Apropos a story that David Bernstein first covered in 2006:
The Philadelphia Commission on Human Relations will hold a public hearing Friday to address a controversial sign at the popular Geno's Steaks that has gained national attention.
The hearing was scheduled after allegations were made accusing Geno's Steaks of discrimination for posting a sign that reads: "This is America. When ordering speak English." ...
Philadelphia Commission on Human Relations ... alleges Geno's is in violation of the Philadelphia Fair Practices Ordinance - Chapter 9 Section 9-1105(A)(1)(b) of The Philadelphia Code.
The commission believes the sign discourages patronage by non-English speaking customers.
"Individuals who operate in a place of public accommodation cannot post signage or express messages that might have the resulting affect of making any group, any ethnicity, and any national origin person feel unwelcome," said Nick Taliaferro, Human Relations Commission....
Note, incidentally, the breadth of Mr. Taliaferro's assertion — presumably any speech that has the effect of making any group feel unwelcome (e.g., a posting of the Mohammed cartoons, an allegedly racist display, a Confederate flag, a supposedly sexist picture or slogan, and so on) is punishable when posted in a business, whether a pizza shop, a bookstore, a theater, or whatever else.
I should note that statements expressing an intent to engage in unlawful discrimination in a business transaction (for instance, "Blacks Not Served") may indeed be unprotected under the Court's rules related to commercial advertising, on the theory that they are akin to statements proposing an unlawful transaction. (They aren't quite, but that's how a 1973 case involving sex-based job advertisements, Pittsburgh Press Co. v. Pittsburgh Commission on Human Relations, has been interpreted in recent decades.) But it sounds like Philadelphia's theory is much broader than that; plus it's far from clear that rejecting orders in other languages — something that people who speak only one language routinely do — would be illegal in any event.
Thanks to Sebastian for the pointer.
Yikes.
Are you suggesting that Mr. Taliaferro might not feel welcome at Geno's?
Where do people who can make public statements like this without irony come from?
ADIOS AMIGO!
At least the slippery slope is a short trip: Signs in Cyrillic in Serbian restaurants might make Croats feel unwelcome. No Cafe Istanbuls, because the signboard might make Kurds or Armenians feel uneasy, no Your Black Muslim Bakery because the association with Farrakhan makes some whites uncomfortable, no Japanese restaurants that make Chinese remember the Rape of Nanking, and make Koreans remember forty years of colonial subjection etc. etc. etc.
These kinds of commissions are full-employment schemes for political hacks and those connected folks without productive skills. Wonder what Taliaferro's salary is?
The Nanny-state lives on!
Fortunately for Mr. Taliaferro, the Human Relations Commission is not a public accommodation, because his statement makes me (an unhypenated American) feel unwelcome.
1. What about a sign that reads, "All ham, all the time. Shop here only if you want the best ham in Philly!" Seems that would have the "resulting affect" (sic) of making a few groups feel unwelcome.
2. What if the sign read, "Due do our unfortunate linguistic shortcomings, we can speak only English. Accordingly, we can only serve English-speaking clients. Interpreters welcome."
and thus, no bookstore could carry, or certainly not have advertisements or posters for:
Huckleberry Finn
Chris Hitchens' latest screed
The Bible
The Koran
The Turner Diaries
Stupid White Men by Al Franken
etc.
maybe they can distinguish between a store that essentially MARKETS opinion (which you can't market without offending somebody) or food. but even restaurants can get in trouble . see: do the right thing, for th epolitics of offensive italian american pizza postings.
And how about if they just answer anyone who doesn't speak English with "Hunh? Sorry I only understand English. Next."
the "No Fat Chix" night club there on the Main Line.
According to this article, Joey Vento is not an immigrant.
"It shall be an unlawful public accommodations practice:
(I) For any person being the owner, lessee, proprietor, manager, superintendent, agent or employee of any place of public accommodation, resort or amusement to:
. . .
(b) Publish, circulate, issue, display, post or mail, either directly or
indirectly, any written or printed communication, notice or advertisement
to the effect that any of the accommodations, advantages, facilities, and
privileges of any such place shall he refused, withheld or denied to any
person on account of race, color, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity,"
religion, national origin, ancestry, physical handicap or disability, or
marital status, or that the patronage of any person of any particular race.
color, sex, sexual orientation, religious creed, ancestry, national origin
[or], physical handicap or disability, marital status, is unwelcome,
objectionable or not acceptable, desired or solicited."
Note that among the prohibited bases for refusing service is NOT "language." Instead, it is the usual, "race, color, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity,"
religion, national origin, ancestry, physical handicap or disability, or
marital status." The problem may be the use of "America" in the sign, which does suggest somewhat weakly that national origin may be involved--but I think that would be quite a stretch.
So I don't see what basis the Commission has here, at least based on the language of the ordinance.
Who cares? Am I the only cold-hearted capitalist who thinks that if non-English speakers are deterred from going to a hostile restaurant, they will go elsewhere, and, eventually, the restaurants that are more inclusive will do better for the exclusiveness of places like Gino's?
What does this come down to? "You're not allowed to lose business by being a xenophobe"?
This is silly. I suspect that part of the problem is that some of the staff, as well as some of the customers, were speaking a language other than English a significant part of the time, and that management wanted to nip that in the bud by saying that business would be conducted exclusively in English. A staff that carries on side conversations in other languages can really annoy customers -- I changed dry cleaners recently for this very reason. (And who can forget Elaine's manicurist from Seinfeld?) But I can't imagine that a business would refuse to take money from a customer who mumbled sheepishly in some other language and pointed at what he wanted.
Or are they just not supposed to put up a sign to that effect?
That makes the poster political speech, not mere a way of doing business. This may have two effects - it isnt simply a benign announcement of an acceptable business decision (as some here are trying to claim), but on the other hand its likely to be protected by the First Amendment as protected speech. Although there may be a question as to how far you can take this (can a state law make it illegal for a restaurant that does not want to serve african americans put viruntly racist paraphanelia designed to keep them away? I honestly do not know the answer to this), I think we should generally defer to protecting the speech component of things rather than the business-decision component. I agree with EV that the law cannot reach the sign in question, and want to point out to commenters who missed it that EV very accurately summed up the issue:
"Note, incidentally, the breadth of Mr. Taliaferro's assertion — presumably any speech that has the effect of making any group feel unwelcome (e.g., a posting of the Mohammed cartoons, an allegedly racist display, a Confederate flag, a supposedly sexist picture or slogan, and so on) is punishable when posted in a business, whether a pizza shop, a bookstore, a theater, or whatever else."
I tend to think that EV may understate the degree this sign actually DOES make groups feel unwelcome, btw. I don't think this is a slippery slope issue, but the very issue that the facts present.
The statute, on the other hand, could well encompass groups like diabetics, anorexics, or alcoholics, which leads to all kinds of fun conclusions.
Does the prohibition on using marital status apply to singles bars and dating services? Fascinating.
I think this description omits important facts. What the sign actually said was more like this:
This is
AMERICA
WHEN ORDERING
"SPEAK ENGLISH"
The sign (best image I could find here) also includes an image of an American flag and a large, angry-looking bald eagle. The overall impression is extremely hostile. Even if you still disagree with the interpretation as an expression of racial hostility, I think it's a much more reasonable interpretation than the written description indicates. Compare a hypothetical sign saying something like "We regret that we are unable to accept orders in foreign languages."
Perhaps you have gender identity issues.
I could type up a letter in Spanish if it were given to me in writing. I used to do that for an old boss years ago. The letters were in Magyar and I don't speak or read a word of it.
BTW - does he pronounce his name Tally-a-ferro or Tollivar?
What, can't they handle Algonquian?
It seems to me that if Geno's has a "Soup Nazi" atmosphere, it makes it easier to argue that the sign is just their version of "We regret we can take orders only in English."
You say the sign as it is (I couldn't connect to the link) is an expression of racial hostility. Is it assumed that English can only be spoken by a Caucasian due to the physical structure of the larynx? It's interesting that so many political correctors routinely assume English language requirements are a form of racism. The confusion helps them rhetorically since then they can equate the Geno's sign with a refusal to serve any but one race.
Jim's Steaks on 4th and South: no xenophobia, AND meat from cows.
Oooooo. A flag and an angry-looking eagle. Someone call the authorities.
Only between 1901 and 1905. From 1905 to 1958, the dictation test could be in any language.
The "disparate racial impact" came about not because of the "European" requirement, but because the test was applied at the government's discretion, in the language of the government's choice. A Maltese would-be immigrant, for instance, might be tested in Dutch.
The test could be used for non-racial ends; in 1934, notoriously, the linguistically versatile Egon Kisch, entering Australia to attend a Communist front peace conference, was tested in Gaelic. He was allowed to stay after the High Court, in a fit of judicial activism, decided that Gaelic didn't count as a language.
I'd like someone to develop a class curriculum, perhaps for middle schoolers, called 'Developing a Thick Skin'.
Which has nothing to do with anything. There is nothing race-specific about the matter, except, of course, for your remark.
Mayor John F. Street Announces Creation of Faith Leaders Advisory Taskforce:
Faith Leaders Advisory Taskforce Members
* Pastor Nick Taliaferro, North Philadelphia Seventh Day Adventist Church and Executive Director, Human Relations Commission.
This writer believes the Taskforce expresses messages that might result in making non-religious people feel unwelcome, especially if they're not a "national origin person."
Those should be inclusive; I've seen ads by those who claim to be "Married But Looking"
Several years ago, an immigrant acquaintance of mine, a Brit, lost his cafeteria job because he could not effectively communicate with his Spanish-speaking co-workers. Maybe he could get a job at the cheesesteak place?
So a business owner cannot express a political sentiment? Says who?
If that's the case, where can I file a complaint against Hollywood producers of movies and TV shows? I can't turn on the TV or go to the movies without being assaulted by left-wing, anti-war, anti-Bush, anti-conservative, anti-religious, anti-American propaganda.
Joey Vento has every right to post this sign. What I think really upsets people is that Geno's has always been unabashedly pro-America, pro-military, pro-police and anti-Mumia Abu Jamal. If you don't like it, do what the commenter above says, go to Jim's at 4th and South, or walk across the street to Pat's.
Of note, if you ever go there, you'll see prominent pictures of President Clinton when he visited Geno's, as well as Oprah Winfrey and a ton of other famous people.
One other thing. I was watching Univision one night (God blessed me with the ability to pick up Spanish and French while in school) and I saw a commerical I'll never forget. It was for a set of tapes teaching you English. In the beginning of the spot, the woman was working as a cleaning lady is some dingy joint. Then, after learning English, she was working as a secretary. Without English language ability, you can't make it in this country. You'll be left to washing cars and dishes or landscaping. I was called a racist for saying this in law school. Of course, when I asked for examples of successful lawyers, doctors, teachers, etc., in this country who could not speak English, no one could come up with any.
In sum, like the sign says, this is America. Speak English.
The press would love reporting on the tables being turned on Mr Nanny State Taliaferro -- who, being made into a ridiculous laughingstock and hoisted by his own petard, would probably go into hiding to lick his self-inflicted wounds.
Legal, perhaps, but a dumb business practice. Why don't the folks at Geno's like making money?
How would this apply to a deaf customer who "speaks" sign language? Say the restaurant staff doesn't include anyone who understands sign language. Would the restaurant be able to refuse service on the basis of impossible communication? What if the customer could simply point to the menu?
If the deaf customer could point to the menu, why couldn't any non-English speaker?
I get the feeling the staff of this restaurant doesn't vacation abroad, but if they do, they'll find foreign restaurateurs more accommodating. I've eaten plenty well in foreign dives where I did not savvy the lingo at all. Point to stuff, write down the numbers, smile, and you will get a good meal at most restaurants on earth. Because I've depended on this policy, I'm not planning on eating at any restaurant that mandates orders be placed in a particular language.
That's a misconception of ludicrous proportions. The Taiwan government hasn't affirmatively asserted any claim to be the government of all of China since martial law was lifted in the late 1980s. (By contrast with the Beijing govrenment, which at all times has aggressively asserted its contrary claim.)
It is true that the Taiwan government has not formally repudiated the claims made before the lifting of martial law, but that may have a little something to do with the fact that the Beijing government has repeatedly stated in no uncertain terms that it will invate Taiwan promptly following a declaration of independence by the Taiwan government. Any unilateral change by the Taiwan government in its formal status vis a vis the Beijing government would be fraught with extreme peril.
That's gonna be tough. The place isn't nearly large enough to accomodate the necessary 6700+ employees, even if they could afford them.
Jim's Steaks on 4th and South: no xenophobia, AND meat from cows."
Hear hear.
""Anti-Hispanic bigotry is protected by the First Amendment, as it should be."
Which has nothing to do with anything. There is nothing race-specific about the matter, except, of course, for your remark."
Do you not know much about this case? Watching pretty much any interview with Vento will confirm that this is the intent of the sign, and given the demographic features of certain sections of South Philly (the areas to the southeast of Passyunk, where Geno's is located, for instance), there has never been much doubt in pretty much in the mind of any Philadelphian I know (even those who agree with Vento).
Then I noticed that he spoke French to the party at the next table over. Once again, as far as my ear could tell, it was nicely pronounced French.
Then he spoke to the table on the other side of us. In German.
Of course I had to ask. He spoke English, French, German, Finnish (apparently a lot of Finns visit Luxembourg) and Luxembourgish.
Now imagine if the café insisted on only serving people who spoke Luxembourgish.
Uhmm... sorry to nitpick, especially off topic, but Stormfront is not just labeled racist.
And there is also the problem of tourists. A tourist with poor English will be ignored? And the major problem of this thing is that this guy is getting free advertising because of a anti professional attitude..
I imagine such a poor business plan would result in bankruptcy; while restricting clientele to the billion or two English speakers would not.
John D. - In Luxembourg I was also able to find people who spoke English, even on a Sunday. Generally in Europe, one finds that the schools teach second languages starting in grade school. But then again, in Europe there are many official state languages depending on the state. French in France, German in Germany, French and Flemish in Belgium. My friend from Romania took German starting in second grade and French starting in 5th or 7th grade. In addition to Romanian. Not just "conversational" either.
Yes, many different languages are spoken in this country. But it's not as if every state had a different language. (although sometimes it seems so). New York doesn't have a different language than New Jersey or Pennsylvania. Illinois doesn't have a different language than Wisconsin or Iowa or Minnesota. OTOH, France has a different language than Germany and Spain and Portugal and the Netherlands. Moving east, you even find different alphabets.
English is the main language spoken in this country. A few years ago, when my son was pre-kindergarten going in for testing, the school official asked the woman in front of me if she needed a bilingual aide to help her through. The woman had an accent. The woman said, "We speak English. We are Romanian." The School system would only have been able to provide an aide who spoke Spanish by the way. Not a Romanian speaking aide even though there is a large community of Romanians in my area.
My other Romanian friend, the one mentioned above who speaks Romanian, German and French, came to the US 16 years ago. She speaks perfect English now too, albeit with an accent. Her boys (8 and 13) speak English with an American accent and only know a little Romanian because they speak English in their home. For the boys.
If I were to move to any other non-English speaking country I would be expected to learn that language. Is it really too much to expect that people moving here learn our language? I had to learn some German when I lived in Germany. I found that if I went into a store expecting them to speak English, they said they didn't speak it. I found that if I tried in German and they could speak English they did so, because I tried. (disclosure: I was in the Army and didn't need to immerse myself in German because I had an American English community right there.)
Well, people who like to defend bigots often do so by ignoring context. (See, e.g., the Confederate Battle Flag.)
Can members of an ethnic group insist on a heterosexual male waiter if a female or homosexual waiter makes them feel uncomfortable?
I'd bet that if Mr Taliafero had the power to release Mr Cook nhe have done it so long ago that Cook would by now be back in jail, having murdered someone else.
Having been to Vancouver, and Richmond, there is a striking difference between Richmond and "proper" Vancouver. I was in a restaurant in Richmond, which, granted, catered to Chinese folks from Hong Kong (which I'm one of, BTW), had a menu completely in Chinese only. Somewhat surprised, coming from the US, where most are bilingual in Chinese restaurants, though some restaurants post off-menu/seasonal items on the walls in Chinese only.
Anyway, through the course of eating at said restaurant in Richmond, I heard the next table speak English to the waitress, while (I think) translating the menu to them.
No doubt some Canadians feel the same way when they hear Cantonese in British Columbia, as some Americans do when they hear Spanish in California.
After the passage of the 1964 Civil Rights Act, requiring places of "public accommodation" to serve everyone, regardless of [insert laundry list of suspect classifications here], the law was challenged on the ground that a shopkeeper's freedom of association allowed him or her to choose not to have business dealings with [insert particular suspect classification here]. The U.S. Supreme Court shot this argument down in flames.
Thus, a law firm’s freedom of association does not allow it to discriminate against female candidates for partnership: “‘[Invidious] private discrimination may be characterized as a form of exercising freedom of association protected by the First Amendment, but it has never been accorded affirmative constitutional protections.’ [Citation.]” (Hishon v. King &Spalding (1984) 467 U.S. 69, 78.)
Why should freedom of speech be treated any differently?