Uber drivers to sue Sadiq Khan for racial discrimination

[maomao]

Is driving a PHV that is wheelchair unfriendly a protected characteristic of BAME folk?

It doesn't say that. It actually says the opposite.

 

[Bahnhof Strasse]

It doesn't say that. It actually says the opposite.

eh?

 

[Spymaster]

eh?

He's right. You needed a 'not' in there somewhere.

 

[maomao]

eh?

The protected characteristic doesn't have to be the thing that is being discriminated against. In fact it can't be in indirect discrimination. That would be direct discrimination.

 

[littlebabyjesus]

I think the use of the race card here is going to annoy a fucking lot of people but isn't this what the legislation was for?

Well this will be a test of what the legislation is for, I would think. imo it's potentially a confusing and confused bit of law because in a city like London there will be lots of areas where BAME people are over-represented or under-represented due largely or entirely to their over-representation among poorer people. This appears to be one such area - it costs a fair bit of money to become a black cab driver.

But that aspect of it might not come up. The test here would perhaps be between the competing interests of potential indirect discrimination and the wheelchair access issue. My guess is that Khan will win this given that all WAVs will be exempt. The counter argument would be that were this to be deemed illegal, that would be saying that Khan is not allowed to exclude vehicles that do not give wheelchair access, which would be a rather strange outcome to say the least, affecting the ability to act in the interests of another protected group.

 

[maomao]

I may be 4-5 years out of date here but the only regularly PCO licensed WAV that I'm aware of is the Peugeot Partner. Don't think it scores very highly environmentally and their aren't enough of them favailable for all the Prius/whatever drivers to switch overnight. Being a WAV is a red herring. The Black Cab drivers are able to improve their emissions levels with the new TXE taxi because they are a well organised group of workers who can have a vehicle specially developed for them rather than a disparate group of unskilled and mainly immigrant workers who can be bullied off the road with new taxes.

 

[littlebabyjesus]

I may be 4-5 years out of date here but the only regularly PCO licensed WAV that I'm aware of is the Peugeot Partner. Don't think it scores very highly environmentally and their aren't enough of them favailable for all the Prius/whatever drivers to switch overnight. Being a WAV is a red herring. The Black Cab drivers are able to improve their emissions levels with the new TXE taxi because they are a well organised group of workers who can have a vehicle specially developed for them rather than a disparate group of unskilled and mainly immigrant workers who can be bullied off the road with new taxes.

But there are two red herrings here then, no? Surely indirect racial discrimination is also a red herring. It's a battle of the stinky fish.

 

[sleaterkinney]

I wonder if it will stop the black cab drivers striking all the time...

 

[maomao]

But there are two red herrings here then, no? Surely indirect racial discrimination is also a red herring. It's a battle of the stinky fish.

I'm not arguing that I believe it's racist I'm arguing that it's discrimination and I'm happy for them to use any legal tool available to fight it.

 

[butchersapron]

Well this is the crux of it. From what I've seen it appears that for whatever reason Khan can't limit the numbers the way he would like. So either there is apolicy in place which restricts him or he's being a bit tricksy and this is simply a tax raising measure.

Either way doing it on the grounds of racial discrimination is a bit dodgy imo. The laws are there for very good reasons, looking to exploit them like this isn't a good look.

You (and others) may be interested in this brief look at the legal differences between direct and indirect racial discrimination.

(Even if from a noted turncoat)

 

[Bahnhof Strasse]

The protected characteristic doesn't have to be the thing that is being discriminated against. In fact it can't be in indirect discrimination. That would be direct discrimination.

Indirect discrimination is covered by the Equality Act 2010. It occurs where there is a practice, policy or rule that is applied generally to a large group but a sub group that possess a particular 'protected' characteristic ends up being treated less favourably.

A policy will dictate that all PHV that are wheelchair unfriendly will pay the congestion charge. This will affect BAME drivers disproportionately as they are most likely to drive wheelchair unfriendly vehicles. From what's written above, the sub group (BAME drivers) would need to have wheelchair unfriendly vehicles as a protected characteristic for the Equality Act to apply.

No?

 

[littlebabyjesus]

I wonder if it will stop the black cab drivers striking all the time...

Do they strike all the time? Like the majority of Londoners, I wouldn't even notice if they were on strike.

Bit conflicted on this one. On the one hand, it is good to support a group that has strong representation that protects its interests and allows its members to earn a good living. On the other hand, black cabs are so extraordinarily expensive that they are mostly just for the rich, and the barriers to membership do turn them into something of a cartel.

 

[maomao]

A policy will dictate that all PHV that are wheelchair unfriendly will pay the congestion charge. This will affect BAME drivers disproportionately as they are most likely to drive wheelchair unfriendly vehicles. From what's written above, the sub group (BAME drivers) would need to have wheelchair unfriendly vehicles as a protected characteristic for the Equality Act to apply.

No?

No

 

[Bahnhof Strasse]

No

Good.

 

[Monkeygrinder's Organ]

Do they strike all the time? Like the majority of Londoners, I wouldn't even notice if they were on strike.

They block up roads don't they. They've been blocking Tottenham Court Road fairly regularly recently.

They're certainly more effectively organised than most groups tbf.

 

[SpookyFrank]

Do they strike all the time? Like the majority of Londoners, I wouldn't even notice if they were on strike.

Bit conflicted on this one. On the one hand, it is good to support a group that has strong representation that protects its interests and allows its members to earn a good living. On the other hand, black cabs are so extraordinarily expensive that they are mostly just for the rich.

Also they use their organising power to do things like carpet-bombing public consultations on cycle infrastructure etc.

 

[littlebabyjesus]

They block up roads don't they. They've been blocking Tottenham Court Road fairly regularly recently.

They're certainly more effectively organised than most groups tbf.

Ah ok. That passed me by.

 

[littlebabyjesus]

Also they use their organising power to do things like carpet-bombing public consultations on cycle infrastructure etc.

Yeah, they're a mix between a union and a cartel in that regard.

 

[SpookyFrank]

They block up roads don't they. They've been blocking Tottenham Court Road fairly regularly recently.

They're certainly more effectively organised than most groups tbf.

Obstructing a highway is a crime, a serious one if it prevents access for emergency vehicles. I can see why they use that tactic though, simply going on strike is not exactly a threat if the only consequence is reduced traffic, cleaner air and less racism.

 

[agricola]

You also have to look at why TfL are looking to exempt black cab drivers. Nobody is seriously going to say it's because they're predominantly white. Tradition? Notwithstanding agricola's mention of the licensing and construction of black cabs, the WAV thing does seem like a bit of a stretch doesn't it? Like someone's reeeeeally tried to find a way to exempt them.

What are the black cab boys arguing?

With black cabs though it makes sense - their regulations (for the green badge ones at least) specifically require them to be able to work within the congestion charge area. PHVs at least have the option of not entering it.

 

[maomao]

Obstructing a highway is a crime, a serious one if it prevents access for emergency vehicles. I can see why they use that tactic though, simply going on strike is not exactly a threat if the only consequence is reduced traffic, cleaner air and less racism.

I've always credited their first couple of demos against Uber as giving Uber a head start in this country by making it impossible for their regulars to get a cab at the same time as telling them who was doing it cheaper.

 

[Spymaster]

With black cabs though it makes sense - their regulations (for the green badge ones at least) specifically require them to be able to work within the congestion charge area. PHVs at least have the option of not entering it.

Fair point.

 

[littlebabyjesus]

With black cabs though it makes sense - their regulations (for the green badge ones at least) specifically require them to be able to work within the congestion charge area. PHVs at least have the option of not entering it.

So an argument here, and perhaps a strong one, is that you're not comparing like with like. PHVs and Black Cabs are not part of the same group.

 

[sleaterkinney]

Also they use their organising power to do things like carpet-bombing public consultations on cycle infrastructure etc.

Yeah, I would have a neutral opinion on black cabs if they weren't so anti-cyclist.

 

[8ball]

Yeah, they're a mix between a union and a cartel in that regard.

Isn't an important difference between a union and a cartel the fact that the latter purports to be a group of independent unaffiliated parties? As opposed to whether they might use sabotage as a tactic, which applies to both?

 

[littlebabyjesus]

Isn't an important difference between a union and a cartel the fact that the latter purports to be a group of independent unaffiliated parties? As opposed to whether they might use sabotage as a tactic, which applies to both?

I was thinking more about them acting as a group of self-employed independent traders concerned with price-fixing and jealously guarding their space from competition. I don't blame them for doing it, but they are not quite the same as a union - they show no solidarity with other cab drivers, for instance, quite the reverse.

 

[SpookyFrank]

Isn't an important difference between a union and a cartel the fact that the latter purports to be a group of independent unaffiliated parties? As opposed to whether they might use sabotage as a tactic, which applies to both?

Just because we might not like their aims or tactics, doesn't make them a cartel. A cartel for me would be a group of organisations which are ostensibly in competition but who act in concert.

If they're problematic as a union or union-like group it's because they exclude, and actively organise against, a large chunk of the people in their industry. You can't expect solidarity while showing none yourself.

 

[8ball]

I was thinking more about them acting as a group of self-employed independent traders concerned with price-fixing and jealously guarding their space from competition. I don't blame them for doing it, but they are not quite the same as a union - they show no solidarity with other cab drivers, for instance, quite the reverse.

That seems to me to be more mirroring the actions of individual employees generally (who may be members of a union).

 

[littlebabyjesus]

If they're problematic as a union or union-like group it's because they exclude, and actively organise against, a large chunk of the people in their industry. .

exactly what makes them cartel-like imo. Can't be bothered to argue it, though. Whatever.

 

[pesh]

They block up roads don't they. They've been blocking Tottenham Court Road fairly regularly recently.

They're certainly more effectively organised than most groups tbf.

they blocked up central London a few years back protesting against Uber and succeeded in increasing Ubers new signups by 800% that day.

personally i think they should either scrap the entire charge or apply it to everyone, i don't really get the idea thats its wrong to charge an Uber driver or cabbie the fee to use the roads all day but its ok to charge it to someone who just needs to get to and from work.