Taxi procedures LH Group
 

The LH OM-A says the following on that: "During taxi CM1 should concentrate on steering the aeroplane, while CM2 should concentrate on navigation and has to give advice from taxi chart, including heading information and visual cues to be expected."

That's SOP at most US carriers. Only the CA will taxi. No clue why.

Traditional mind-set.

Some airlines are different as they want the F/O to have taxi experience in case the captain become incapacitated......which is an even less desirable time to have a taxiway excursion due to lack of training/experience. I taxied the 747/777 on my first day operating it. It is an enjoyable experience.

It may also be a Insurance clause.

Most of the time the parking aids at the gates are calibrated for the captains side or seen better from the captains sids.
atleast thats what we have been told

Depends on what system is used...

You have do be aware that the LH A340 fleet invented flying.
As the A320 fleet. And the B747 fleet for sure.

It's just ego.
If the co-pilot can't taxi why let him/her fly?

"That's the way we've always done it."

LH still does it that way. Loads of dogma in their OMs. Many CPTs will still let you taxi every once in a while.
On the flip side, basic manual raw data flying is not only allowed but encouraged which is very commonly made use of and rarely seen elsewhere.
Swiss eventually let go of that particular bit of silliness in June afaik. EW Discover adopted Airbus procedures right away. Things might change for the better in that regard.

Joking aside, in some contexts the way we've always done it, is that way for a good reason.

If the airline has different types, some without a tiller in the right seat, people would have to make a transition every time they bid into a new type. Even worse, if there are planes with and without the right seat tiller of the same type, this is now jumping back and forth on a day-to-day (or even leg-to-leg basis) instead of once every few months or years.

Now different people are starting the engines, doing different flows on the ground, etc. Where, if you just keep everything simply CA-FO, everything is the same all the time, you stay in the same habits, etc. Easy-peasy. I see no reason to fix what isn't broken, by jumping back and forth unnecessarily.

And I see plenty of reason to not do it. On the ground at a zoo like LGA or ATL, it would be begging for problems, to put an overwhelmed newhire in charge of taxiing where they'e constantly literal seconds away from making a wrong turn, missing a quick instruction, hitting a ground vehicle or other airplane that's in the wrong place, etc. Leave it to the CA. (In the air, this is much less of a problem as there is always far more time for the CA to react, before hitting anything hard.)

If someone changes type they will do a whole new type rating course and do lots of things differently. So that is a spurious argument.
If the fleet has some with RH tiller and some without, that makes sense.
I find it interesting that you think that turning a tiller puts someone "in charge" of taxiing. In a busy ground environment it actually makes more sense to me to have the inexperienced guy driving and the CA doing the navigating. On my type which only has a tiller on the left I have lost count of the number of times I have had my workload through the roof due to trying to taxi as well as sort out where we are going because the F/O has failed to read the plate properly.

My company's fleet consists 320/330/350, 737/777/787. Only in 330, TRIs allow P3s to taxi, no idea about turning to the gate. My idea; if we are allowed to land, then why not to taxi? A320 F/O here.