"The commission had before it an allegation pertaining to the English-only policy that claimed it was not only unnecessarily broad and disrespectful but a deliberate act of racism against Filipino employees."

"Nowhere in its decision does it consider this argument or the supporting evidence provided by Ms. Casila. This is concerning seeing its centrality to Ms. Casila's complaint, which claimed that the policy was racially motivated, not related to simply ensuring work-related tasks could be performed."

"Ms. Casila claimed that this then impacted her indirectly as a Filipina customer." 

Saskatchewan Court of King's Bench

 

"While SHA [Saskatchewan Health Authority] has now provided me with the relevant portions of its policy, I do not see how I can consider it. The policy was not before the Commission – it chose not to investigate Ms. Casila’s complaint."

"In sum, according to Ms. Casila, the policy prohibits employees from communicating with each other or the public in any language other than English or French, without exception."

"[This assertion that she was not denied service] failed to address forms of discrimination other than the complete denial of services." 

"Considering these deficiencies as a whole, I am unable to find that the Commission's decision was reasonable." 

Justice Shawn Smith 

The woman’s complaint argued that the health authority’s policy around languages amounts to discrimination against her as a Filipina customer and stems from racist complaints. (CKOM file photo)

 

In an exceedingly rare instance, the Saskatchewan Human Rights Commission finally got it right when it turned down a complaint from a Filipina woman who accused a coffee cafe of racism because it ignored her menu request in Tagalog, a language spoken in the Philippines, where the woman, Vanessa Casila, was originally from. She contended that the English/French-only policy in an officially bilingual Canada was racist because it excluded the language she was born to, and that included other Filipina women who worked for the coffee chain, specifically ordered to speak English to their clients.

 

At the Royal University Hospital in Saskatoon, there is a Starbucks in operation, as is frequently the case in hospitals throughout the country. When Vanessa Casila put in her order speaking Tagalog, the Starbucks employee who took her order explained that she would be in line for a reprimand from the manager should she respond to an order in any language other than English. It is likely that Ms. Casila, recognizing the employee as a Filipina like herself, felt it reasonable to order in their common language.

 

Her sense of dignity as a Filipina was outraged that Tagalog would not be accepted as an acceptable form of spoken communication, as a matter of company policy. Righteous anger propelled her to file a human rights complaint, that the "English only" policy was discrimination based on race, colour, ancestry, place of origin and nationality. Starbucks' language policy, she claimed, prohibited staff from communicating among themselves or with the public in any language but English or French. 

 

She was aware that customer complaints directed to the company relating to Starbucks staff not communicating in English, led to the company's English-only policy. This did not seem to resonate with her; it too became a part of her human rights complaint. What also did not register with her was that when living in a country with a national language that naturally dominated in social interaction, legal and governmental affairs, it is appropriate for all residents of Canada to become familiar with and use, the legally-designated official languages; not to do so is a symptom of disrespect.

 

Statistics confirm that Canada, a country of immigrants, hosts people with 400 different spoken/written languages. If all these people were affronted that their mother tongue was not recognized and could not be used anywhere and everywhere they wanted to do business, a virtual Tower of Babel would ensue. There must be a common,  unifying language -- or two, as the case may be -- and in Canada that would be English and French. In areas of the country with low Francophone numbers English always dominates. Furthermore it is a common universal language.

 

Ms. Casila appealed when the Saskatchewan Human Rights Commission dismissed her complaint on the basis that enough evidence was not provided to convince the commission to give it further consideration; to come to the conclusion that there was "reasonable grounds to believe that there had been discrimination based on a prohibited ground". In the opinion of the commission this was missing, and as a result the complaint was dismissed. 

 

She argued further that the policy of English-only was the result of racist customer complaints, disproportionately affecting the Filipino employees working at the hospital-adjacent Starbucks, and indirectly affected her. In her possession was a memo an employee had been sent as a reminder in the interest of not excluding workers and customers, to speak English. That memo was interpreted by the complainant as labelling Tagalog speakers as rude. 

 

If the shoe fits, wear it; it most certainly IS rude to speak a language unknown to others with whom the speaker is involved; it is insulting and exclusionary; a sign of entitlement that is undeserved ,and bad manners at the very least. Her claim was once more dismissed by the Saskatchewan Human Rights Commission, citing commercial transactions as being immune from protection of language. A policy meant for employee conduct should not concern her, as a non-employee.

 

This is one determined woman. She approached the Saskatchewan Court of Queen's Bench, where she finally found satisfaction. The court found that the Commission had been too swift to reject the woman's complaint. Justice R. Shawn Smith ordered the commission to revisit the case since its decision "failed to address forms of discrimination other than the complete denial of services". Sometimes, it's true...justice is an ass.

  

Last month, Saskatoon Court of King's Bench Justice Shawn Smith ordered the Saskatchewan Human Rights Commission to reconsider a complaint brought by a woman who says she was denied service in her preferred language while ordering at the Royal University Hospital Starbucks. Photo by Michelle Berg /Saskatoon StarPhoenix