Would this be employment discrimination?

maninthestreet

so are you fluent in Spanish or not?

Morphlaw

Yes I am fluent in spanish.

More so than your average 'foreigner' - as my family is Spanish, I go to Spain regularly, I read spanish websites, news, I watch television etc.

I have a spanish passport, and always have done. Thus Brexit isn't relevant.

The job doesn't involve translation, and it isn't governmental or military in nature either.

I struggle to think of a valid reason they would want a spaniard who actually grew up there and now lives in London - over someone almost the same except having always had their permanent residence here in London.

To me it gets more outrageous the more I think about it frankly. The answer to whether it is disciminatory in english law is unclear to me. Most of you have said it isn't, though if a lawyer working in the field is about I'd be interested to hear their thoughts.

Savvy_Sue

It may be that as well as the language, they also want someone who 'gets' the culture - or rather 'has' the culture. And it may be that they have a narrow view of what this entails.

I know a couple of British families who have raised their children in France. To my ear, one set of children don't sound English when they're speaking their mother tongue. I don't know if they sound French when they're speaking that, because my French isn't good enough.

But culturally, they are definitely more French than English!

sangie595

Morphlaw wrote: »

The answer to whether it is disciminatory in english law is unclear to me. Most of you have said it isn't, though if a lawyer working in the field is about I'd be interested to hear their thoughts.

The point is that something is only discriminatory in law if the action continues - and it hasn't. And who is being discriminatory? The agent is interpreting what the client wants, and from a perspective, from what you say, of not speaking Spanish. So does the agent understand what the employer wants - it doesn't sound like it. But you queried what the agent said and explained your circumstances, and they said they would put you forward. In any language, that is "case over". Some chance words over the phone, that could be interpreted in a million ways and which are totally unclear, do not constitute discrimination.

Morphlaw

sangie595 wrote: »

The point is that something is only discriminatory in law if the action continues - and it hasn't. And who is being discriminatory? The agent is interpreting what the client wants, and from a perspective, from what you say, of not speaking Spanish. So does the agent understand what the employer wants - it doesn't sound like it. But you queried what the agent said and explained your circumstances, and they said they would put you forward. In any language, that is "case over". Some chance words over the phone, that could be interpreted in a million ways and which are totally unclear, do not constitute discrimination.

You're quite right regarding the agent - I wasn't entirely sure why she was so strict, and wondered perhaps if she had misinterpreted her client's instructions. I raised this with her in a subtle way which may have helped her decide to forward my details after all.

I didn't come here to make a discrimination complaint however - as I got what I wanted. But this is the second time this has happened to me in the last two months, hence my interest.

However, I'm surprised that the discrimination has to 'continue'. That sounds relevant in the case of ongoing workplace discrimination, and not the initial discrimination when profiling candidates.

sangie595

Morphlaw wrote: »

You're quite right regarding the agent - I wasn't entirely sure why she was so strict, and wondered perhaps if she had misinterpreted her client's instructions. I raised this with her in a subtle way which may have helped her decide to forward my details after all.

I didn't come here to make a discrimination complaint however - as I got what I wanted. But this is the second time this has happened to me in the last two months, hence my interest.

However, I'm surprised that the discrimination has to 'continue'. That sounds relevant in the case of ongoing workplace discrimination, and not the initial discrimination when profiling candidates.

The law makes a requirement that people should try to resolve an issue before running off to court. And something is actually only discrimination in law when a court says it is. What your or I think is discrimination really is only an opinion until the court decides.

So, in your case, let's assume that your opinion is that this is discrimination - which is not at all clear it is. But let's assume it is and the phrase used is "we want someone who is Spanish and born and brought up in Spain". So that is clear - they are setting a specific criteria that only certain people can meet. Now even that may not be discrimination! There actually could be a very good reason for stipulating something of this nature, and there are exceptions in the law that actually allow discrimination. But let's again make the assumption that there is no good reason.

You don't just run off and put in a court case. First you must question this requirement, as you did. And as a result of that, it changed. That is what should happen. If they refuse to change, that is the continuing act. And having refused you then have a right to take it further if you wish to do so.

People may discriminate unintentionally. In point of fact, there are so many things to potentially consider, you could say that absolutely every action might discriminate against someone. But to make a case, the adjustment must be practicable and refused. Taking a different example, this agency uses the written word to advertise? That is discrimination against every person with dyslexia! If it isn't in Braille , it discriminates against blind people! But is it practicable for them to make every adjustment possible? No. But if you, as a blind person, wanted to know about this job, it would be reasonable to ask for adjustments to help you apply. Then the agency would have to decide how practicable out was to respond to that request. It is the respons, in this case, that makes an actionable discrimination or not. Not just a refusal, but the reasonableness of the refusal.

These examples are no different from the situation you face - possibly. You think the agent said that you must be Spanish ( whatever that means). You queried that and showed that toy met whatever that criteria was about. Job done - they agreed and acted upon it.

Does that now make sense?

DebtFreeWannaBE

Alice_Walker wrote: »

Your qualification is Masters level, there is no doubt that you have an excellent grasp of the language, but it doesn't mean you speak it like a native.

They're not specifying that the applicant must be Spanish, what they're looking for is someone with strong experience of speaking the language in a native setting, for instance it could be an English person that has lived in Spain, or who spent a year there as part of their studies. This is not discrimination, it's simply being picky/ highly selective.

Agreed. Mentioning A Level Spanish doesn't actually help, because the type of Spanish that you learn in the school is quite a bit different from native dialects. That being said, if you grew up speaking Spanish with your mother at home, then that would help you qualify and you should promote yourself as bilingual on your resume.

As a "native English speaker" in the German market, I can tell you the reasons they are picky and want a "native" speaker are very many and usually very good. But a bilingual person would have the same "native" qualifications. IMO.

sjbrun

They may want a native so they can get local knowledge they wouldn't otherwise get like to be able to tell their customers where the best beach is for kids or for OAP's or the best restaurant.

Being able to speak a language isn't always enough

FBaby

Is it telephone based? If so, then I do believe as it's been mentioned that it is about the accent. There is nothing worse than being on the phone to someone who tries to explain something and you can't get the instructions because you can't understand their accent.

Having a parent from that country and high level degree doesn't mean in any way that the person will have a good accent.

ScorpiondeRooftrouser

sjbrun wrote: »

They may want a native so they can get local knowledge they wouldn't otherwise get like to be able to tell their customers where the best beach is for kids or for OAP's or the best restaurant.

Being able to speak a language isn't always enough

They don't want a native. They want a "native-level Spanish speaker". It's not the same thing at all.