February 23, 2026(Yes Punjab News)
UNITED SIKHS, a human rights organization dedicated to advocating for the rights and dignity of marginalized communities, strongly condemns the U.S. Department of Transportation’s (USDOT) recent statement regarding English-only Commercial Driver’s License (CDL) testing requirements.
This policy unjustly restricts access to CDL licensing for skilled drivers and exacerbates the ongoing crisis in the trucking industry by excluding qualified individuals based on language barriers.
The English-only requirement is touted as a safety measure, with the argument that drivers must understand road signs, communicate with authorities, and comply with safety regulations.
While ensuring driver safety is paramount, the rigid enforcement of English fluency for CDL licensing is a policy that fails to recognize modern technological solutions and the evolving demographics of the workforce.
1. Exclusion of Skilled Immigrant Drivers and Labor Shortages
At its core, the English-only CDL requirement systematically excludes a vast and experienced pool of workers, many of whom come from non-English speaking regions. These individuals often possess the necessary skills and experience to contribute to the U.S. trucking industry.
The driver shortage currently plaguing the industry is a critical concern, and restricting access to CDL licensing based on language proficiency only exacerbates this crisis. Workers, who form a crucial part of the workforce in sectors like trucking, are unjustly barred from filling vital roles because they are not fluent in English. This exclusionary policy limits the available labor pool at a time when the demand for trucking services is surging, creating a growing gap between supply and demand for drivers.
2. The National Security Argument: A Non-Issue
Another argument frequently put forward in defense of the English-only CDL requirement is the national security concern: that drivers must be able to understand instructions when accessing sensitive areas within the U.S. However, this concern is increasingly outdated and fails to reflect the realities of modern security protocols.
- Security Procedures and Screening: Today, access to sensitive areas, whether they be government buildings, military installations, or critical infrastructure, is heavily regulated and monitored through robust security measures that go far beyond simply relying on a driver’s ability to speak English. Security clearances, background checks, and stringent screening processes already ensure that individuals who access these areas are properly vetted. The argument that non-English speaking drivers would pose a security risk is unfounded, as the industry already has mechanisms in place to safeguard these sensitive areas, regardless of language fluency.
- Technology and Multilingual Security Measures: Many areas that require drivers to access restricted zones already utilize modern security technologies, such as automated systems, digital verification, and multilingual staff, to ensure that safety is maintained. The notion that a driver’s inability to speak English would pose a significant risk to national security in these contexts is both exaggerated and misinformed. Non-English-speaking drivers can still undergo proper background checks and use technology to communicate with security personnel, ensuring both security and compliance.
- Real-World Precedent: Furthermore, drivers from other countries, some of whom speak little or no English, are already trusted to operate in the U.S. without posing a national security threat. The inconsistency of this argument, allowing foreign drivers with limited English proficiency to drive on U.S. roads while denying the same to qualified workers, highlights how the national security concern is overstated and may be irrelevant in this context.
3. Outdated Safety Concerns and Technological Solutions
The argument that English proficiency is essential for safety, particularly for communication with law enforcement and understanding road signs, is increasingly irrelevant in the modern world. Today, there are a multitude of technological solutions, GPS systems, translation apps, and bilingual safety materials, that can bridge the language gap and ensure drivers’ safety on the road.
These tools allow non-English-speaking drivers to navigate with ease and communicate effectively with authorities, ensuring that safety standards are upheld without the need for arbitrary language requirements. In fact, bilingual signs and translation services are already commonplace in many regions, demonstrating that the rigid English-only policy is not only outdated but unnecessarily exclusionary.
4. The Economic and Social Impact of Exclusion
The long-term harm of the English-only CDL requirement extends beyond the trucking industry’s ability to meet current demand. It stifles economic inclusion by denying non-English speaking workers the opportunity to participate fully in the labor market. These workers, who have already made significant contributions to the economy, are being systematically excluded based on a policy that fails to reflect the realities of an increasingly diverse and globalized workforce.
The trucking industry, which is essential to the U.S. economy, cannot afford to limit itself by excluding large segments of the labor market. Relaxing the English-only requirement could unlock a wealth of untapped potential, enabling the industry to grow and meet the challenges of an expanding economy. It is essential to remember that the immigrant community, which plays a crucial role in many sectors, including transportation, should be seen as an asset, not a barrier to growth.
5. Going Down the Wrong Path: Exclusion of Others
By continuing to enforce the English-only CDL requirement, the U.S. risks heading down a path of increasing exclusion. Such a policy does not foster growth but instead creates barriers that marginalize skilled workers who could contribute to the country’s prosperity.
This approach to licensing is not only harmful to the economy but sends a divisive message that immigrants and non-English speakers are not valued members of society. As the workforce grows increasingly diverse, the country must adapt to create policies that promote inclusivity and fairness, rather than exclude those who are ready and able to contribute.
6. A Call for Change: More Inclusive Licensing Policies
UNITED SIKHS calls for an immediate reevaluation of the English-only CDL requirement, urging the USDOT and policymakers to adopt more inclusive practices that reflect the realities of the modern workforce. The solution is not to exclude capable workers based on language barriers but to develop alternative measures such as bilingual testing and multilingual safety materials.
We believe that by embracing linguistic diversity, we can help the trucking industry expand and thrive, while simultaneously ensuring that safety standards are maintained. There is no reason why English-only testing should be a barrier for qualified drivers, particularly when modern technology offers practical and effective solutions to mitigate language differences.
Conclusion: A More Inclusive Future
The policy of English-only CDL testing is not only discriminatory but also short-sighted. It restricts access to a vital sector of the economy and hinders the growth of the trucking industry at a time when we need it most. By adopting more flexible and inclusive policies, the U.S. can build a stronger, more dynamic workforce, increase competition in the labor market, and better serve the needs of the country’s growing transportation demands.
UNITED SIKHS stands with the immigrant community and advocates for policies that promote inclusivity, fairness, and opportunity for all workers, regardless of their language proficiency. We urge the USDOT to reconsider its position on English-only CDL requirements and take steps to ensure that all qualified drivers can contribute to the success of the U.S. trucking industry.
FOLLOW NOW
