Updated (Friday, July 30 at 12:12 a.m.): With its history of technological problems, the MTA didn’t have much public trust when officials said this week they will replace station agents with remote monitoring equipment. Yet, the Board voted yesterday to axe 200 station agents, and now the authority is moving full speed ahead with plans to equip subway platforms — not even under the purview of those fired agents — with intercoms and working cameras.
This week, Heather Haddon of amNew York had two updates on the state of safety technology. First, she reported on how 990 cameras went live in fare control areas at 31 stations late last month. These cameras had come under fire after the MTA had installed them but could not activate them. The rush repair job, she notes, cost $22 million, and there are still 1100 cameras that are out of service. The MTA is working to fix those.
Last night, Haddon added to her week of safety with a report on new intercoms. Although approximately 20 of the MTA’s 953 passenger emergency intercoms break per day, the MTA has fanciful plans for an intercom system. Within 45 days, says Haddon, the authority will install “a better intercom system…with the brightly lit devices to be installed every 150 feet along stations. The intercoms will have separate buttons for emergencies and information, and automatically report technical malfunctions, officials said.”
In other words, this new system sounds like — and as the rendering from Metro shows, looks like — security features found on college campuses across the country. Now, the MTA just has to make sure it remains operational. If so, this new security system could act as a greater deterrent than the station agents did.
17 comments
Sounds to me the MTA is willing to cash out more money replacing and repairing technical issues daily than to pay old-school live station agents. Irony does work in mysterious ways. I think that security camera that doesn’t take breaks have bigger digits in salary at the end of the year. If there was a genie to grant wishes, I want to be an MTA security device.
That’s not how the economics of it work. High initial cost to install equipment + low maintenance costs whereas station agents cost salary, benefit and pensions annually.
Besides, cameras and intercoms can provide far better security and service than station agents ever did. No station has an agent every 150 feet along the platform!
The camaeras are not live. The TA has spent over $1 billion with Siemens for their fiber optic SONET system to among other things have a live feed for their cameras. To date most of the SONET system is still down and especially on hot days as the equipment on the station is overheated and shuts down. These cameras only have a recording capability and should have been doing that over a year ago. Also many of these cameras are at staffed booths. The CIS next train signs in the stations except for the L line were also supposed to be on SONET but are using the old signalling system and could have been installed and working 40 years ago.
The ATS system that provided the information to PA/CIS didn’t exist 40 years ago. A fiber optic system is a communication system, not a signal system.
those cameras and intercoms really helped that guy who bled to death at christopher street when he got stabbed on the train a few months back. Hopefully such thigs will not happen to anyone else.
You mean like that rape in Queens a few years back on the station agent’s watch?
poor point Andrew, the agent in question did excatly what they were supposed to do : call the police.
You also forgot to mention the Station Agent that just got sent to the Hospital defending a woman being attacked about 2 weeks ago in Queens.
Just for fun try the new emergency communication system when a train goes through the station….you can hear nothing and neither can the people on the other end.
Good luck my man and put your lawyer on speed dial.
No, that’s exactly my point: a station agent is not a security guard.
Calling the police doesn’t stop someone from bleeding to death. (And most of the platform is out of view of the booth anyway. I’d rather have an intercom every 150 feet.)
So who uses the intercom? The person bleeding to death?
No, somebody else on the platform. You know, somebody in a position to actually see what’s going on, unlike the station agent, who’s inside a booth with a view of about 10% of the platform, at best, so who probably has no idea anything’s going on.
Not that it makes much of a difference if he’s dead already.
Ever hear of Kitty Genovese? To tell me it is better to have a customer handle an emergency than someone with even a modicum of training is not an answer at all. To have someone who knows the system, is familiar with the processes involved and whose responsibility it is to handle an emergency is far better than what has been proposed. The argument has always been about customer safety and still is and will be as events prove this out. The money being saved is minimal the potential for life saving intervention is enormous. Google Micheal Steinberg (am NY) for proof.
Station agents are trained to see around corners?
Funny how a safety argument is being advanced primarily by a labor union. Could it be that they have an ulterior motive of some sort?
There have been many booth unstaffings within the past 10 years. How has the crime rate at those stations changed compared with the crime rate at stations that have kept all of their booths?
http://www.ny1.com/content/top.....on-the-job
If station agents are so critical for safety, why isn’t the TWU pushing to have this one fired immediately?
[…] MTA is gearing up to install a series of intercoms every 150-200 feet along platforms at stations without agents, but what happens when this technology goes down? That’s the […]
[…] Metro and amNew York — reported on a new initiative by New York City Transit that would bring high-tech intercoms into the subway system. Billed as a way to improve passenger safety while lending the subways the […]
This issue is still in the News crime is up addresses are down. big problem