On Sat, Apr 16, 2011 at 8:24 AM, Sarah slimvirgin@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Apr 15, 2011 at 16:16, Fred Bauder fredbaud@fairpoint.net wrote:
Well, I would not be surprised to be wrong, but I don't think your legal theory would be valid, after all the candidate fluent in Urdo may well be an American citizen and have read at Oxford. The question is whether a global organization hires globally, hiring people who have experience and skill in communicating globally.
Right, I understand that. But my question is whether an employment ad in America could lawfully say (or imply), "Ideally your native language is not Urdu."
It looks like the problem here is that there is confusion on what is meant by "as a native speaker".
Some people are taking it to mean "We'd like it to be your first language", in which case Sarah is quite correct that it specifically excludes people whose first language is English from the "ideal" requirements. Others are taking it to mean "We'd like your ability to be as good as if it were your first language", in which case Berìa is correct that it is pragmatic, reasonable, and legitimately useful for the job.
I'd like to invoke the principle of charity and think that Wikimedia means the latter, but I can see why somebody might be interpreting it as the former, since the latter reads a bit more into the words.