Here are the questions to the readings for Week 3. Please choose 1 or 2 to write a short response to.
-------------------------------------------------
Chen's article:
1. Chen describes three forms of language-based discrimination. The
article provides a pretty straightforward definition of each of the
discrimination types, and claims that language discrimination leads to
issues regarding economic, civil, and labor rights of immigrant
workers. Have you ever encountered any experiences or conflicts of
language-based discrimination in your own life, that may or may not
necessarily be related to labor issues? Was the conflict ever
resolved? How so? What do you believe is the first step towards
eliminating this type of discrimination in the work place?
2. Chen describes that language discrimination occurs in many workplaces. Suppose you are an employer of a workplace, would you impose the "English-only" rules to your employees for the convenience of the workplace environment? Why or why not?
3. Do you feel that the employer should encourage and aid in the proficiency of his/her employees' English skills, given that most of his employees are immigrants?
----------------------------------------------
Shah's article:
1. The idea that the first step towards resolving labor issues is to
provide workers with the basic tools for understanding what they can
do for themselves is common of many organizations dedicated to helping
immigrant workers. However, as Shah describes, workers are often
afraid to fight for their rights for the fear of being terminated, for
the fear of being caught by the INS, or simply because it is not a
custom in their Asian cultures to stand up to authority. Do you
believe the Shah's approach of using attorneys to rally a few Asian
American workers in each case to lead the fight to be a good approach?
Why/why not?
-----------------------------------------------
Espiritu's article:
1. How has Asian American history, immigration laws, and the swapping of
gender roles defined the role of an Asian American woman and defined
the concept of family in terms of labor? Have these definitions
evolved since the 1930s? How so?
2. Based on Espiritu's article, how had the roles of Asian American women
changed during the era of large immigration to the United States? How had
those of the Asian American male migrant workers changed?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Chen's Article. #2:
ReplyDeleteI cannot, for the life of me, imagine a scenario where imposing an English-only rule would be an option worth considering. To start with Chen's arguments, such a rule is much more likely to bring harm than good. It is definitely unconstitutional in that freedom of speech is denied, and as a citizen of the US I disagree with the concept, even if technically I've only been one for two years.
On an individual level, such a rule limits communication and oppresses people. I've noticed how my mom is a different person when she writes emails or speaks in Spanish because she is able to get her thoughts out more clearly. For her to be at her full effectiveness in her work her audience needs to know some Spanish to be able to follow her thought process. Taking that away from employees would actually cause communication problems rather than resolve them. The only time a workplace should be English-only is when it is agreed upon by the workers. Ideally employees should work towards good communication with their coworkers to naturally form a system that works for everyone and employers should guide that process.
shah's article.
ReplyDeletei really liked shah's approach to tackling labor issues. she makes some very interesting point about what organizations can do to help asian american laborers, like having bilingual material and staff, and understanding that the organizations can only take on so many cases and that educating the laborers to help themselves is the best thing an organization can do. i also agreed with the point she makes about the "us against them" mentality taken by many americans towards immigrants, especially in california. i think that rallying a few Asian American workers in each case to lead the fight is a good approach because it gives other laborers an example of what can be done if you have the courage to fight against in the injustice many of them face, instead of a "white man will save you" view where the laborers aren't lead by people in their own community. although i think her approach can be effective i can see some of the drawbacks to putting a few people in the spotlight. she brings up the fear that many asian american laborers experience in their work environment, and although it is a great idea for the movement to be lead by people in that community, they are putting a lot at risk.
Espiritu's article -
ReplyDeleteThis is sort of a combination of the two.
It was interesting to read about the "lack" of women in the States, mainly due to immigration laws. Many female immigrants were prohibited from entering the country, which led to decreased numbers of Asian women. This was also to prevent familial bonds to form and the responsibilities that come along with them, such as housing for the whole family. At one point in the article, we read that men had to learn household tasks because of the absent presence of females.
The changing social climate for the men affected the lives of many women already in the States, or even for those still coming into the States. For example, it was interesting to read about the different kinds of "arranged marriage" - bringing in girls from abroad, prostitutes becoming wives, etc. Since there were throngs of eligible bachelors and very few women, women had more than their fair share of picks. Women had some "independence", since many left their husbands for another if they ewre unhappy. They were also working manual labour, heavy work that are more 'normal'for men. Some of the gender roles were swapped, providing some contrast between Asian women in the States and the Asian women back in their native countries.