Taxi Driver Online

Basingstoke taxi drivers racially discriminated by council

https://www.basingstokegazette.co.uk/ne ... d-council/

TWO private hire taxi drivers from Basingstoke suffered racial discrimination from borough council officers who 'sided with white drivers', an employment tribunal has found.

The licensing officers from Basingstoke and Deane Borough Council (BDBC) were found to have discriminated against two private hire taxi drivers 'based on simple racial prejudice'.

Miss O Akinleye and Mr A Olumade, who are both of African descent and are black, took BDBC to an employment tribunal for race discrimination, harassment and victimisation due to race, and discrimination due to sex, respectively.

The tribunal, which published its outcome on November 4, found that 'both claimants were subjected to unwanted treatment which was related to race and that the behaviour of the authority officers created on occasions, a hostile and intimidating working environment for them'.

In one incident, which was ruled as 'an act of direct discrimination', Mr Olumade reapplied for a private hire driver's licence from the council in 2009 after his licence granted in 2006 expired.

Mr Olumade contacted BDBC for clarification on requiring a form showing that he had 'good conduct' whilst living in Nigeria as he had previously been granted a licence without providing the form.

His initial application in 2006 was made with a Nigerian passport, recording permission from the United Kingdom with indefinite leave to remain. However, his application in 2009 was made using a British passport.

Mr Olumade travelled to Nigeria to obtain the form, after which a note was placed on his file stating that he changed his name and was now a British citizen.

Licensing officer Sheila Stevens then contacted the Home Office, asking if the government department had 'any concerns over this applicant'.

The tribunal found that at the point of application, 'Mrs Stevens must have known that he was a British national' and that 'there was no reason to send his papers to the immigration office unless there was some suspicion about either the genuineness of his passport or his immigration status or his right to work'.

It was ruled that 'in the absence of any clear explanation' the tribunal inferred that Mr Olumade's skin colour and nationality 'were relevant factors that influenced Mrs Sheila Stevens in her decision to send the claim'.

"This is an act of direct discrimination and the BDBC are liable for it," it concluded.

The tribunal also found that Mr Olumade and Miss Akinleye 'were treated less favourably than white taxi drivers were treated...in particular' by officers Linda Cannon, Sheila Stevens, Robert Draper and Andrew Wake.

The officers are working for, or have worked for, BDBC licensing.

Concerns were also raised at the tribunal, held in Southampton in October 2023, that officers at the council 'cast Mr Olumade and Miss Akinleye, by association, as a problem instead of investigating concerns'.

Mr Olumade raised concerns that he was 'being targeted by other white taxi drivers because of his race' which were not investigated as officers 'sided over and again with white taxi drivers'.

The decisions were made in a report published by employment judge Rayner on November 4, an amended judgement made after a process of reconsideration in October.

A spokesperson for Basingstoke and Deane Borough Council said they take the judgement 'extremely seriously'.

They added: "This is a complex and long-running matter, that started in 2009, around the council’s responsibility for licensing private hire drivers.

"We have reviewed the judgement and take it extremely seriously. We are considering what actions need to be taken as a result and we are not able to comment further owing to ongoing legal processes."

_________________
IDFIMH

It's just a shame you haven't taken matters seriously in the last 15 years.

To have four licensing officers named by a tribunal as acting in a discriminatory way is nothing short of a scandal.

I think the directors and councillors at that council should also be considering their positions.

But I bet they don't.

_________________
IDFIMH

Can't see any prima facie evidence suggesting what is claimed, and can't bring myself to read the whole decision (there are numerous different and very confusing documents), so will have to disagree with the only other contributor to this thread (and predictable talk in the comments about serial troublemakers playing the race card etc.)

But does anyone know offhand what locus an employment tribunal has regarding a dispute between a licensing authority and the drivers it licenses?

Even if it was a case based on employment status and the like, for a start the tribunal would have to declare that the drivers were either 'employees' (PAYE) or 'workers' (Uber and Bolt) rather than self-employed.

And that would have nothing to do with the council, as opposed to the circuit the drivers worked for.

(Looks like it's something to do with the Equality Act rather than employment status, but I wasn't aware that employment tribunals were involved in that kind of thing, directly.)

(At first glance, reading the press article it looks like it's kind of saying something like an employment tribunal decided that Uber drivers have been discriminated against by Wolverhampton Council, say. Which I'm not saying can't happen, but I wasn't aware that employment tribunals had any say in that regard )

basically Stuart as a badge had been held for 3 years presumably without complaint unless something came up with DBS or insurance there shouldn't have been such an investigation at renewal.

_________________
lack of modern legislation is the iceberg sinking the titanic of the transport sector

Fair point about having had a badge for three years. But the foreign vetting thing is messy, and the rules seem to be changing all the time and are very complex, although I wouldn't claim to be an expert on it. And he did change his name in the interim, which might warrant some form of double checking, I would guess.

It also reads something like the fact he changed his nationality and passport in the meantime effectively meant his fitness and propriety to drive a taxi were ensured. Not sure that follows...

Anyway, it's obviously a very complex and detailed case, so maybe better not to say too much without at least reading the official decision.

This is some of the stuff here - the main decision seems to have been published in 2019, so not clear precisely what's happened recently with regard to it all, but there are one or two update papers etc:

https://www.gov.uk/employment-tribunal- ... 02853-2018