Can an employer get a potential employee to take a language proficiency test before hiring them.

I don't see why not when lots of companies do aptitude tests.

Wouldn't the level of English be clear from the interview though?

We have this issue in our workplace but she to a number of issues, being fussy about proficiency in English isn't high on the list.

It does impact on the communication and relationship between employees and those they look after.

It's actually very frustrating for the residents as most have a high level of dementia and just simply can't cope with lack of verbal understanding along with other things.

It's been raised in our workplace but to no avail.

One of my nieces went for a job interview a few years ago. She mentioned in her CV that she knew some German. As part of the process, had to have a full conversation with two native German speakers for 30 minutes.

I'd never get a job or hire someone if I/they could not communicate with customers or co workers to get the job done.

It's not clear why you're the one asking about the legalities of a language test. Have management asked you to provide suggestions on how to get employees with a higher level of English? If not, your job is to report to management the problems that this is causing. It's not to decide how the problem should be fixed

I'm not disagreeing with you.

One option gets you closed quickly. The other one can also get you closed, but it takes longer and people may get demoralised, neglected, abused, injured or even killed along the way.

I've had to spend work time coaching colleagues in English. Not a problem when you're working in low-risk IT and no one's going to die.

All we can really offer you is thoughts and prayers though, and the suggestion to keep making management aware of the issues and and solutions you can see.

FWIW, a spoken-language competency test is totally legal, provided spoken language is part of the job, and every candidate has to do it. (There are a good few Irish people who may fail such a test!)

Being understood has to be essential in a care setting.Can't believe someone who doesn't have full competency in English would be given employment.I'm sure the HSE will have an input if/when they inspect the residence.

In other languages/european countries if applying for a job you would be expected to have a B1,B2,C1,C2 level of language proficiency with proof from one of the recognized international bodies. For medicine or another specialist field you would be expected to the appropriate level of proficiency with proof from one of the international bodies and not some photoshopped certificate.

It is an example of the chaos that is modern Ireland with VISAs thrown about like confetti for everyone and anyone with no checks being done...Ireland is not a serious Country.

I've been on language courses in Germany where Albanian Care Home workers were expected to pass their C1 German Language exam to continue in employment. Someone passing a C1 german language test would not necessarily be fluent to native speaker level but would have a better understanding of grammar than the average blue collar German.

It's perfectly acceptable to require job applicants to demonstrate proficiency in English (or any other language) if proficiency in that language is an objectively justifiable requirement of the job (and there are many public-facing and customer-facing jobs for which language proficiency clearly is an objectively justifiable requirement). The level of proficiency you require has to be objectively justified also — e.g. you can't demand that someone have Leaving Cert Honours in English for a job that can be done by someone with a basic competence in spoken English and the literacy level of a 12-year old.

You'd have to apply that requirement in a non-discriminatory way; you couldn't select certain candidates by reference to a prohibited characteristic (such as nationality) and require only those candidates to demonstrate their proficiency.

Obviously, if you apply an English-language proficiency requirement to all candidates, that's going to bear more heavily on candidates from a non-English-speaking background than on native speakers; a greater proportion of them will fail to meet the requirement. But that's OK; provided the standard of English you are requiring is objectively justifiable by reference to what the job entails, requiring it of all candidates is not indirect discrimination on the grounds of nationality or ethnicity.

It's not, I think, a fear of discrimination claims that lead to employers not tesing language proficiency. It's that care work is hard, and badly-paid, and the cohort of workers willing to do it is not large. Non-nationals are heavily represented in that cohort. Applying a language proficiency requirement would reduce the pool of avaiable workers still further; the only way to increase it would be to raise pay rates, probably by a fairly signficant amount and/or improve other working conditions to make the job more attractive. This would mean either higher charges for care or lower profits for employers or (quite possibly) both.

I have dated a Serbian medical professional who had to take a specialist language course and a language teacher in the best language school in my city. Employers demand more of their staff here than in Ireland. Those Albanian Care workers were highly motivated and there to cover the syllabus and take the c1 exam to keep their employer off their back. Please allow for the possibility that some people have experience of things that you don't.

You don't appear to understand the difference between a visa and a work permit, which really isn't a good place to be starting your claims of superior knowledge from.