Sarah Mills: Canadians travelling to the U.S. are down dramatically
Sarah Mills says Mexico and Europe became a destination for Canadians in January, showing the elbows-up approach is havi...
A complaint is being sent back to the Saskatchewan Human Rights Commission over a language policy set by the Saskatchewan Health Authority (SHA).
Vanessa Casila told Saskatoon’s Court of Kings Bench she was at the Royal University Hospital in Saskatoon and wanted to make an order at the Starbucks there.
Read more:
- Viral video at Saskatoon hospital reflects broader issue, nurses union says
- Patient at Saskatoon’s Royal University Hospital dies after incident with hospital security
- Dozens of weapons, machetes, knives, seized at RUH in past three months: NDP
Casila tried to do so in Tagalog, her first language, but was told by the employee, who was also a Tagalog-speaking Filipino, that there was an English-only policy and if they didn’t abide by it, it would result in a formal reprimand by the manager.
Casila filed a complaint with the Saskatchewan Human Rights Commission, saying the language policy resulted in discrimination against her as a Filipina customer, based on race or perceived race, colour, ancestry, place of origin and nationality.
She said speaking Tagalog is “intimately tied to her Filipina identity” and is how she expresses and preserves her minority culture in Canada. She also contended the policy was based, at least in part, on racist customer complaints.
In his written decision, Justice R.S. Smith described an email Casila submitted, which had been sent to the health authority in 2022, which “amid some uncouth and intolerant commentary,” asked the SHA to enforce an English-only policy.
Casila said Filipinos are disproportionately affected by the policy because of the high number of Tagalog-speaking employees at the RUH Starbucks and that the characterization of speaking a non-English language as disrespectful implicitly labels Tagalog speakers and Filipino customers as rude.
In her submissions, Casila contended the policy prohibits employees from communicating with each other or the public in any language other than English or French, without exception.
Casila attached another letter, this one from the SHA, about the policy, which the justice said appeared to be directed toward an employee of the Starbucks. It said the employee must always speak English so as not to exclude coworkers and customers.
In response to 980 CJME’s inquiry, the SHA said while its policy does identify English as the primary language for communication at work, it’s not an English-only policy. The statement said employees can speak other languages with each other as long as everyone involved can understand.
The human rights commission dismissed the complaint, saying language isn’t protected in all cases – that it’s protected when it’s a conveyor of culture, nationality and ethnicity, but it’s not protected when it’s a transactional means of communication.
The commission said in dismissing the complaint that Casila wasn’t denied service and wasn’t an employee of the hospital or the SHA.
Casila initially applied for a judicial review, landing it in Saskatoon’s superior court.
Justice Smith found the commission’s decision to dismiss the complaint was reasonable in how it addressed the issue of language-based discrimination.
However, he also found the commission didn’t even consider the argument that the policy is racist toward Filipino employees. He said the commission also failed to address forms of discrimination that don’t include complete denial of services.
Smith has sent the complaint back to the human rights commission to be considered again.
