story ends well, but many others – most others, I would claim – do not.
Everyday individuals are reminded that the language they speak marks
them as less-than-good-enough. Most don’t realize that they have rights,
or that there are organizations who will help making sure those rights are
protected. Some might know that they have a legal claim, but be afraid to
risk retribution.
Then there are those whose claims are bound to fail, because the
ideology of the workplace and that of the court work together to make sure
that they do.
Dercach v. Indiana Department of Highways
Anthony Dercach was born in the Ukraine and raised in Venezuela where
he attended Spanish-speaking schools. He moved to the United States at
age 19, and had at that point no English language skills.
Dercach was hired by the highway department as a maintenance worker,
and after three years was promoted to crew leader at the recommendation
of his foreman, because of his ability to drive a Mack truck. Two years
later, after a series of resignations, Dercach served as acting, temporary
unit foreman. The department then advertised the unit foreman position,
received 12 applications, and set up interviews. The person given the unit
foreman position had also been a crew leader, but had less seniority than
Dercach.
Two people on the interview committee testified that they chose not to
recommend Dercach for promotion to unit foreman because he had had
problems with paperwork and because he had had problems
communicating with others. One of the interviewers testified that workers
would ask Mr. Dercach what he wanted them to do, and then simply walk
away, unable to understand. Mr. Moser refused to attribute such incidents
to Mr. Dercach’s accent, but offered no other explanation. He said they just
couldn’t understand him “like normal people with normal language.”
The plaintiff repeatedly denied that Dercach’s accent was an issue in
their promotion decision; the court did not find those denials to be