The new forums will be named Coin Return (based on the most recent vote)! You can check on the status and timeline of the transition to the new forums here.
The Guiding Principles and New Rules document is now in effect.
don't mention the what
The Cat
Registered User, ClubPA regular
Registered User, ClubPA regular
http://www.smh.com.au/news/business/dont-mention-the-flaw/2007/09/13/1189276851644.html
tl;dr, aussie exec sues german company for being fired due to not knowing german, while working a job in germany for german customers. Claims he was 'kept out of the loop'.
Is it me, or should one be expected to speak the local language when employed? Even takeaway shop owners know better than this idiot :x is there something magically different about executive jobs in large companies that means everyone else should be kowtowing to your ignorance?
tl;dr, aussie exec sues german company for being fired due to not knowing german, while working a job in germany for german customers. Claims he was 'kept out of the loop'.
Is it me, or should one be expected to speak the local language when employed? Even takeaway shop owners know better than this idiot :x is there something magically different about executive jobs in large companies that means everyone else should be kowtowing to your ignorance?
The Cat on
0
Posts
Speaking a certain language is a job requirement if and only if it is reasonably required to do the job and is stated as such in the job description.
So, from reading the article, regarding clues if it was necessary for him to speak German...Seeing as it was based in London, England, I'm guessing; no. So, unless I'm reading this thing terribly wrong, it wasn't for German Customers and he wasn't in Germany?
On the black screen
He can't exactly prove that, since he doesn't speak German.
Well if he got a time machine, learned German and then went back in time to before he was fired for not knowing German he could see whether they fired him again. Then we'd know that they fired him for not being German.
Dude was head-hunted by another non-German into firm A. Senior execs of firm A kept non-German speakers out of the loop regarding a takeover bid by firm B. Lower-rung employees were given key roles in the takeover, despite the fact that they were less qualified - dude alleges this is because they were German speakers/German.
This is not a matter of "speaking the language" - they hired him knowing he didn't speak German, but they still allegedly discriminated against him because of that fact - despite the fact that his knowledge of German didn't have any bearing on the work he would have been doing.
I doubt that there was any call for him to learn German. He was hired as an English-speaker, working in a country/region where English is an official language of business and commonly spoken language, and was working in a division of the company (global capital) where his language would have been even less relevant to his job.
He's alleging that they excluded him from the firm's business because he wasn't "german" enough for the bank's new owners - ie, that he didn't fit into a perceived company image/profile - not because they didn't think he was competent at his job. The issue of speaking German really is secondary.
Also, racism? Whu?
Yeah, but we don't have an official language (melting pot and all) so technically we could never say "learn english or you're fired... we have to hire people who speak spanish to talk to the spanish speaking people we hired... which is...yeah....that's what it is..... (not going to derail the thread, just wasn't sure if Tarranon was making a joke or a serious comment)
As for the situation, if I was him, I would request that it went on my record that I had left of my own accord, and that I was eligible for rehire (the two things you can legally talk about from a past job) and I would find another job. What kind of carreer does he think he is going to have when the other companies see that he's just another lawsuit baby trying to make his easy million?