Taxis and dogs

I'm getting no younger and have considered after 47 years on the road giving up driving.

I have a little dog. There is not a single taxi company in my area that would carry me and my dog to the vets - even though I said it would be well paid. Any mess, which would be unthinkable I would clean up and pay much compensation. I've pushed the issue with the taxi companies and always, after much pushing more or less got the same answer - religion. Islam considers dogs to be inpure.

If I was a Christian taxi driver, could I refuse a Muslim passenger a journey as I DO consider them to be inpure?

Reply to
Mr Pounder Esquire
Loading thread data ...

No, because that would be discrimination on the ground of a protected characteristic.

Having a dog is not a protected characteristic.

If the dog were a registered assistance dog then you would be protected by the protected characteristic of disability and would be able to complain to the taxi licensing authority or sue the taxi driver.

formatting link
Owain

Reply to
spuorgelgoog

Which poses the interesting question as to the differences between a dog, a therapy dog, and an assistance dog.

My wife is getting a bit deaf, and her (vanilla) dog certainly helps to make sure the door-bell is never missed.

Reply to
newshound

What matters for the obligations on taxis and PHVs is whether or not the dog is an "assistance dog" for the purposes of the Equality Act as defined there.

You'd need to be ready to show the dog had "been trained to assist a deaf person".

And details differ around UK as powers are devolved.

Reply to
Robin

I was asked last year by someone who sometimes drives a taxi as his council's guidance was vague.

Reply to
Robin

Its interesting as if it was an assistance dog, the law requires they take it. Pets are a whole other thing. Legally for assistance dogs the cab driver has to carry them unless they can show a medical certificate. However a lot of people and this includes many Muslims are actually frightened of dogs. Indeed some shitless. Now whether its due to the indoctrination of them about dogs, or whether its from experience I do not know. I might suggest you talk to a company who has done work for people with assistance dogs and ask if a driver would be able to be used for yourself. It seems silly if they are forced to do the jobs by legislation but cannot find the drivers they find for the disabled for yourself.

Most of the drivers I see when i travel with a friend with a dog, have a throw in the back and the dog has to sit in the footwell.

This is how assistance dogs are taught to travel, ie not on the seat with their heads hanging out of the window! Having said all of that however, the number of no shows of taxis for guide dog users is going up. This is probably because they know they would get a

1500 quid fine if they refused, to carry the dog and hence they see the dog from down the street and go right past. I feel there has to be collusion in this from the operator though but they deny it. Brian
Reply to
Brian Gaff

Yes dogs can be certified but they have to be through the formal training. He says its a small dog, Can it be carried in a crate? This is often a good idea for vets in any case to stop the waiting room posing that tends to go on with some dogs which have not been well trained. Personally I think dogs and owners should need to pass an exam, as there are a a lot of people who keep dogs for the wrong reasons, and these are the dogs left to wander or worry or attack other working dogs, or whatever. You can see them if you can see as they lay into anything they don't like.

However I do not see that we should be punishing Muslims over something they learned from their religion, rather we should be seeking to get the message across to the society they live in that a working dog is a working dog, and that they are the good ones. That however will not help the original poster with the issue, so I think pop into a local cab company you know local blind people use and just ask the question if they would be willing to help. Brian

Reply to
Brian Gaff

Well yes that is one way of looking at it, but it is true also that if you are in certain areas around here at night when the pubs and clubs chuck out, most cab companies are mysteriously fully booked. On talking to the drivers it is apparently all too common for drunk folk to throw up in the back of a cab and this takes hours to clean up, Also the number of fights that break out in the back of cabs is also increasing, so many drivers only take private jobs and most know the danger signs and refuse. Its a sad inditement on our society.

Oh yes and its amazing how many people who claim to be Muslim seem to get themselves drunk. One thing they have obviously learned from the English, how to be a lout!

Brian

Reply to
Brian Gaff

You could probably keep a dog with you in the cab though "for security" :-)

Owain

Reply to
spuorgelgoog

My feeling is that if you choose to do a customer-facing role, whether it is a taxi driver, a maker of cakes or a proprietor of a hotel, you undertake to put the law of the land ahead of your own personal feelings.

So you commit to drive all passengers, even those with dogs; you commit to make cakes for gay/lesbian weddings; you commit to allow gay/lesbian couples to stay in your hotel.

If you have a *medical* reason not to, fine: that's a valid reason. If it is merely a religious one, then that is about the worst excuse anyone could give.

In other words: if you don't like dogs/gays - find another job where your prejudices won't be against the anti-discrimination law of the land.

Reply to
NY

I do of course agree - but note the Supreme Court ruled that the couple from Belfast prosecuted over refusing to make a cake with a message in support of gay marriage did *not* break the law.

Reply to
Robin
<snip>

<snip>

But the 'law of the land' doesn't day that you have to carry 'pet' dogs. And why should you? What next, goats, pigs?

Cheers

Reply to
Clive Arthur

possibly a trained miniature horse - eg if a UK-US trade deal harmonises definitions

formatting link

Reply to
Robin

Sorry, I was being lazy: I should have specified "assistance dogs" not pets. But a taxi firm should send a driver who does not have any objection to assistance dogs, if they are notified in advance by a prior booking as opposed to a stop-in-the-street hailing of a taxi.

Reply to
NY

Yes, I thought that was a very bizarre and counter-intuitive ruling: to put the personal feelings of the hotel owners before the anti-discrimination laws of the UK.

Maybe attitudes will change over time - maybe to say that if you discriminate against people, it is only permitted if you do so equally against *all* religious people as opposed to those who hold no religious convictions ;-) [I'm being facetious]

Reply to
NY

The basis of judgment in the bakery case was not a matter of balancing feelings. It was that the bakers didn't discriminate against the person asking for the cake. But it's well worth reading the judgment or failing that the Press Summary.

formatting link
And if you think people should be required to produce messages they profoundly disagree with then you have to be ready to carry that through to other areas. Eg Jewish bakers in support of Iran. A co-op of hard left printers in support of Tommy Robinson. Umpteen website designers, copywriters etc etc for/against a second referendum, hard Brexit, euthanasia, migration, abortion, right-to-life...

Reply to
Robin

But on London Underground escalators is says "Dogs must be carried"

Reply to
charles

You did read the post? Nothing to do with driving. Just the usual racist rant. Dressed up.

Reply to
Dave Plowman (News)

As if the O/P didn't already get enough attention to the same thread in unn.moderation a few days ago ...

Reply to
Andy Burns

Reply to
Mr Pounder Esquire

HomeOwnersHub website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.