Cabbies ordered to pick up all riders

[Tubal-Cain]

Cabbies ordered to pick up all riders

Airport commissioners insist it's simply a customer-service issue. But many Muslim taxi drivers say it's an unfair new penalty that violates their religious prohibitions against handling alcohol.

Both sides agree that the dispute, part of a cultural conflict in the Twin Cities that has already drawn national attention, is probably heading for a court challenge, which in turn could become a national test case.

On an 11-0 vote Monday, Metropolitan Airports Commission (MAC) members voted to crack down on drivers refusing service, making Minnesota the first place in the country to decide how to treat Muslim cabbies who decline to transport alcohol-toting riders on religious grounds.

Starting May 11, any airport taxi drivers who refuse riders will face 30-day suspensions. Drivers will have their licenses revoked two years for a second offense.

"We're just sending a message that if you want to drive here at this airport, you have to take all our customers," said Steve Wareham, director of Minneapolis-St. Paul International Airport.

Hassan A. Mohamud, an imam at the Islamic Da'wah Center in St. Paul, called the stricter sanctions frustrating and disappointing.

"We see this as a harsh penalty against fellow Americans only because they are practicing their faith," the Muslim scholar said. "This does not reflect the American values of tolerance and accommodation."

Roughly three-quarters of the 900 licensed cabbies at the airport are Somali and most are Muslim.

There were 27 alcohol-related refusals of service out of an estimated 120,000 rides from mid-November to mid-January, one of the airport's busiest seasons, according to recent MAC figures. It has been less of a problem since Aug. 11, when carrying liquids on planes was banned, airport officials said. Most of the recent issues came from buying alcohol at duty-free shops.

Taxi driver Abdinoor Ahmed Dolal said that many of his fellow Muslim cabbies plan to go ahead and pay for renewed licenses and adhere to all the commission's rules -- until a rider clearly carrying a bottle of alcohol needs a ride.

"That is against our faith and we will wait until that moment and continue working until we are pulled out of line," said Dolal, a Kenyan emigre. "This is a country of laws, not a country of men. They passed an ordinance that we feel is unfair and if we have to go to the state Supreme Court, we will."

Amish precedent?

Attorney Jeff Hassan, representing the Muslim drivers, pointed to a 1990 Minnesota Supreme Court decision allowing Amish buggies to use state roads without displaying bright orange triangles required under state law. The Amish maintained the signs were against their religion.

Hassan cited the case in arguing that the Minnesota Constitution is "distinctively stronger" than the federal Constitution in protecting religious freedom. The state Constitution dates to settlers coming from different sects who had faced intolerance in their native lands, he said.

"There is a clear analogy to this new group to this country that has particular beliefs and our courts require reasonable accommodation," said Hassan, who added later that a court challenge is likely.

MAC attorney Tom Anderson told commissioners that the Amish case is different because taxi drivers are common carriers of other people. But he acknowledged that "ultimately this might be the court's decision."

Commission Chairman Jack Lanners talked about an e-mail he received from a parent who was riding home from the airport with two children.

The parent casually mentioned he had wine in his luggage "and he was deposited on the street somewhere in the dark of night," Lanners said. "That's a safety issue."

But Dolal, the drivers' unofficial spokesman, said they are only concerned about exposed alcohol and wouldn't ask passengers what was in their luggage.

Commissioner Mike Landy said he had met with Muslim scholars and understands the Qur'an rules against benefitting from alcohol and how that is considered sinful.

"The airport is plagued with this issue and the longer we let the condition go on, it has actually festered," he said.

Airport spokesman Patrick Hogan said that the issue apparently has not bubbled up elsewhere. Some say that's because of Minneapolis' high concentration of refugees from Somalia, many of whom interpret the Qur'an more conservatively.

[Guest LadyC]

as i understand it from skimming the article, this only applies to those working the airport for fares, not to the rest of the city. if they want to work the airport, they have to accept all fares. if they want to discriminate against their passengers who have alcohol with them, they can still chose to drive their cab elsewhere in the city, just not at the airport. am i getting that right?

they shouldn't be so upset about it IMO. they still have the opportunity to drive a cab without penalties for turning down passengers.

[Wingwalker]

As a former customer service employee, I still reserved the right to refuse service to customers, and not loose my job. I also believe that all taxi drivers should have the same right. If anything at all, the taxi driver looses his fare. But when forced to pick up every customer, the rights of the drivers are compromised.

Sorry if this offends others. My husband was a taxi driver. He has a scar on his neck from a drunk fare. Would my husband declined the fare if he were allowed to? I dont know. I do know that my husband was an armed driver, and because he was, he is alive today.

[Guest LadyC]

they aren't forced to pick up every customer. they can pick and choose who they want to give rides to anywhere other than the airport. nobody is forcing them to work the airport.

i'm glad your husband is alive and well.... and i'm glad he was armed with protection!

[Oh Hamburgers!]

I support this. If you sign up to be in a service like this, you should have to deal with things that you might not specifically care for. If you are offended by your passengers, or if you don't agree with their lifestyles, that's too darn bad. As long as they are following legal guidelines, they should be able to go in any taxi they want, provided they pay of course. Now, if a passenger has illegal substances on them, or is doing some illegal activity, or if for some reason the driver feels physically threatened, then of course they shouldn't be required to be picked up, but as much as certain drivers might protest alcohol, alcohol is a legal substance for 21year olds and up in this country. Bummer if you get offended, but then you should probably find a different job. This applies to ALL drivers for me, not just muslims. It would be the same if, say, a Christian driver would be refusing a homosexual couple. Sorry, at this point in time, it's legal, if you have a problem with catering to those types of people, then I suggest a different line of work.

[Guest LadyC]

exactly tmr. not to mention, it's a rare thing for someone to leave the airport already intoxicated and unruly. most of them just got off the plane. they woulddn't be a threat, at leaast not in that sense.

now, picking someone up from the topless bar at 2 a.m., that could be risky, and by all means they have the right to refuse a ride. but then, according to the article, they CAN refuse service... just not at the airport.

[Guest LadyC]

oh, wait... i need to correct myself. the one part i do disagree with you about is the separation of church and state being guaranteed by the constitution. that's not what the constitution says. the constitution only guarantees (or used to) that no law shall be passed that requires people to follow a particular religion or that restricts them from EXPRESSING their faith. refusing service doesn't fall into the category of expressing one's faith.

if this were christian cabbies, we'd be suggesting that they use the opportunity to witness. of course, i wouldn't suggest that to a muslim!

[kat8585]

I doubt this is the end of this. Being Minnesota, with CAIR'S muslim congressman Ellison being from the same state, they will try to get their way in court.

And they will probably succeed. But can you imagine what would happen if this was a Christian driver trying to stick with his convictions?

[Oh Hamburgers!]

I doubt this is the end of this. Being Minnesota, with CAIR'S muslim congressman Ellison being from the same state, they will try to get their way in court.

And they will probably succeed. But can you imagine what would happen if this was a Christian driver trying to stick with his convictions?

I don't understand the connection. It's possible the opposition will succeed, but we don't know, it isn't certain. Similarly, if this was directed mostly towards Christian drivers, it would be possible they would succeed, but we don't know right now considering the case hasn't been decided.

Maybe we should draw correlations once we get more information about the outcome.

[JustinM]

I love this comment:

Hassan A. Mohamud, an imam at the Islamic Da'wah Center in St. Paul, called the stricter sanctions frustrating and disappointing.

"We see this as a harsh penalty against fellow Americans only because they are practicing their faith," the Muslim scholar said. "This does not reflect the American values of tolerance and accommodation."

Tolerance and accomodation? So, then are the cabbies being tolerant and accomodating to airline passengers when refusing to give them a ride?

Double standard, they can't have it both ways. If they want tolerance and accomodation from us, they need to be tolerant and accomodating to us as well.

Do we really need to comment much more on this? The airport did the right thing, now that the guidelines have been set, I really do not see the need to persue this through the judicial system. Terms of agreement, the cabbie can A, work for the airport and go by their rules, or B, can work somewhere else where he would feel comfortable providing a service.

Refusing to serve a customer is a right, but that customer cannot be discriminated against based on religious beliefs. Essentially, it's the cabbies being discriminative to the non-muslim passenger, not the passenger being discriminative to the driver by choosing to ride in his cab.