English Please!
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Germany
Age: 76
Posts: 1,561
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Shoe on the other foot...
English is my mother tongue, which was a big help when I went into aviation. I only noticed the disadvantages to being mono-lingual once I started working outside the U.S.A.
To fly GA aircraft in Germany I had to learn some basic aviation German and pass a language test. This was the first time that very basic point that English is not, in fact, always and everywhere the official language of aviation was brought home to me. Well, yes, there had been the odd occasion when a trip to Gabon, say, saw most of the traffic speaking French but I took that for an aberration.
If you want to fly at an airstrip in Germany AND use the radio for getting advisories and giving position reports then you shall need a specific radio licence that states you can speak German. (You get into a situation where the others aren't allowed to speak English, having German-only licences, while you aren't allowed to speak German, even assuming that you are capable of that, if you lack a licence for that.)
Now I am working in North Africa, where the two main languages are Arabic and French, with French sharing about 50% of the radio traffic with English at a rough estimate.
For your own sake you had better know the French for the basic clearances so that you have good SA. To get fuel you shall need very basic French to give the quantity required unless you want to be reduced to writing little notes on scraps of paper, when you may look like an ignoramus, or else get the other crew member to do this for you.
Most of my colleagues have English as their second or third language. Socialising is done mostly in French and Arabic with English in third place closely followed by German. You wouldn't get very far here by putting in some sort of "English only" rule anywhere but in the cockpit, and even there English is restricted in its use if both crewmembers share another common language. I think this is just common sense, really.
Such a heavy-handed approach as ordering people to only use English just because they are working in aviation would be totally unacceptable, I think. It would be interesting to see someone try to do that of course. "Cultural imperialism" might be the first bit of English learned aside from the usual stuff such as "Say again?"
Having the courtesy to learn some basic phrases in the local language can pay big dividends in having a good working relationship plus helping to make friends if you have any interest in that. (411A, you can just look away now!)
To fly GA aircraft in Germany I had to learn some basic aviation German and pass a language test. This was the first time that very basic point that English is not, in fact, always and everywhere the official language of aviation was brought home to me. Well, yes, there had been the odd occasion when a trip to Gabon, say, saw most of the traffic speaking French but I took that for an aberration.
If you want to fly at an airstrip in Germany AND use the radio for getting advisories and giving position reports then you shall need a specific radio licence that states you can speak German. (You get into a situation where the others aren't allowed to speak English, having German-only licences, while you aren't allowed to speak German, even assuming that you are capable of that, if you lack a licence for that.)
Now I am working in North Africa, where the two main languages are Arabic and French, with French sharing about 50% of the radio traffic with English at a rough estimate.
For your own sake you had better know the French for the basic clearances so that you have good SA. To get fuel you shall need very basic French to give the quantity required unless you want to be reduced to writing little notes on scraps of paper, when you may look like an ignoramus, or else get the other crew member to do this for you.
Most of my colleagues have English as their second or third language. Socialising is done mostly in French and Arabic with English in third place closely followed by German. You wouldn't get very far here by putting in some sort of "English only" rule anywhere but in the cockpit, and even there English is restricted in its use if both crewmembers share another common language. I think this is just common sense, really.
Such a heavy-handed approach as ordering people to only use English just because they are working in aviation would be totally unacceptable, I think. It would be interesting to see someone try to do that of course. "Cultural imperialism" might be the first bit of English learned aside from the usual stuff such as "Say again?"
Having the courtesy to learn some basic phrases in the local language can pay big dividends in having a good working relationship plus helping to make friends if you have any interest in that. (411A, you can just look away now!)
The people who sign your paycheck make the rules . . .
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Montréal, Canada
Posts: 75
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Chuks,
Beautiful post.
It seems that mono-lingual english speakers on this board figure that proper communication in all aspects of life can only be achieved in english.
Sometimes, YOU have to go the extra mile. I congratulate you on learning a bunch of languages (some of them harder than others) to stay ahead of miscommunication, instead of expecting everybody else to talk like you.
I would love to see the reactions of those people if one of theirs was reporting from Italy that their employer were forbidding them from speaking english with a countryman.... oh the nerve!!
Felix
Beautiful post.
It seems that mono-lingual english speakers on this board figure that proper communication in all aspects of life can only be achieved in english.
Sometimes, YOU have to go the extra mile. I congratulate you on learning a bunch of languages (some of them harder than others) to stay ahead of miscommunication, instead of expecting everybody else to talk like you.
I would love to see the reactions of those people if one of theirs was reporting from Italy that their employer were forbidding them from speaking english with a countryman.... oh the nerve!!
Felix
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Stuck in the middle...
Posts: 1,638
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Mike,
Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights gives the right to freedom of expression and this is the most-used starting point when arguing for the right to use a certain language; should you/your union bring an action, it would most likely be under this head.
However it has not been fully tested by the European Court of Human Rights so it's still a grey area.
Article 10 does allow some derogation from the freedom:
- hence an employer such as an airline may be within their rights to stipulate a certain language on those grounds. CRM has been mentioned previously and if you have multi-national crew, it may be that the airline considers it best if they are used to dealing with each other in one language as a matter of course.
Likewise, they may actually be operating under a view of non-discrimination. That is, if you have multi-national crew and some start speaking to each other in a language which effectively excludes others, then that could be discriminatory (
). Hence they have to be seen to be doing something to control that. Whilst you're on a trip, you're on duty, even at the pub, so they get to say what goes. Proof of that can be seen in two simple examples: 1. if you fell over and broke your arm at the pub whilst on a slip, you could claim on the company's insurance; 2. if someone behaved inappropriately towards a female F/A, the company could go after the culprit. Hence whilst on a trip, you're on duty, even when you're not at the wheel.
Now you claim that your employers are making this rule so that they get to hear everything that is going on. But if you work for a Spanish (or any non-UK) airline, then how will it help them if everything is in English? Surely they would be better to stipulate everything outside actual operational conversation (eg. with ATC or checklists), be in Spanish?
Moreover, if you're complaining about them wanting to hear your conversations off the aircraft but whilst still on duty, then you are saying that they have ears EVERYWHERE - in which case I suggest you need to be careful of who you're talking to, irrespective of the language used.
I would say that this sort of stuff is gold to any 'popular' newspapers... I wonder what management would say if they found out that it was going to hit the press.
This article may be of interest.
Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights gives the right to freedom of expression and this is the most-used starting point when arguing for the right to use a certain language; should you/your union bring an action, it would most likely be under this head.
However it has not been fully tested by the European Court of Human Rights so it's still a grey area.
Article 10 does allow some derogation from the freedom:
The exercise of these freedoms, since it carries with it duties and responsibilities, may be subject to such formalities, conditions, restrictions or penalties as are prescribed by law and are necessary in a democratic society, in the interests of national security, territorial integrity or public safety...
Likewise, they may actually be operating under a view of non-discrimination. That is, if you have multi-national crew and some start speaking to each other in a language which effectively excludes others, then that could be discriminatory (
). Hence they have to be seen to be doing something to control that. Whilst you're on a trip, you're on duty, even at the pub, so they get to say what goes. Proof of that can be seen in two simple examples: 1. if you fell over and broke your arm at the pub whilst on a slip, you could claim on the company's insurance; 2. if someone behaved inappropriately towards a female F/A, the company could go after the culprit. Hence whilst on a trip, you're on duty, even when you're not at the wheel.Now you claim that your employers are making this rule so that they get to hear everything that is going on. But if you work for a Spanish (or any non-UK) airline, then how will it help them if everything is in English? Surely they would be better to stipulate everything outside actual operational conversation (eg. with ATC or checklists), be in Spanish?
Moreover, if you're complaining about them wanting to hear your conversations off the aircraft but whilst still on duty, then you are saying that they have ears EVERYWHERE - in which case I suggest you need to be careful of who you're talking to, irrespective of the language used.
I would say that this sort of stuff is gold to any 'popular' newspapers... I wonder what management would say if they found out that it was going to hit the press.
This article may be of interest.
Riding the Euro Gravy Plane
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Strasbourg
Posts: 455
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Taildragger
The European Convention on Human Rights isn't really relevant in this case. The conventions written at the Council of Europe are a set of legal obligations which member governments agree to adhere to, most of these obligations are enshrined in law in each member country. Ultimately, a case can go all the way here to Strasbourg (in fact we have 80,000 of them waiting to be heard) but it's important to understand that only a member government can be prosecuted in the European Court of Human Rights, it is not a place where an individual can attempt to prosecute a private corporation.
With regard to freedom of expression the point of the convention is more to do with your ability to say what you think without being harrassed by a government instrument, like the police for example. It has very little to do with language, there are various other conventions which cover protection of language though none of them cover what a private corporation may or may not impose on its workforce, that's an entirely different legal playing field.
Article 10 of the European Convention on Human Rights gives the right to freedom of expression and this is the most-used starting point when arguing for the right to use a certain language; should you/your union bring an action, it would most likely be under this head
With regard to freedom of expression the point of the convention is more to do with your ability to say what you think without being harrassed by a government instrument, like the police for example. It has very little to do with language, there are various other conventions which cover protection of language though none of them cover what a private corporation may or may not impose on its workforce, that's an entirely different legal playing field.
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Stuck in the middle...
Posts: 1,638
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
SXB,
Agreed, the ECHR is a public law instrument (indeed the UK Human Rights Act can only be used as a cause of action against public bodies) but it imparts rights, which are enforceable against anyone seekingto infringe them. That is, a right to privacy of correspondence must be observed by both government (can't open my mail) and, say, an employer (can't open mail addressed to me without a legal, justifiable reason - which may include 'business purposes').
So my point is that right to expression - which in the first paragraph of Art.10 carries no qualification, unlike para.2 - is a general right.
Whether the right to freedom of expression extends to freedom to always use a language one chooses (rather than the content of what one says) has not, I think, been tested.
Agreed, the ECHR is a public law instrument (indeed the UK Human Rights Act can only be used as a cause of action against public bodies) but it imparts rights, which are enforceable against anyone seekingto infringe them. That is, a right to privacy of correspondence must be observed by both government (can't open my mail) and, say, an employer (can't open mail addressed to me without a legal, justifiable reason - which may include 'business purposes').
So my point is that right to expression - which in the first paragraph of Art.10 carries no qualification, unlike para.2 - is a general right.
Whether the right to freedom of expression extends to freedom to always use a language one chooses (rather than the content of what one says) has not, I think, been tested.
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: crawley
Posts: 8
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ok... so for all you pro-english speakers out there :
hola mike76, como va la cosa? te enteraste que el madrid gano la liga?
so... one of two things will have happened to you
1. you either switched off completely, because you don't understand, and won't read the rest of this post, or...
2. you are suddenly offended because i'm speaking to a countryman in our language, about something nothing to do with safety, aviation, or our work environment, (for the record, i don't know mike76 at all) but because you've heard/read some familiar words (e.g. madrid) have come over all suspicious about what we might be saying...
respect for my colleagues is one thing, and i will avoid speaking spanish german or italian if everyone INVOLVED in the conversation didn't speak it, but if in a public area, in a conversation intended for only spanish speakers, and again, not related to work, i will speak whatever language i damn well please!!! or am i not allowed to use sign language or esperanto now??? bureaucratic busybodies....
hola mike76, como va la cosa? te enteraste que el madrid gano la liga?
so... one of two things will have happened to you
1. you either switched off completely, because you don't understand, and won't read the rest of this post, or...
2. you are suddenly offended because i'm speaking to a countryman in our language, about something nothing to do with safety, aviation, or our work environment, (for the record, i don't know mike76 at all) but because you've heard/read some familiar words (e.g. madrid) have come over all suspicious about what we might be saying...
respect for my colleagues is one thing, and i will avoid speaking spanish german or italian if everyone INVOLVED in the conversation didn't speak it, but if in a public area, in a conversation intended for only spanish speakers, and again, not related to work, i will speak whatever language i damn well please!!! or am i not allowed to use sign language or esperanto now??? bureaucratic busybodies....
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: FUBAR
Posts: 3,348
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I believe the person who tried to impose this rule is no longer in his previous position of authority, although regretably for those who have to share the crew room / cockpit with him , neither is he in the Caribean as planned. . . . shame that.
If I had found myself in receipt of his "advice" I would have spoken French to whoever was around, whether they understood or not, even if English ( or at least my dialect of it) is my mother tongue.
I suggest you use the time spent in his presence to insult him among yourselves in a language he doesn't understand, it can be most rewarding.
If I had found myself in receipt of his "advice" I would have spoken French to whoever was around, whether they understood or not, even if English ( or at least my dialect of it) is my mother tongue.
I suggest you use the time spent in his presence to insult him among yourselves in a language he doesn't understand, it can be most rewarding.
