Posted on 04/16/2007 2:06:51 PM PDT by ButThreeLeftsDo
The operator of the Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport on Monday approved tougher penalties for cabdrivers who refuse service to travelers carrying alcohol, as some Muslim drivers have done for religious reasons.
The Metropolitan Airports Commission voted to suspend a driver's airport taxi license for 30 days for the first offense and revoke it for two years for a second offense. The new penalties take effect May 11.
Airport officials say more than 70 percent of the cabbies at the airport are Muslim, and many of them claim Islamic law prohibits them from giving rides to people carrying alcohol.
Under the old rules, a driver who refused to transport someone carrying alcohol would be told to go to the back of the taxicab line. Airport officials said that since January 2002, there have been more than 4,800 instances of a driver refusing service because a customer possessed, or was suspected of possessing, alcohol.
The dispute has been simmering for months.
One pilot program had drivers who wouldn't transport alcohol display a different top light on their cab, but the public's reaction was overwhelmingly negative and other taxi drivers who feared it would make travelers avoid taxis altogether.
On Monday, cab driver Abdinoor Dolal called the penalties punitive and asked commissioners to take a measured approach. Other drivers urged the commissioners to vote against the new penalties and consider compromises.
However, commissioners said the new penalties were needed to ensure customers get safe and reliable taxi service at the airport.
"Today's action will strengthen compliance with our taxicab ordinance and ensure people who seek taxi service receive it," said MAC Executive Director Jeff Hamiel in a news release.
These drivers are given a license for the express purpose of transporting those who request a cab. This license is a privilege granted by the state withThe rules of that license set by law. I don’t think a doctor’s license requires him to perform a set of particular procedures.
Don’t forget that the MAC said no to a private, muslim only prayer room at the airport, as well.
WELCOME TO FREE REPUBLIC’S MINNESOTA PING LIST!
78 MEMBERS AND GROWING...!
FREEPMAIL ME IF YOU WANT ON OR OFF THIS LIST!
Right, it’s just like if you don’t wish to scan a package of bacon at a cash register, don’t apply for a cashiers job at Target.
Somewhere in British Columbia(BC), Canada. The Blind person was suing the cab company for refusing to let his sight-seeing dog in the cab.
“Airport officials say more than 70 percent of the cabbies at the airport are Muslim...””
I have to fly to Wisconsin this summer.
This makes me be sure I don’t fly thru Mpls/StPaul.
Frankly, I think the external marking light was probably the best solution. Why should they be made to carry particular fares? The ONLY thing mitigating that is that it isn’t an overall ban they are being faced with, but the privilege to pick up people at the airport, and may be forcing others who are willing out of the queue.
They are under contract to serve ALL customers. Its their job. No one is forcing them to drive airport hacks, or ANY cabs at all. They CHOSE to enter into a common carrier contract to provide a paid service to the public.
Its that simple.”
Especially with such an overwhelming number of them being “Muzzies”. I am not sure I would want to even get into a cab—woman alone—with a Muzzie.
I sent a letter to the Minn. Airport Commission to the effect that it's alcohol today (although carrying closed containers of alcohol or even having a few drinks is COMPLETELY LEGAL), and tomorrow it will be Jews, or African-Americans, or women wearing shorts. Christian cabdrivers don't demand that their passengers carry a cross, and Jewish cabbies don't refuse to carry people who don't keep kosher, so why should the islamists decide who can and cannot ride in a cab. I was irate, and I don't even travel through the Minn. airport.
Dont forget that the MAC said no to a private, muslim only prayer room at the airport, as well.”
I knew that they had requested it, but was unaware that it had been declined.
Someone in Minnesota is finally growing a set, and good for them.
So, if all of the cabs on duty at the time have marker lights on that say “No alcohol”, how does one get home?
Everyone (cabbies) has to abide by the rules. Otherwise, it’s anarchy.
Well, that's a reasonably forthright response. But I still kinda like my 'kinder, gentler' solution. Only allow these Muslim cabbies who don't want to transport certain passengers based on religious reasons the use of a a cab stand with a far less desirable location.
http://www.nsnews.com/issues06/w111206/113206/news/113206nn1.html
The airport should just form two cab pools, a restricted service cab pool, and a full service cab pool.
Any cabbie could choose to be in the restricted service cab pool, and any cabbie who refuses a fare would automatically be moved from the full service pool to the restricted service pool.
Then each customer could choose which pool they wanted to serve their needs. All the drivers in the restricted pool would go broke after a while, and the problem would be solved.
Thanks for the link.
I hope it works!!
No, there can be no picking or choosing. Either one is at the airport, sitting in a cab, employed to drive people to their destination. Or....one is looking for work doing something else.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.