These pay phones might not work for phone calls, but they make great bagel holders. (Photo by pizza guru and flickr user Adam Kuban)

Every year, the Straphangers Campaign conducts a random test of pay phones through the subway system, and every year, the results come back about the same. Approximately a quarter of all subway pay phones are out of order at a given time. Some stations have more functioning pay phones than others, and overall, the rider advocacy group urges the MTA to repair its broken phones.

This year’s survey features some improvement, at least on the surface. As the group announced yesterday, in one survey of 921 phones at 100 randomly selected stations, 26 percent of the phones were found to be out of service. While the group touts this as “a modest improvement” over the 2007 rate of 29 percent, the margin of error is 4 percent and basically negates the improvement. Another survey of 638 pay phones as the 25 most heavily-trafficked subway stations found 23 percent of the phones to be out of order.

The Straphangers further broken down their survey to determine just how subway pay phones are out of order. Topping the charts with 24 percent of the share of broken phones were those with no dial tone. A problematic coin return encompassed 23 percent of non-function pay phones while 18 percent saw the coin fall through the phone. A bad handset — I’m not sure how detailed the Straphangers should get there — accounted for 16 percent. Another 11 percent could not connect to a 1-800 number, and eight percent suffered from a blocked coin slot.

Two items of note though popped up during the Straphangers’ own survey. First, the advocacy organization notes that their findings conflict with Transit’s own Passenger Environment Survey. NYCT’s internal metrics claim that 93 percent of all subway pay phones are functioning at any given time. However, an independent pay phone audit conducted by a third party at the request of Transit found 25 percent to be out of service.

The Straphangers point to methodology as the root of these numerical discrepancies. The PES surveys, says the Straphangers’ press release, are “less thorough. Surveyors do not perform a coin drop to test the phones, rating telephones as functioning if the surveyor notes an undamaged handset and is able to contact a specific 1-800 test number.”

Finally, the Straphangers pinpoint contractual issue that may be hindering pay phone performance. Verizon is the MTA’s phone service provide, and according to the press release, prior Verizon contracts required that 95 percent of all pay phones be “fully operative and in service at all times.” The current contract though calls up on Verizon to “exercise good-faith effort to clear 95% of all known troubles within 24 hours.”

It would certainly be an interesting study to chart the MTA’s and Verizon’s efforts to repair a pay phone after one reports it to them. Perhaps the next time I notice a broken pay phone, I’ll see if the agency and its contractor really can repair it within 24 hours.

In the end, this survey is nothing new. Pay phones have long been unreliable under the best of circumstances, and the subways are hardly the best of circumstances. With the MTA years away from realizing underground cell phone service, though, we are stuck with using those grimy, gritty, gross pay phones. That is, as long as they work.

For a long time, New Yorkers have been waiting for the debut of communications-based train control. Long promised for the L line, the automated control of trains should speed up travel and subway efficiency while increasing the number of trains the MTA can run per hour on one of the system’s most popular lines.

While the project has faced numerous obstacles — including the objections of union leaders who don’t want to see an automated system replace their union members — the MTA had been running live overnight tests of the system along the L line since February. Recently, the agency had increased the test runs to a 12-hour period starting at 7 p.m., but all has not been wine and roses though for Transit’s test case.

As Heather Haddon reports today, a few technical glitches have led trains to miss station platforms by a few feet. When a train does that, Transit regulations require that it move on to the next station, and some straphangers have missed their stops. She reports:

Running the L line on autopilot at night is causing trains to shoot past platforms, forcing straphangers to miss their stops, motormen and union officials said.

Because of the software fluke, drivers have to travel to the next station to let passengers off, according to the officials.

One Brooklyn mailroom worker, who didn’t want to be identified, said he was late for work repeatedly for several weeks after the L train missed his stop in Bushwick.

“It’s not perfected yet. It’s not working. And it’s definitely not cost-effective,” Keith Harrington, union vice chairman for train operators, said of the $326 million system.

This isn’t the first time technical problems have popped up in regards to the CBTC program. Last month, I wrote about jerking motions and breaking problems aboard the CBTC trains. What is interesting this month, however, is Haddon’s sourcing.

In this article, the complaints about the CBTC program come from “motormen and union officials.” These are the same people who stand to lose their jobs if and when CBTC is deemed a success. As the MTA plans to start running it in Queens soon as well, train drivers may have a reason to fear for their employment future.

For Transit’s part, spokesman Charles Seaton said the problem, according to Haddon, “does not impair passenger safety” and will be solved soon. It should be. CBTC, after all, is a technology whose time has come.