Taxi driver in health test row

Taxi driver in health test row
http://www.yorkpress.co.uk/news/yorknews/display.var.2127075.0.taxi_driver_in_health_test_row.php
A 69-YEAR-OLD private hire driver who is forced to undergo a medical every year intends taking legal action against City of York Council, claiming age discrimination.

IT'S NOT FAIR': Taxi driver Tony Clayton-Chance, 69, who feels he is being discriminated against by City of York Council

Tony Clayton-Chance claims the authority is breaching legislation by making him take an annual medical examination, at a cost of £150, when drivers aged 45-65 only need one every five years - and under 45s do not need one at all.

Mr Clayton-Chance, from the Bishopthorpe Road area, spoke out after a council licensing committee yesterday refused to change its policy, which it said had the legitimate aim of protecting passengers' safety.

He told The Press: "I am not leaving it there. I am going to consult a solicitor with the aim of taking legal action. I am also going to contact the Government, Age Concern and my MP.

"The council has posters all over the place saying it is anti-discrimination, but this discrimination is costing me £150 a year.

"If the council was saying that Asian drivers had to have a medical every year, that would rightly be considered racial discrimination."

Mr Clayton-Chance, who said he drove children to and from school and carried out other general private hire work, produced a letter from the Department for Work and Pensions' "Extending Working Life Division" to support his case, which said: "Treating people differently because of their age will only be justifiable in exceptional circumstances.

"Therefore with regard to your own specific case, the council should now require every driver to provide medical examination regardless of age, unless they can objectively justify not doing so."

A report to councillors from head of licensing Dick Haswell said that the 2006 Employment Equality (Age) Regulations stated that requiring additional medical certification at a certain age was discrimination.

"The regulations do, however, recognise that there may be certain circumstances where such discrimination is justified if it is a proportionate means of achieving a legitimate aim."

He said all drivers, regardless of age, had to submit details of any serious illness or prescription which could affect their abilities.

He said that to justify the council's policy, it was necessary to show that older drivers were more likely to have medical conditions rendering them less safe to drive than younger ones.

He then referred to a publication by the Royal Society of Medical Press which stated that increased age was associated with less effective visual function, and slowing of cognitive processes and many responses.

He said that requiring all drivers to undergo a medical examination would create a financial burden that could be seen as unreasonable for younger drivers, and would be a higher standard than was required of bus and large lorry drivers.

He added that the York Taxi Association agreed with the council retaining its existing policy.