I've been ignoring
this story for several days, but it caught my eye this morning --mostly because of a joke at
Tim Blair's place. Cabbies at the Minneapolis airport, three quarters of whom are Muslim, have taken to refusing fares from people carrying alcohol.
Buzek, the flight attendant, said she was refused service in March after she told a driver to be careful with her suitcase because it had wine in it. Other drivers in the taxi line passed the word, she said, and four more refused her service. A dispatcher finally steered her to a driver who would take the fare.
Interesting case, no? Ridiculous as I think this is (no one objects to hidden bottles, just visible ones), I think the driver does have the right to refuse. But his cab company equally has the right to fire him. Would we tolerate Muslims refusing to carry people who looked like Jews? (In DC a driver can be fined or fired for refusing to pick up a young black male.) What about a Catholic driver refusing to drive someone to an abortion clinic? (Ha. It's a little tricky isn't it?)Anyway, get a load of the proposed solution:
Now the airports commission has a solution: color-coding the lights on the taxi roofs to indicate whether a driver will accept a booze-toting fare. The actual colors haven't been decided on yet, but commission officials met Thursday with representatives of the taxi drivers and the Minnesota chapter of the Muslim American Society to continue working on the plan.
What made me laugh was
this comment:
They haven't decided on the colors, but I think they should keep yellow in reserve as it would be a good choice for designating which cabbies will carry Jews.
Why should the airport authority get involved in this at all? The cab companies ought to set expectations for drivers and hire people who will comply. If independent cabbies want to color-code themselves, grand --let the market do its work-- and teach its lessons.
