Lia Lee V. Federal and State Bank

825 Words4 Pages
Lia Lee v. Federal and State Bank In the case of Lia Lee v. Federal and State Bank, I would rule in favor of the defendant, Federal and State Bank. The case revolves around a Laotian-American named Lia Lee, who worked for state and federal bank for as a teller for a period of more than three years. The supervisors had always given Lia Lee outstanding performance reviews. As a consequent, when a position emerged at a customer service desk to handle customer issues and inquiries, Lisa applied for it. She however, failed to get the promotion. According to the bank’s claims, Lia lacked adequate English skills to calm irate customers. As a result Lia Lee filed a law suit with the allegation that the Federal and State bank denied her a promotion due to her accent. As a judge, I wouldn’t rule in favor of the plaintiff on the basis of Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964. While the Civil Rights Act of 1964 does forbid job discrimination based on an individual's "national origin," the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals on March 6, 1989 ruled that the act is not violated if an employer refuses to hire someone whose accent "interferes materially" with their ability to perform a job. (Savage 1990) This precedent is set in Manuel T. Fragante v. City and County of Honolulu (9th Cir. 1989) 888 F.2d 591, 596. In this case, the district court found that the “oral ability to communicate effectively and clearly was a legitimate occupational qualification” for the job in question. (Savage 1990) This finding was based on the court's understanding that an “important aspect of defendant's business, for which a clerk would be responsible, involved the providing of services and assistance to the general public”. (Savage 1990) The court also found that defendant's failure to hire Fragante was explained by his deficiencies in the area of oral communication, not because of his

More about Lia Lee V. Federal and State Bank

Open Document