also help.
On the other hand, if
immigrants truly want to come to this country and become part of the success
story that we are, then perhaps they should adopt American mores and culture.
Learning English would be a good start.
Char Coburn
char@bonanzacasino.com
Char Coburn is the director of human resources for the Bonanza Casino in Reno.
She has been at the casino for the
past 20 years and is a human resources
generalist who wears many hats.
Did you enjoy this article? Click here to subscribe to the magazine.
