ENGLISH RULES ARE “TOO BIG A RISK”: Employers can be held responsible for their employees’ misbehavior in all sorts of ways. They can be sued for sexual harassment. They can lose customers if their employees are viewed as rude. The best way to manage these risks varies from workplace to workplace. But sometimes English-speaking supervisors have required their bilingual employees to speak English on the job, so they can assure proper workplace decorum is being upheld and so customers and fellow employees don’t freak out (“They’re talking about me; I just know it!”) Courts have repeatedly upheld this. But these days it often doesn’t matter what the courts do; the EEOC can and does make employers with English-only rules miserable.

Last night I ran across a web site advising employers to avoid such rules. It says it’s “too big a risk,” and that may be right. Alas, there are so many different bodies of “law” at work these days. There is the law as Congress enacted it. Then there is the “law” as a court would interpret and apply it if there were a case before it. Then there is the “law” as interpreted by the EEOC. Unless and until the EEOC actually sues, that “law” is procedurally tricky to get in front of a court. Instead, the EEOC’s strategy is usually to investigate a non-compliant employer to death. The wiser course for employers is usually to comply.