LPGA to require English proficiency

[gbk56]

They are interviewing the prospective members. The prospective members can't understand the questions or carry on a conversation.

If they do not like them it is a private organization and they should not admit them.

The point I am trying to make is that it is more about personality than language. I believe the LPGA position will be found illegal. However, wherther it is legal or illegal I think it is wrong. Suspension is much too harsh. Please note, I think it is in the player best interest to learn English but the method the LPGA is trying to institute this just doesn't seem right legally or ethically IMO.

[gbk56]

(Playing Devil's Advocate here):

So you would be offended with such a policy is my point.

Suppose they said you should speak with a boston accent because most of the sponsors are from boston and they feel more comfortable speaking to people with a boston accent.

[Harry Longshanks]

The point I am trying to make is that it is more about personality than language.

And the point I am responding with (and so is the LPGA) is that you can't make any determinations about personality if you can't communicate with them.

Take a look at Mike Weir's interview after his round today at the Deutsche Bank. Tell me that an interview like that (eloquent, humorous, informative) wouldn't benefit the heck out of the Korean players exponentially more than the cold, paraphrased answer given through a translator. Legality is certainly an issue. But so is whether the policy has legitimate business merits.

[Harry Longshanks]

So you would be offended with such a policy is my point.

No, my point was that your analogy was faulty and that you won't garner any support with such statements. The LPGA is not requiring that the foreign players speak without an accent. Only that they be able to communicate on a basic level in English - because doing so benefits the LPGA by pleasing the fans.

And that is the point that I have been trying to get you to acknowledge - that there are legitimate reasons for the policy.

[gbk56]

And the point I am responding with (and so is the LPGA) is that you can't make any determinations about personality if you can't communicate with them.

Yes it is harder but suspending them seems to be too harsh when the main focus is to play good golf. I sure do not want the LPGA to turn into the WWE (LPGAE).

[Harry Longshanks]

True but suspending them seems to be too harsh.

Fair enough.

But let's say (again for the sake of discussion - assume the LPGA's position is true), that the foreign born players have been repeatedly fined as a results of complaints from Pro-Am partners about lack of any communication. Isn't suspension the next step? Otherwise, the policy has no teeth and the players will continue to break the rules, because it benefits them to do so.

[gbk56]

Fair enough.

Totally agree!!

If the Pro-Am partners complain they should investigate and suspend if the complaint is true.

[julie_m]

This applies to all players and is not closely related to nationality as stated under title vii.

In the articles I cited, the complaints against them are exactly that - they target specific players, including but not limited to, Black culture. One excerpt, the middle few paragraphs of the NFL article,

_____________________________________________ There are concerns about infringing upon a player's personal beliefs. Long hair and dreadlocks are part of both Polynesian and Rastafari culture, respectively. "I'm certainly aware of the sensitivity around this and want to get the players' perspective," said Goodell, who spoke last week with NFL Players Association chief Gene Upshaw about this issue. Leo Goeas, a Hawaiian-born agent and former NFL offensive lineman, represents eight NFL players with Polynesian ancestry. Three of them — Cincinnati defensive tackle Domata Peko, Miami center Samson Satele and Miami defensive tackle Paul Soliai — would be in clear violation. The same goes for the five University of Hawaii draft prospects he has signed. "I'm sure they're not too excited about this," Goeas said. "I can't think of too many Polynesian guys that don't have long hair." ______________________________________________

[gbk56]

I think this is my last post on the subject because I am finding myself repeating myself and I think we have reached a point where we just have different points of view. We could probably debate this issue for an eternity.

My first point is that I think that this will be found illegal. The PGA was found to be an employer in their case against Casey. Under title vii employers cannot discriminate base on nationality. Langauge is closely related to nationality and IMO I think this will be enough combined with the fact that the LPGA had a mandatory meeting with the koreans and the LPGA reasoning does not seem to hold that much water.

I do understand other peoples point of view, but I do not think the courts will believe the LPGA. The courts will probably believe that this could leave the door wide open for the LPGA to hand down even more bold rules and regulations.

My personal view is yes it would be in everyones best interest for the foreign players to speak english. I personally do not think suspending players will solve the problem. I think there are better more comprehensive ways to solve the problem. I also do not believe the LPGA's stated reason for implementing this new rule. I truely believe that their underlying goal was to limit the number of foreign/korean golfers which I believe is wrong on any level.

I also do not believe SeRi Park agrees with the LPGA. She stated that she believes that suspension is too harsh. This is contrary to the LPGA's stated policy.

You can chose to disagree with me and I do not expect you to change your mind on the issue. I just hope that you can understand my point of view. I know that this is a difficult subject, but I do appreciate all the constructive comments.

Thank you.

[mikelz]

...

This is not discrimination.

This is a legitimate condition of employment. There's a big difference between a skill and where you were born.

[bigoak]

Come on! The women have to flirt with the guys paying the $2000 to play in the pro-ams. Speaking and understanding English must be part of it. Pro-ams and clinics are money makers. LPGA is now losing sponsors. It's all about the $$$$$

[iacas]

Langauge is closely related to nationality and IMO I think this will be enough combined with the fact that the LPGA had a mandatory meeting with the koreans and the LPGA reasoning does not seem to hold that much water.

1) It was a mandatory meeting to DISCUSS the policy.

2) Language isn't nationality. 3) They might get suspended AT THE END OF THE 2009 SEASON. They then have several months to bring their proficiency up.

I do understand other peoples point of view, but I do not think the courts will believe the LPGA.

I doubt it'll go to court. The Korean players interviewed seem on-board with it.

Again, the Korean players get it - who are you to decide for them that it's so wrong?

The courts will probably believe that this could leave the door wide open for the LPGA to hand down even more bold rules and regulations.

They can't rule on things that have not yet happened.

I personally do not think suspending players will solve the problem.

I personally think the threat of suspension is an entirely different thing than actually suspending someone.

I think there are better more comprehensive ways to solve the problem.

The LPGA doesn't, and quite frankly, they probably know better than you do.

I truely believe that their underlying goal was to limit the number of foreign/korean golfers which I believe is wrong on any level.

Based on what? Oh, right, nothing.

I also do not believe SeRi Park agrees with the LPGA. She stated that she believes that suspension is too harsh. This is contrary to the LPGA's stated policy.

Oh whatever - she agrees that they need to learn English, and again, if someone actually gets suspended, that's one thing. You can't have a toothless policy if you really want people to get it. What else could they have done? A suspension at the end of the season is pretty weak as penalties go, if you ask me, but the word "suspension" itself should be enough to motivate the players. They have this off-season to learn and all of next year to practice.

[julie_m]

I know we've sucked the life out of the topic, but I'm still keeping an eye on it. New developments today.

http://adage.com/article?article_id=130699

Is this something the LPGA should worry about?

[Thrash13]

I'm going to merge this with the other topic.

The LPGA tries to help the sponsorship situation, and one of their biggest is against the idea. If they get the same reaction from a couple others, they may have to reconsider. However, it's probably for the best overall, so we will just have to wait and see.

[Harry Longshanks]

I'm going to merge this with the other topic.

Hmmmm, I wonder if any State Farm big-wigs ever complained at the pro-am about their pro partners. Too bad the LPGA would never release that info. Isn't the State Farm Classic one of the lamer stops on the Tour? I don't remember many big names being there this year. I wonder if State Farm was considering pulling their sponsorship anyway and this issue gave the proverbial "hook to hang their hat on." There was quite a delay in their response after the original announcement by the LPGA. Just a thought.

[Thrash13]

That's a good point. I always associate State Farm with the LPGA, but they probably aren't as big a sponsor as I said in my post above. Nonetheless, they are a pretty big name, so I'm sure their reaction will have some effect.

[julie_m]

I'm not sure about the wishy-washy "may reconsider sponsorship." That doesn't seem like much of a stance at all. What, you can't even reconsider it, you just might reconsider it? The thing is starting to smell like publicity stunt, like they're the first to make a stand against it...but may consider not doing so.

Harry's right, though I didn't think of it first - if they pull or don't pull, it'll be all their decision and prob have little to do with the LPGA.

[Harry Longshanks]

Nonetheless, they are a pretty big name, so I'm sure their reaction will have some effect.

Oh, no question about that.

I'm just wondering if they were just being opportunistic. Why say anything? It's not like State Farm is a bastion of progressive ideology. I guaran-darn-tee that Safeway won't make a peep on this issue.