Muslim cabbies tell airport they won't bend in alcohol dispute

[militarymuscle69]

But that sounds exactly like what the cabbies are saying. 

If you want to be an islamist and not carry alchohol then you should label your cab company as a muslim cab company. If you want to be a pharmicist and not give birth control you should lable your store a christian drug store. But if it is open to the general public, you have no right to refuse service. If anyone has ever lived in Utah you will know what it is like to have religion forced upon you. All of their laws are based on Mormon beliefs. But I still will probably retire there and understand that I will have to deal with it.

[militarymuscle69]

what if i want to be a racist and keep knee gurrs out of my bar?

Call it a white only bar and see how far you get with the law

[Dos Equis]

Cabbies are no different whether they work for a company or are independent.

They are a form of PUBLIC transportation that must adhere to codes.

If a Somali doesn't want to transport person carry alcohol or guide dogs that's his right (when acting as a private citizen in his private vehicle) on the job, he's charged with transporting the public, and as long as someone is not breaking any laws, or posing a risk to them or their property, they have no right to refuse them service. If the guy is drunk and puking... that's one thing, ...but carrying a bottle of wine?

An independent cab driver is not a form of public transportation.  And what "codes" are you talking about?

[militarymuscle69]

An independent cab driver is not a form of public transportation.  And what "codes" are you talking about?

It pains me that Jag is such lib because I bet she is smoking! Canada produces some of the hottest women around

[24KT]

It pains me that Jag is such lib because I bet she is smoking! Canada produces some of the hottest women around

{giggle}    Yes we do, ...and yes we are!

[24KT]

An independent cab driver is not a form of public transportation.  And what "codes" are you talking about?

No, an independent cab driver is not a form of public transportation. An independent cab driver is an independent cab driver. The service he provides however IS public transportation through private enterprise.

Cabs, while they are not buses, or subways, are considered a form of public transportation.

They must be licensed by the city in which they operate and adhere to certain guidelines, and regulations as required by the licensing body.

I know parts of Hawaii can be pretty rural, ...but I doubt cabs there consist of some guy with a car who says give me $10 and I'll take you there, ...while you hop in his back seat and try to avoid squishing his daughters tickle me Elmo. Cabs are a regulated form of public transportation through private enterprise.

[Dos Equis]

Cabs are a regulated form of public transportation through private enterprise.

Good point.  That might mean they are indeed subject to whatever anti-discrimination laws apply to those who provide public transportation. 

[24KT]

Good point.  That might mean they are indeed subject to whatever anti-discrimination laws apply to those who provide public transportation. 

Hence the right of the cab companies to rightfully & justifiably firing them for discriminating against those who are carrying alcohol. I think a temporary suspension as proposed is inappropriate. No tolerance. Fire them.

[Dos Equis]

Hence the right of the cab companies to rightfully & justifiably firing them for discriminating against those who are carrying alcohol. I think a temporary suspension as proposed is inappropriate. No tolerance. Fire them.

No, you're confusing two different issues.  I was talking about whether an independent driver was subject to anti-discrimination laws.  You raised a good point about licensing, which I think might subject independent drivers to those laws. 

Whether a company can fire an employee is a different issue.  They have to try and accommodate the employee's religious practice, unless it would cause an undue burden on the company. 

[24KT]

No, you're confusing two different issues.  I was talking about whether an independent driver was subject to anti-discrimination laws.  You raised a good point about licensing, which I think might subject independent drivers to those laws. 

Whether a company can fire an employee is a different issue.  They have to try and accommodate the employee's religious practice, unless it would cause an undue burden on the company. 

However if that religious practice causes the company to break the law, then the two are incompatible.

[Dos Equis]

However if that religious practice causes the company to break the law, then the two are incompatible.

Not necessarily.  If the company can provide another cabbie to perform the service, then laws prohibiting discrimination in public accommodations/transportation wouldn't be violated.  I think it's similar to the pharmacist issue that Ribo posted the other day.   

[24KT]

Not necessarily.  If the company can provide another cabbie to perform the service, then laws prohibiting discrimination in public accommodations/transportation wouldn't be violated.  I think it's similar to the pharmacist issue that Ribo posted the other day.   

I suppose if people wanted to make a real issue out of it, when they call for a cab they should specify "I'll be carrying alcohol along with my seeing eye dog", ...whether they are or not. 

[Dos Equis]

I suppose if people wanted to make a real issue out of it, when they call for a cab they should specify "I'll be carrying alcohol along with my seeing eye dog", ...whether they are or not. 

Oh you think that is a joke?  There is a lady in a wheelchair in Hawaii who goes around to establishments throughout the islands and if she cannot access the establishment her lawyer, also wheelchair bound, sues the establishment for violation of the Americans With Disabilities Act.  She has probably filed about 50 or more lawsuits (probably more).  She is nothing more than a prostitute and her lawyer is a pimp.      

[24KT]

Oh you think that is a joke?  There is a lady in a wheelchair in Hawaii who goes around to establishments throughout the islands and if she cannot access the establishment her lawyer, also wheelchair bound, sues the establishment for violation of the Americans With Disabilities Act.  She has probably filed about 50 or more lawsuits (probably more).  She is nothing more than a prostitute and her lawyer is a pimp.      

I don't think it's a joke. I think it would be effective. People willing to discriminate against law abiding citizens in pursuit of a little happiness should NOT be charged with carrying the public. I'd be willing to specify I want a driver that doesn't discriminate. If that means the other cabbies who discriminate aren't getting the fares... too bad for them. Perhaps they might consider more suitable employment. So ya, ...if that were me... I'd call the cab company and specify that I will be carrying alcohol and my seeing eye dog and I want a driver willing to transport us. 

Think about it. You apply for a job as a taxidermist, but then tell your boss that you are a Brahmin <sp> and are forbidden from touching dead animal flesh... how well do you think that would go over? So why apply for let alone accept the job to begin with? Understand what your job description will be ahead of time, and if there is anything in it that conflicts with your religious beliefs, then weigh your options and make your decisions accordingly. Either accept the job and do it, ...or don't accept the job and follow your religion. but you cannot have your cake and eat it too.

[Dos Equis]

I don't think it's a joke. I think it would be effective. People willing to discriminate against law abiding citizens in pursuit of a little happiness should NOT be charged with carrying the public. I'd be willing to specify I want a driver that doesn't discriminate. If that means the other cabbies who discriminate aren't getting the fares... too bad for them. Perhaps they might consider more suitable employment. So ya, ...if that were me... I'd call the cab company and specify that I will be carrying alcohol and my seeing eye dog and I want a driver willing to transport us. 

Think about it. You apply for a job as a taxidermist, but then tell your boss that you are a Brahmin <sp> and are forbidden from touching dead animal flesh... how well do you think that would go over? So why apply for let alone accept the job to begin with? Understand what your job description will be ahead of time, and if there is anything in it that conflicts with your religious beliefs, then weigh your options and make your decisions accordingly. Either accept the job and do it, ...or don't accept the job and follow your religion. but you cannot have your cake and eat it too.

O.K.  Now you're all over the place.     A person has to be able to perform the essential job functions and the employer has to accommodate a bona fide religious practice, unless it creates a undue burden on the employer.  So, the taxidermist would have no obligation to hire a "Brahmin" (whatever that is). 

[24KT]

O.K.  Now you're all over the place.     A person has to be able to perform the essential job functions and the employer has to accommodate a bona fide religious practice, unless it creates a undue burden on the employer.  So, the taxidermist would have no obligation to hire a "Brahmin" (whatever that is). 

However, isn't asking a person what their religion is on a job application against the law? It is up here.
Therefore the onus is on the employee to learn his job description and determine if he can commit to it's duties and obligations prior to accepting the job. If he can't, ...the employer is completely justified in firing him. It's not religious discrimination, ...it's simply an inability to do the job required. not all over the place at all. My position has remained consistent since first viewing this thread. It hasn't changed and it's not going to.

[Dos Equis]

However, isn't asking a person what their religion is on a job application against the law? It is up here.
Therefore the onus is on the employee to learn his job description and determine if he can commit to it's duties and obligations prior to accepting the job. If he can't, ...the employer is completely justified in firing him. It's not religious discrimination, ...it's simply an inability to do the job required. not all over the place at all. My position has remained consistent since first viewing this thread. It hasn't changed and it's not going to.

I don't think it's against the law to ask (not sure), but it's against the law to refuse to hire because of their religion.  Dumb to ask, but I'm not sure the question itself is prohibited.  I'm part of the "hiring committee" at my company and I interview people all the time.  I NEVER ask that question.   

But that doesn't matter, because if the employee cannot perform the essential job functions the employer, if they are doing their job, will determine this during the interview.  It's not that complicated.