Interkulturelle Arbeitswelten in Luxemburg. Mehrsprachigkeit und kulturelle Vielfalt am Arbeitsplatz von Grenzgängern

Luxembourg has the highest number of cross-border commuters in the EU. These mainly come from the neighboring countries of France, Belgium and Germany. The reason for this lively cross-border commuter traffic is the massive expansion of the Luxembourg service sector that has been taking place since the 1980s. Currently, cross-border commuters account for almost half of the local labor force. In their contribution, the authors use three of their own studies to investigate “how linguistic or cultural orders are practiced, represented and brought forth in cross-border contexts” (p. 74). The three studies are a postdoctoral project on “Dealing with language diversity: the language ideologies of cross-border workers in Luxembourg” (2009-2011) by Julia de BRES (Study 1), the dissertation project “Dealing with linguistic diversity at the Workplace: the linguistic practices of cross-border workers in Luxembourg” (2009-2013) by Anne FRANZISKUS (Study 2) and the dissertation project “Socio-cultural dimensions and spatial constructions of cross-border worker mobility in the SaarLorLux Greater Region” (2008-2011) by Christian WILLE (Study 3).

The authors note that little attention has been paid in the cultural sciences to cross-border commuting as a circular form of mobility, although it is an almost exemplary context of investigation for a multitude of contemporary phenomena “which question languages and cultures as properly practiced complexes of symbols and norms (Hörning / Reuter 2004)” (p. 74). Already in the introduction to the topic of languages and communication at work, it is made clear that in contrast to other multilingual countries, language use in Luxembourg is not structured territorially but rather functionally according to social fields. This linguistic segmentation also permeates the Luxembourg labor market. The question the authors then ask is: How do cross-border commuters deal with linguistic diversity in the workplace? First of all, it is specified that the language use in companies varies greatly. The orientation of the work, the national origin of the company as well as the internal language policies shape the monolingualism / multilingualism in the company. Almost all respondents in Study 1 are confronted with multilingualism in the workplace, as the multilingual context of Luxembourg has an impact on the respective fields of work. Based on the perception of the language situation, two language ideologies were presented in detail: “the advocates of the ideology of social multilingualism as a problem and the advocates of the competing ideology of social multilingualism as an opportunity” (p. 76). The advocates of the first ideology identified the following problem areas: limited access to information, perceived exclusion, lower information density in communication and limited opportunities for advancement (these are supported by citations in the article). The statements of those who see social multilingualism as an opportunity were categorized as follows: contact with people from other cultures, use and development of language skills, cognitive development, enhanced relationships, enjoyment of an international working environment, linguistic flexibility and clarity in communication.

On the basis of the results of studies 1 and 2, the practices developed by cross-border commuters to handle multilingualism in the workplace were shown. These have been mapped on a continuum ranging from a minimum practice to a maximum practice of multilingualism. When discussing cultural diversity in the workplace, it becomes clear that personnel diversity in companies in Luxembourg does not necessarily mean that different nationalities meet in everyday working life. However when this is the case, the interculturality in the workplace is experienced differently by cross-border workers in Luxembourg. In particular, the results of Study 3 indicate that “differences are perceived and categorized stereotypically with regard to the working methods of colleagues of other nationalities” (p. 85). In the following section, ideal-typical and context-dependent strategies in cultural contact are presented in detail.