Posted on 08/16/2007 9:53:10 AM PDT by Alouette
A blind Vancouver man who was shunned by a taxi driver who didn't want a guide dog in his cab has reached a $2,500 settlement with North Shore Taxi.
Bruce Gilmour, 49, had called a cab from a West Vancouver coffee shop after a day of skiing in November 2006.
But North Shore Taxi driver Behzad Saidy, a Muslim, refused to transport Gilmour and his golden retriever Arden, saying his religion prevents him from associating with dogs. Gilmour, who has been blind for 30 years, filed a human rights complaint, alleging discrimination. "I'm tired of defending my dignity," he said Wednesday.
Last Friday - three days before a B.C. human rights tribunal hearing - Gilmour reached a settlement with the taxi company.
The agreement, issued by the tribunal, attempts to balance the rights of blind people with guide dogs to obtain taxi service with the rights of Muslim cab drivers to follow their personal beliefs.
Gilmour said he will donate part of the monetary settlement to the Az-zahraa Islamic Centre in Richmond after receiving help from Imam Syed Jaffir, and to B.C. Guide Dog Services. They will likely get $500 to $700 each, he said.
Under the terms of the settlement, North Shore Taxi was ordered to immediately establish a policy forbidding any driver to refuse a fare from a blind person accompanied by a certified guide dog.
The only exceptions are for drivers allergic to dogs and those who satisfy the company that they have an honest religious belief that precludes them from transporting certified guide dogs.
However, such drivers must call dispatch for the next available cab, give their name to the blind person and remain with the person until the next cab arrives.
Anyone who breaches the policy will be suspended for two shifts for a first offence and be subject to termination for a second offence.
Blind people will not be required to inform dispatch of their disability.
"It's a landmark in my life," Gilmour said. "This is not binding with any other cab company, but if a person in White Rock or Coquitlam winds up in the same situation, my case will now raise the bar."
William Thornton, chief executive of B.C. Guide Dog Services, said Gilmour's experience was "all too common." There are about 150 guide dogs in B.C.
Gilmour, who uses taxis regularly, said he's been fighting such discrimination since 1985, when he got his first guide dog.
He said he's argued with cabbies who have refused to allow the dog in their cars and has been passed up by taxis as he waits on the curb. He and his guide dog rarely encounter problems with other types of public transportation, he said.
"I'm humiliated and frustrated and it's an awkward position having to go into defending your rights because you're blind," Gilmour said.
North Shore Taxi officials could not be reached Wednesday.
But Saidy, the cab driver, claims he also suffered discrimination because he was told by a citizenship judge 15 years ago that he could practise his religion and culture.
He said that as a Muslim, he cannot associate with dogs because they are considered impure.
Saidy said he often walks disabled people to their door or helps them into cabs and, in Gilmour's case, he called the dispatcher to order another cab to collect him and Arden.
"I felt for [Gilmour]. I'm sorry for him but I'll never be sorry for what I did because I try to help people all the time," he said.
"I have lots of customers who are blind or disabled...but I can't be close to the dog.
"In my own company they say if you don't take the dog you're going to be fired. This is torture for me." Saidy said he agreed to the settlement because his religion was finally respected and he was exempt from picking up guide dogs. But, he adds, he's not optimistic that's going to happen.
"I don't trust anymore," he said.
I was in Saudi Arabia and there are dogs there. Some of the westerners even had pet dogs. The kind of native dog found in Saudi Arabia would put most people off dogs. They are shifty, surly, and half-wild. I had a friend who “tamed” three of them.
They were crazy, and untrainable. One time he left them with a friend of his while he went away for the weekend. The friend shut them up in a spare bedroom and went to work. When he got back they had tunneled through the dry wall to get out and did about $2000 worth of damage to the apartment.
I’m guessing dogs were tolerated to some extent in Islamic societies because they performed the same kind of useful function in all nomadic societies. They eat the garbage around the camp and bark like they were insane when strangers came around.
That is just to funny!!!LOL
Why should he have to wait another 5 minutes? He’s already been slowed down by his blindness, and we should tell him to suck it up and submit to being slowed down again, to serve the personal beliefs of someone who took a job that would clearly involve picking up people with guide dogs (not to mention people with pets, who may need to urgently transport them to a vet)?
Pat a dog........no
Rape a goat.... .yes"
Can't get get much more succinct that that!!
I predict that, if we continue to bow to the abberant wishes of these people, we will eventually lose our republic.
I regret to note that some of the people who post on this forum seem to see nothing wrong with this type of behavior. They are, in large part, at the heart of the problem.
Are you seriously comparing this blind guy to Rosa Parks?
First, the cab driver wasn’t refusing to serve the person, he was refusing to serve the dog. While I appreciate that in this particular situation, the guy and his dog are pretty inseparable, there is still a pretty significant distinction between saying “coloreds to the back of the bus,” and “sorry, I can’t take you in my cab with a dog.”
First the Muslim cabbies refuse to take customers carrying alcohol.
Then they wanted foot washing basins in the airports.
Now it's refusing a seeing eye dog.
Next thing will be women not wearing the hijab .
All part of their cult religion. They are just starting with the small things. The bigger things will be up and coming as we roll over and play dead to all their demands. Where does it end?
Hmmm, with a libertarian-type moniker like yours you might want to reconsider this whole thing. The only reason that we are having this debate is because cab-drivers are heavily regulated and specifically licensed. Supposedly this is for our benefit. Cabs are public accommodations when they shouldn’t be.
Why can’t anybody just go buy a suitable vehicle and start hauling people for money? I visted Moscow a few years ago and it seemed like half the population with a vehicle was ready and willing to haul somebody else for money. I rode in little tiny cars with big guys in overalls and in Mercedes limos driven by guys in expensive suits.
We are focused on this guy because we don’t think its reasonable for him to refuse to put a dog in his car. I’m not anti-dog but what if the dog is wet? What about non-guide dogs? Can a cabbie refuse?
What about the cabbie’s right to refuse other types of riders? Cab drivers suffer one of the worst work related injury and death rates in the country due to violence yet are under pressure to pick up people they don’t trust and take them places they don’t want to go in order to keep their jobs.
If I was the guy I would probably want to compile a list of drivers that I trusted and make arrangements. If the industry weren’t so regulated he could probably get a regular driver who would haul him around. I probably couldn’t work as a cab driver because I pretty much would want the final say over who I picked up and who I didn’t.
And better yet, can you refuse to transport people who you SUSPECT are homosexual, just to be extra-safe with regards to maintaining your religious purity?
I assume he’s not completely blind, but blind enough to need a dog and be unable to drive. I’m not sure what cabs look like in B.C., but in NYC, for example, they’re all school-bus yellow and would be very hard to miss if you had any vision at all.
Thanks for the info.
“Though I’m sure I’ll get flamed for this, but frankly, it doesn’t sound to me like the cab driver was being particularly unreasonable. He called the guy another cab—what, this guy can’t wait five minutes for another cab to come around the corner?”
Yes, you should be flamed for this. By your logic, I can discriminate against anyone based solely on the premise that the next person they meet will not discriminate. If you went to the store and they stopped you at the door and told you to go to the store across the street, I think you would be upset. If you tried to buy a ticket to fly to another city and you were turned away and told to take a bus I’m sure you would be angry.
I’ve seen blind skiers on the slopes...advanced runs, but always with a trained teacher/ski patrol person who helps guide them down. Never with a dog, but there’s always a first time. I’m always fascinated when I see paraplegics and amputees skiing. They’re good!
Thanks
Time was, a cabbie would just float right by a black man, since the fare would likely take him into a bad neighborhood. The city hack licensing would simply shrug at complaints, since, as others have mentioned, "private companies can refuse service." That attitude came to screeching halt in the late '50s, for some reason.
A hack badge costs, a lot, like several thousand, each. The city has been in ultimate control of the cab business a LOOONG time. These drivers had better brush up on the law, in case a local DA wants to be mayor. I offer Jane Bryne, of Chicago, as someone who got into the mayor's office partly by playing hardball with the cab companies.
Thats because the muslims have taught them to hate humans
I don't see it. You have the driver of a public conveyance refusing to provide service to an American citizen because the driver personally dislikes and disapproves of an inseperable part of the rider's existence. Please note the distinction.
Hell, at least the bus driver would've tolerated Rosa if she had sat in the proper seat. The cabbie cannot stomach a friggin' golden retriever service dog? Please.
I'm done bending over for Islam. He does not deserve to keep the job if he is unwilling to provide service for all persons equally. Sue the cab companies until it is prohibitiviely expensive for them to keep the intolerant monsters around. Problem solved.
A half-hour away? Where were they, the Yukon? This was in Vancouver. Besides that, no, I don't think it would make much of a difference.
As I've noted before, this isn't precisely accurate. The cab driver didn't discriminate against the person, his actions were directed at the dog.
If you tried to buy a ticket to fly to another city and you were turned away. . .
Happens kind of a lot. They put you on the next flight and life goes on. Sort of like how this guy would have gotten in the next cab.
Besides that, as someone else noted, these cab drivers are typically independent business folk. If they want to refuse service to some people, I don't have a problem with that.
I’ve expounded on this point ad nauseum before, but to summarize, in many cities — like NYC, where I live Monday-Friday — having safe, reliable cabs is really important to the overall economy. Many years ago, when I was young and naive, I got into an unlicensed van that was picking people up at a train station. I got lucky, they tried to get a lot of cash, and ended up getting about 3 times what I would have paid a normal cab, but I didn’t get beaten, get my entire wallet and luggage taken, etc. There were 4 of them, the driver and 3 others who were posing as picked-up passengers but weren’t.
It is absolutely, utterly unsafe and stupid to get into a vehicle with an unknown person unless there is clear evidence that the vehicle and the person have been screened and are subject to ongoing monitoring. And lots of people need to take cabs in situations where they can’t make prior arrangements with a private car service and ascertain that it’s safe and trustworthy. I’m not a GovernmentEliminator, I’m a GovernmentShrinker, and regulating cabs is a legitimate function of government, because it benefits virtually everybody, directly or indirectly. The NYC system leaves a good deal of free market competition within the system, while maintaining an appropriately sized fleet of cabs that are well-maintained, and almost without exception driven by mentally stable and non-criminal people.
Sure, cities could solve the discrimination problem by completely taking over the cab business and making it like city bus service -— city-owned vehicle, city-employed driver and mechanics, etc. But a regulated private system involves less government intrusion and is preferable. All cities that regulate cabs also provide for private car services, that are subject to almost no regulation beyond individual citizens driving their own cars. People whose religious beliefs prevent them from picking up all members of the general public can work for those if they like. But if they want the reliable income of a regulated street-hail cab driver, without having the years of experience and connections necessary to get a job with a high-end private car service, they should be required to serve the entire public. They should also be free to carry guns, to protect themselves from the criminal element of the general public, but that’s another story.
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.