What do you do with poll results from a self-selected group of New Yorkers who opt to receive e-mails from the Straphangers Campaign? These poll results aren’t really indicative of the pulse of New York. They simply show what the more transit-aware are thinking, and even that’s up for debate.
The question has risen to the forefront in the Great Station Agent Debate of 2009. (More here, here and here.) The Straphangers Campaign has released results of a poll asking its members the following question: “Station Customer Agents (SCA) are the maroon vested employees of the MTA that provide customer assistance to the public, services like: providing travel information to riders, assisting riders with fare purchases at MetroCard vending machines, as well as contacting the proper authorities in the case of an emergency. Do you feel safer traveling on the subway with a station agent present?”
Of course, the answer was yes and not by a small margin. Per the press release from Straphangers attorney Gene Russianoff, 63 percent of the 627 members who voted said yes while 16 percent said no and 21 percent didn’t care. The group used these results to protest the cuts. “Riders want a human presence at the entrances to the subways,” Russianoff said.
There are a few things going on here that warrant a closer look. First, the MTA is not eliminating full-time staffing in its entirety from any station. 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, but every station will have at least one full-time employee. Furthermore, emergency contact points will be in place at every platform, according to The Post. The illusion of safety may lessen, but actual safety should not suffer.
Second, the Straphangers are seemingly protesting the loss of the red-vested station agents. These are people who work in high-traffic stations during high-traffic times. I see one of these workers at the 47th St. side of the Rockefeller Center station every day, and when he retires — the MTA is cutting jobs through attrition, not dismissals — I won’t even notice that he is gone. Late-night concerns are mostly unfounded. (N.B.: That’s a high-traffic, tourist-heavy station that won’t actually lose it’s agent, but you get the point.)
In the end, these cuts will save the MTA $16 million annually. As the budget plan enacted by Albany requires the MTA to shave $200 million off of its own books, the station agents will go. I’d rather see an illusion of safety disappear than train frequency and maintenance plans rolled back. Wouldn’t you?
10 comments
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.)
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.
[…] safe do you feel in a subway station with an attendant? Join the Great Station Agent Debate of 2009. [2nd Ave […]
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.
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.
MVMs are crap compared to real booths. They don’t take half dollars or 2s, and they almost give no change.