Comments on: Straphangers poll finds support for station agents

By: pete

pete — Fri, 19 Jun 2009 23:24:33 +0000

MVMs are crap compared to real booths. They don’t take half dollars or 2s, and they almost give no change.

By: Alon Levy

Alon Levy — Fri, 19 Jun 2009 02:25:13 +0000

This is a good example of a push poll, where the questions are designed to elicit a specific response. The description of the station agents as generally helpful creatures sets up the tone for the yes answers. The question might equally well be worded negatively, for example noting that station agents are often clueless or asleep, in which case the results would predictably show that most people don’t feel safe with the agents.

By: anonymouse

anonymouse — Thu, 18 Jun 2009 20:14:46 +0000

And once again, I have to ask: what about the PATH? No station agents at all, anywhere in the system, except an occasional presence at the busiest stations at the busiest times, and everything seems to run just fine. And it’s even in the same city as the NYC Subway.

By: Namaste … Here’s My Card - City Room Blog - NYTimes.com

Namaste … Here’s My Card - City Room Blog - NYTimes.com — Thu, 18 Jun 2009 17:02:28 +0000

[...] safe do you feel in a subway station with an attendant? Join the Great Station Agent Debate of 2009. [2nd Ave [...]

By: Rhywun

Rhywun — Thu, 18 Jun 2009 16:21:03 +0000

The “illusion of safety” is being falsely ridiculed here. The presence of an “official” looking person at the station is a big deal to a lot of people, especially at 4AM. I expect this change to result in many people avoiding the subway at those hours. Maybe not $16M worth, but the perception of safety is not something that should be so lightly tossed away.

And while we’re at it, let’s not forget that $16M is a tiny drop in the ocean compared to certain other more wasteful costs that can’t be negotiated away because of promises made in better times.

By: Julia

Julia — Thu, 18 Jun 2009 15:31:48 +0000

If the station agents aren’t able/willing to help riders in an emergency, then they’re not providing any more safety than a random member of the public. If they’re giving a false sense of security, maybe it’s better for the public not to have them there at all. A corps of volunteer “greeters” would do just as well at giving tourists directions and explaining how to use the Metrocard machines, if that’s really all the station staff is there for.
(This is in addition to Marc’s point that it’s silly to ask people if they’d prefer to have a service without addressing how to pay for it.)

By: Chemster

Chemster — Thu, 18 Jun 2009 15:26:35 +0000

The thing that bothers me is this part:
At some locations — a planned 36 stations — the only person working will be in a booth that is across the street from one of the entrances

I don’t think that’s going to be a good thing.

By: John Doe

John Doe — Thu, 18 Jun 2009 13:51:36 +0000

I absolutely agree. Keeping train frequency and maintenance schedules upheld are the first priority. I’ve unfortunately found station attendants to be of minimal utility. The story quotes three services, providing travel information, helping with fare purchase, and notifying security. I feel that all these things can be done more cost-effectively remotely. Replace the booths with more Ticket Vending Machines, and connect those to a department at 311 with a Citrix-run live help and a help intercom. Install cameras in all stations. This way individuals will still be able to get travel info, help purchasing fare cards, and will have even more thorough security management than before. Our subway is our lifeblood. Starving it will give NYC a heart attack but, making cost-effective investments will always pay off in higher tax and fare revenue from increased economic activity and jobs growth.

By: Kai

Kai — Thu, 18 Jun 2009 13:44:37 +0000

Agreed. As much as we love the additional presence, it simply isn’t economical. It’s the same issue that will arise when the one-person-staff train debate gets raised again. If you look at other, more modern systems around the world, you’re lucky to find an agent at a large station, let alone a small one.

By: Marc Shepherd

Marc Shepherd — Thu, 18 Jun 2009 13:40:51 +0000

The Straphangers poll is complete nonsense because they have no idea how to pay for what they want. The MTA “rescue package” only just barely got out of the Senate, and even then it left the Capital Program under-funded. If Station Agents aren’t curtailed, then something else has to be. The more interesting poll would supply a list of other potential cuts, and then ask Straphangers to choose their poison. “We want it all” isn’t one of the allowable answers.

Of course, even the service we now have, flawed though it is, would be impossible without the fare increase that is about to go into effect. The Straphangers oppose that too, as they have every fare increase since the dawn of time. That would be another interesting poll: ask the Straphangers how much of a fare increase they’re willing to accept, in order to keep or expand the Station Agent program.