I think it's a good idea. More companies should do this.

I think, as long as they only require it when employees are on the clock, and make exceptions for break times, if everyone agrees, or they're helping a customer, this is perfectly legal. Aside from the legal aspect, I think it's a good move. I hate it when I'm in a business and there are customers around, meanwhile employees are chatting away about their personal lives. When it's not in English, I have no idea if they're discussing a pressing business need, talking about their hot dates for the weekend, or, yes, talking about customers. It is absolutely exclusionary to speak in a foreign language when 1) you do speak the country's native language, and 2)others who don't speak the language are about.

When Alcatraz does some real journalistic work, say, an in-depth investigation of murdered Central American refugees who attempted to pass through Mexico, I'll be impressed.

Until then, file this under 'Amateur Race Baiting' and leave it there.

the real issue is: why HAVE a rule for that? Has there BEEN a problem?

Sometimes you make rules you don't really need, for very low incidence situations... and then there is a reaction SOLELY based on the fact you have a rule.

It is possible that there are a NUMBER of different languages going on in some places.

What to do? Put on the customer service gameface, and make things happen. Just like in any other store.

OTOH, Lalo has a rep for this sort of thing, so many grains of salt needed.

Bah, ya don' need to shop in Whole-Paycheck anyway... there are alternatives.

My especial favorites are the Korean market, and this Super-Mercardo I know... and both places there's a whole lot of gesturing, sign language, and guesswork involved. But I guess that's considered OK, since it isn't English, being a problem.

Whole Foods is based in Austin Texas. I would imagine with the bilingual nature of the local population, it is probably a very good idea. As a business owner, who might make an exception for one language, I can also imagine being sued for not making an exception for ALL of them.

Sometimes it is just about not opening the door to chaos.

I used to work for a manufacturing company whose assembly staff was comprised almost entirely of immigrants from several countries. I'm not aware of any policy in place that prevented them from speaking their primary languages, but most were respectful of those who didn't understand. The departments would all mingle during pot lucks and other functions, and there was a lot of switching back and forth between languages, but that was mostly so those with more limited English could get clarification from those who spoke and understood it more fluently, etc.

That said, I do understand, and have seen how language barriers can create tension between people, especially in the work place.

As long as the store employee can say something like "How can I help you?" in English, and then assist me in whatever I need their assistance with, then I don't care what language they were speaking earlier or what language they'll be speaking afterward.

I guess my point is that I understand why such a policy would be implemented, but I don't think that policy is an effective way to deal with it (unless you're trying to eliminate a particular demographic from your employ, although I don't think that's the case here given the type of work described).

so... now we know where this is coming from:
http://www.nbcnews.com/business/whole-foods-workers-suspended-over-speaking-spanish-6C10222989

You know, and I'm not sure what this says about me, but if I'm shopping at a place such as an Asian Market, Mexican Restaurant, etc., and people are chattering away in other languages, it wouldn't bother me, as long as I'm getting whatever attention I need as a customer (I'm pretty low-maintenance). But if I were to walk into a B&N in town, and the cashiers suddenly started chattering in another language during my transaction, I think I'd be annoyed. I wonder if this makes me an asshole?

The real question here, is do you think anyone other than Whole Foods should be in charge of what language you speak when you are on the job, as their employee?

I don't. Don't like it, don't work for them, or don't patronize them, but language is a huge part of cultural identity, and if you want your business to project certain values, and attitudes, and avoid a lot of unpleasantness, you need to have a policy.

I worked in one office, where we had a few women who got together and whispered, and another group of smokers who walked away from the building and chatted extensively for long periods. Both of these groups did a lot to destroy morale in this particular work place. It was a poisonous climate.

Think of having a heart attack in their store.

Can you be sure what the response is?

This requirement is one aiding fluency, too. No one can skate by ducking the customer.

Wrong? I think so, but that's a more complicated call, and opinions may differ.

Stupid? Definitely

I don't really "get" people who are bothered by other languages being spoken. Does it really make them THAT uncomfortable? I think Americans are accustomed to the luxury of speaking -- and hearing -- English everywhere. I just saw way too many of those people on my last trip to Europe.

Whole Foods is based in Austin Texas. I would imagine with the bilingual nature of the local population, it is probably a very good idea.

I live in Austin. The bilingual nature of the local population has never been a problem for me. I learned how to order food and ask directions in Spanish, which helps at places like, say, Mexican meat markets/grocery stores. But, 99% of the time, Spanish speakers here know more English than I know Spanish.

The issue at hand seems to be whether employees should be able to speak another language to each other. As long as they're not ignoring me and are cordial to me, I could care less whether I hear them speaking Spanish/Chinese/Klingon to each other after quickly ringing up my order. If a customer is so bothered by that, that customer has some issues that I doubt this Whole Foods "policy" would fix.

tl;dr: The people who feel uncomfortable with another language simply being spoken in their presence deserve to feel uncomfortable.

"The issue at hand seems to be whether employees should be able to speak another language to each other"

This is not the issue.

If you had bother to read the links, you would know the answer to this. They can speak any language they want to each other, just not when they are on the clock.

Nice to know you are comfortable in Spanish. Hope you get equally comfortable with Farsi, and Arabic, if this ever becomes a civil rights issue.

"I think Americans are accustomed to the luxury of speaking -- and hearing -- English everywhere. I just saw way too many of those people on my last trip to Europe."

So are the Europeans, And if most of them did not have English as a second language, they would not be able to communicate at all.

For some odd reason, very few Italians and Greeks know Danish, and vica versa.

I don't just "travel" in Europe. I have lived there.
I think most Americans view Europe through their own prism of cultural biases, and you clearly, are no exception.

I did read the links. On the clock, or off, this would control how employees speak to each other. I think that's silly. I have no problem with a company hiring only employees fluent in English -- or bilingual (many TX employers require Spanish skills,for example). That helps make sure they can speak to the customers. But when they're talking to each other and NOT to the customer, I think it's silly to control what language they speak.

So are the Europeans, And if most of them did not have English as a second language, they would not be able to communicate at all.

I lived in Europe, too. Germany.

You are somewhat proving my point by emphasizing that most Europeans DO learn a second language because they recognize that only knowing one is very limiting. Americans don't really have the need for that, and I think that leads to being "uncomfortable" with other languages. In Europe, you drive a few hours, and the language changes. In swaths of the US, you have to get on a plane for the same effect. Now, this could be "biased" based on the cities I've lived in, in the US and abroad, but I've only really gotten the "Eeek! Another language! They must be talking about me!" vibe from Americans.

It's brilliant. I like Whole Foods more now than I did 5 minutes ago. Like it or not, English IS the language in America. Also like it or not, people that don't speak Spanish and hear 2 employees blabbing in it nearby ARE going to think they're being talked about. So since changing the psycology of every human alive isn't possible, eliminating the problem to avoid offending customers makes sense.

And yeah, it's Texas. They say "other language", but they mean Spanish. Amy, I know you don't come here, but it's like we've been taken over by Mexico without them firing a shot. Most signs (and all gov't ones that I can think of) are in English and Spanish. It's hard to get a job interacting with the public if you can't speak Spanish. We have totally caved to catering to them, when THEY are in OUR country. I wouldn't go to france to visit and expect them to cater to me-much less move there and expect it.

And sofar, it's great that you want to learn Spanish. No one in the US or here in Austin should have to.

Hubby is Mexican. At his family gatherings they will chatter away in Spanish which they all know I don't speak (I actually can, but not fluently enough to converse with native speakers, and it's far more enlightening for me to pretend ignorance). It's damn rude. It's damn rude when any people chatter away in a language they know others present don't speak. The others present know it's rude, and so assume the people are talking about them. Companies absolutely should make sure their employees aren't rude on the clock.

"You are somewhat proving my point by emphasizing that most Europeans DO learn a second language because they recognize that only knowing one is very limiting. Americans don't really have the need for that, and I think that leads to being "uncomfortable" with other languages"

Europeans learn a second language because they want to communicate with people outside their narrow geographical boundaries.

Language is all about communication, not about snob appeal, and demonstrating how "cultured" and sophisticated you are.

I'm not uncomfortable with people speaking other languages, but I know that no matter how much I study a foreign language, I will never convey the nuances and cultural understanding that a native speaker does. Therefore, when my goal is to communicate in a commercial transaction or a business situation, I want to conduct it in English, if possible.

You come across as a self loathing American, brain washed in some second rate school to consider English somehow inferior to all those exotic culturally superior "European tongues".

When I was an Army officer, I had a case, where a Spanish speaking NCO was actually extorting money from his Spanish speaking subordinates in exchange for favorable evaluations. He used their common culture and language to convince these soldiers, that if they went to the commander, he would not help them.

You cannot control what happens in the parking lot, but by insisting that all conversations on the job be in Engish, you can reasonably assure yourself that some employees are not harassing or making threats against other employees right under a supervisors nose, and hopefully they are not making inappropriate commnents to,or about the customers either.

I am sure in your zeal to embrace the rich mosaic of "multiculturalism". It has escaped your attention that it it quite possible for criminal harassment to occur in languages other than English.

@momof4

...his family gatherings they will chatter away in Spanish which they all know I don't speak (I actually can, but not fluently enough to converse with native speakers, and it's far more enlightening for me to pretend ignorance). It's damn rude. /i>

Totally rude. My sister had a similar experience with an ex. What she found most frustrating was that she could understand most of what they said, but didn't have the ability to join in. But I'd say it's different when a bunch of people at a gathering are doing it (to be exclusionary), than when two cashiers are chatting during a lull in business or shouting back orders to each other in the language they're most comfortable with.

And sofar, it's great that you want to learn Spanish. No one in the US or here in Austin should have to.

I've kind of got a 'free-market' attitude when it comes to language. The US has no national official language, and certain regions may have two dominant languages. It just happens, and sometimes you gotta adapt like you do to new technology. I don't think English is going anywhere (even in TX), but I like to have as many tools in my belt as possible. And I want the best tacos possible! And so I (slowly, steadily) am learning Spanish.

@Isab wrote

Europeans learn a second language because they want to communicate with people outside their narrow geographical boundaries. Language is all about communication, not about snob appeal, and demonstrating how "cultured" and sophisticated you are.

I agree! That's what I was saying (or trying to say). Perhaps it was ... lost in translation? heh Languages are tools, and I like to have a few in my belt.

Therefore, when my goal is to communicate in a commercial transaction or a business situation, I want to conduct it in English, if possible.

Agreed! Like I said, it's totally understandable that an employer would want all employees to serve customers in English.

You cannot control what happens in the parking lot, but by insisting that all conversations on the job be in Engish, you can reasonably assure yourself that some employees are not harassing or making threats against other employees right under a supervisors nose, and hopefully they are not making inappropriate commnents to,or about the customers either.

Fair enough! I see your point about streamlining things from a manager's perspective, and it wasn't something I'd fully considered, I admit. I was more responding to other commenters who said they felt uncomfortable with employees speaking other languages to each other between customers -- and that they'd be more likely to visit a business that allowed only English chatter. I thought THAT was silly, and still do.

I am sure in your zeal to embrace the rich mosaic of "multiculturalism". It has escaped your attention that it it quite possible for criminal harassment to occur in languages other than English.

That's an inaccurate way of parsing my thoughts -- as rambling as they are.

My main argument was that, if I'm a customer, and the employees serve me cordially and quickly in English that I can understand, I couldn't care LESS if they're shooting the shit in whatever language between customers. Or if I hear another language being shouted in the kitchen. Perhaps some people have time on their hands to get bothered by such things, but give me my food and send me on my way.

what if a customer doesn't speak English? Will they consider it rude for 2 employees to converse in English in front of that customer?

unless you're going to find out from everyone who walks into the store what language they speak, this rule is patently unenforceable. And even then, in what language will you ask them when they walk in the store?

what if a customer doesn't speak English? Will they consider it rude for 2 employees to converse in English in front of that customer? -- Gabe at June 6, 2013 9:15 PM

Nominally, everyone in the U.S. has at least a little English language skills.

All the store is saying the preferred language is English when you are in front of customers.

If someone comes in and says 아나요한글, the corporation isn't stopping the customer representative from replying in kind. This is saying the preferred language for day-to-day operations for the customer representative should be English.

And yeah, it's Texas. They say "other language", but they mean Spanish. Amy, I know you don't come here, but it's like we've been taken over by Mexico without them firing a shot. Most signs (and all gov't ones that I can think of) are in English and Spanish. It's hard to get a job interacting with the public if you can't speak Spanish. We have totally caved to catering to them, when THEY are in OUR country.

For God's sake, there have been Spanish speakers in Texas for the past 400 years. The idea that a bunch of immigrants from a nearby nation that used to control this part of the country is a "takeover" is obnoxious. Sorry your husband's relatives are rude but sheesh.

At my job, employees are also required to speak in English while on the clock and it's never been a problem. Frankly, it's a privately run American business and they have the right to run it as they choose. And, since English is the accepted national language, it's not unreasonable that that is the language an American business wants their employees to use. Don't like it? Work or shop somewhere else.

I can actually see the point in Whole Foods having to make a policy about it. If not, there would be very little that the company could do in the way of enforcing it if there is no policy. They do tend to hire people from different backgrounds and cultures there (which I love) but if it's not made clear that English must be spoken, I can see where it can be chaotic. Safety of the staff and customers is a good reason to insist upon ONE language that they all must use. A simple "excuse me" in a different language can make the difference between someone running into a fixture and not. Besides, employees shouldn't be talking about personal stuff on the clock anyway so there is no need for them to be having conversations in front of customers in a different language.

I am so sick of this PC bullshit disguised as "muti-culturalism. I'm all for 'diversity' in a work-place but when you're on the companies time, you are expected to represent them in the way they choose. Period. You don't accept the job then expect the company to cater to YOUR wishes. That's not how it works. And, if you're legally able to work in this country, and want to live here, it's not unreasonable to expect you to assimilate to our countries way of doing things. If I go to another country, I am expected to do things their way so why should it be different here?

If someone comes in and says 아나요한글, the corporation isn't stopping the customer representative from replying in kind. -- Jim P. at June 6, 2013 10:18 PM

In other words, this new set of language-driven rules is self-contradictory.

Astra, I don't care that people here speak Spanish in their own homes etc. What I care about it the fact that government and businesses now cater to it. We are heading down the road of us being expected to learn their language as opposed to them having to learn ours. That is wrong.

As an employer this rule makes perfect sense to me. If a few of my employees started speaking another language on the job, it would be annoying and disruptive. In a large workforce it can be isolating, cause suspicion (because you don't know what they're talking about), and problematic.

Given there are provisions that they are free to speak whatever language they like on break, during meals, and even when with the customer, it seems highly reasonable.

And the reason there's a rule about it is because companies like whole foods are HUGE and they need to be run uniformly.

Should they have been suspended? Well only if it's a rule they broke repeatedly.

Amy - what's "our" language? Is there an official one?

In the Army we are required to speak English only on the job.

Its a perfectly valid complaint to level if that rule is violated, with serious reprecussions.

People in Europe learn another language, multiples more often, because they're a short drive away from other countries and other languages. They HAVE to know multiple tongues to do business.

But in the U.S. there is ONE business language.

Speak it on the job. Say what you will how you will at home or on your own time.

But do not give the customer or employer reason to believe you're pulling a high Valerian on them. (Game of Thrones reference, the blonde chick is buying an army and pretends not to speak the language, the man selling the soldiers spends the entire time commenting on her tits and ass and letting his translator clean it up, and he doesn't learn that she can speak the language fluently until just before she has him killed)

Its ill mannered, rude, and crass to speak a foreign language around nonspeakers.

When I go to other countries, I take pains to speak the language of the land as best I can, I ask nothing more in return.

Whoa whoa whoa. Don't put words in my mouth. I guess I wasn't clear. Let's draw a distinction between what's practical and what's legal.

Practically speaking, yes of course we should and do speak English. I'm first generation American too (parents are from Romania). When my parents and grandparents came here, the first thing they did was make a serious effort to learn English as well as possible. Clearly it's easiest for everyone in this country for business to be conducted in English.

That said, my point was that there was no legal "official" language. So, I wouldn't be surprised if something like this Whole Foods thing ends up making its way through the court system.

More generally, I think it's jingoistic to refer to English as "our" language. Since there's not one official language in the US, who's to say it won't evolve to something different in the future? It's not without historical precedent for a country's lingua franca to change over time. Don't believe me? Do we speak the exact same brand of English as they do in the UK?

Whoa whoa whoa. Don't put words in my mouth. I guess I wasn't clear. Let's draw a distinction between what's practical and what's legal...More generally, I think it's jingoistic to refer to English as "our" language.

Yes, I too was referring not to the laudable goal of having immigrants learn the common language of the land but to the ridiculous idea of an "invasion" of "our country" by people speaking a language that was spoken in Texas three centuries before English speakers showed up.

Of course languages evolve.

That doesn't mean they're never standardized. Latin fell apart and broke up into the Romance languages of Europe, English went through multiple variations and evolved over generations until we come to our modern format.

But there is a huge difference between discussing a generational change of language over centuries...and what we do business in and what is appropriate day to day here and now.

The best way to ensure an immigrant's poverty is to ensure they do not learn English. At best that ties them to employment amongst nationals who come from the same region, at worst, they're isolated and unemployable.

Gabe, it isn't "jingoistic" to refer to English as our language. English has clearly been the dominant language since America's inception, and that's how a language becomes the language of a people. It doesn't matter if the government formally recognizes that fact.

What we call Italian was a language unique to Tuscany, but because of the literature, art, and power of that region, it became the language of the whole country. It was dominant not because a majority of the people spoke (all regions had their own unique languages), but because it was the language of the most influential area. What we call French and Spanish became the dominant languages in similar ways. American English should be considered "our" language for the same reason.

Robert is right, of course languages evolve (and in no way is UK English a different "language" than US English), but that doesn't mean we stop preserving the dominant language, and expect that citizens speak it and speak it well. You may consider it chauvinistic to expect the dominant language to be maintained, but that's the way societies work.

"Yes, I too was referring not to the laudable goal of having immigrants learn the common language of the land but to the ridiculous idea of an "invasion" of "our country" by people speaking a language that was spoken in Texas three centuries before English speakers showed up."

What is your point exactly? Languages don't invade countries, cultures do. As for Spanish speakers being in Mexico or Texas for three centuries before English speakers, who really cares?

Spanish was the language of the conquistadores, you know those brutal Spaniards who murdered large numbers of the indigenous people?

What makes Spanish culture superior to English culture in any way other than misplaced ethnic pride?

Russ, let me make sure I understand.

First you give the example of how modern Italian originated in Tuscany, and subsequently spread due to it originating from the most influential area. You give this as an example of how a language spread and evolved, yes?

Then, you confirm this by stating "of course languages evolve."

Finally, then you do a 180 and state that you "expect the dominant language to be maintained" simply because "that's the way societies work". So you gave a (great) example of how a society saw its language naturally evolve, and then claim that societies work by "preserving the dominant language". Huh?

Let me ask you (and Amy): why do you think for the last 20-30 years English has been taught in schools all across Europe starting when kids are in 1st grade? Is it because they "expect the dominant language to be maintained"?

Communication evolves, just like everything else. In the words of Gavin Newsome, "it's going to happen, whether you like it or not."

"Let me ask you (and Amy): why do you think for the last 20-30 years English has been taught in schools all across Europe starting when kids are in 1st grade? Is it because they "expect the dominant language to be maintained"?"

If the U.S had not been the greatest part of a coalition that won World War II, and also emerged from that war economically stronger than any other country in the World, I guarantee that English would not be the current educational choice in Europe for a second language.

A common language is a great deal of help in maintaining political unity. If you don't believe me, watch the EU disintegrate.

A language evolving over time is a totally different phenomena than a language/culture or political entity being swamped by an invasive language and culture.

Read the book: The Story of French

Fascinating look at how French became the dominant language of France.

France didn't always have "French" as the dominant tongue, it actually had over a dozen different mother tongues in various parts of the country.

The French crown made the push for the language, demanding it as the common tongue and administrative language.

Some local officials from another area came to see him and ask that they be authorized to use their own language, and he refused to listen to their argument unless they spoke it in French.

So they stayed for several weeks more, learned the language, then went before him again.

He pointed out that it was ridiculous to argue against French IN FRENCH, and dismissed them back to their home territory fluent in the language of the King's choice.

A number of other influential people played a role of course, but the King was the driving force.

End result, a single dominant tongue in France.

This is simple, really.

If you don't want America to be English Protestant, then encourage the Balkanization of America by promoting the idea that no one needs to learn anything, everyone will learn YOUR patois.

There you go.

The USA gained its power because of English Protestants. We aren't French Catholics, Spanish Catholics or Portuguese Catholics, all of which had their say during the takeover of the New World.

I have a tremendous revelation for you: no matter what the language, learning ONE FOR ALL is FAR more effective than trying to accomodate dozens.

Oh, the Health Care agent doesn't speak Greek? Here's a check for hundreds of thousands of dollars because your civil rights were violated - we've promised everyone their chosen language will be fine in recognition of your unique heritage!

Gabe,

I gave the example of Tuscan as a language that was chosen because it was the language of the influential. There was a need to have a single language as unification efforts were on the rise. Italy as a single country didn't exist and with some different language prior to its inception, so it's not a case where " a language spread and evolved." Yes, it spread through other areas, but only because there was a new unified country. As Robert pointed out, the French monarchy made the same effort in France (choosing Langue d'Oil, what we call "French"). The powerful chose and they knew that if the people were going to be unified, they would have to have a shared and established language.

My point about the dominant language is just that the dominant language (that of the most influential) IS the language of the people. Over gradual periods, languages do evolve, but that doesn't mean we stop upholding one way of speaking as the standard. As Isab also points out, there's a difference between internal, natural and inevitable changes in languages and the external introduction of a whole different language. And look at what happens when languages do go through their very gradual changes: our spelling of the word "knight" even though we no longer pronounce the 'k' or 'gh' as we did in Middle English. The French add a circumflex to vowels that used to precede the letter 's' and Portuguese a tilde for 'n's that have disappeared. We do these things, because a stable, shared language with standards, even though they're going to change, is best for society.