The Gazette asks whether the STM’s fines make sense but doesn’t come to any conclusion.
I find odd that the STM can be so draconian in the metro, while on the bus the situation is so casual. There are buses with bad card readers where the driver will just wave people past, to keep things moving. There are riders whose fares don’t read, or for some reason their change doesn’t register, and after a try or two, they get waved past as well. Some people may be trying this in bad faith but most, I think, are not, and the driver’s priority is to keep to schedule and – in some situations – avoid a conflict.
I’m also a little curious how many people are able to get into the metro without paying, and how. I’ve never noticed a lot of turnstile-leaping going on.
Marc 23:05 on 2010/07/31 Permalink
It pisses me off when I hear the MTC go on about there being so much fraud (turnstile-jumping) when the solution is so easy. They need to put in the retractable doors that open when you wave your card. They’re like phone booth doors and the unmanned entrances at Jean-Talon and Laurier have (had?) them. You can’t jump those. But no; their solution is to have police academy dropouts on power trips hussle people to see if they’ve paid or not.
admin 11:47 on 2010/08/01 Permalink
Except those doors only work where there’s a narrow passage, which is the case in the two stations you mention. It would look hideous adding them to a bigger space like the turnstiles at Berri-UQÀM.
I guess what I’m thinking is this: from my perspective, over the years the STM has improved a lot. I remember when bus drivers were uniformly hostile. You encounter an occasional grumpy one now, but they’re mostly not like that any more. In the last year or two I’ve even been happy to notice that drivers no longer play loud radio while driving.
The general tone of the organization has become more open. In other words, generally the STM has improved its client service approach a hell of a lot – except that its security force seems to be living in the dark ages. Somebody needs to get a handle on their priorities. The agents have to understand what’s important to the public – agents should be roaming through the metro system with an eye out for signs of swarming, bullying and similar trouble – but be flexible enough to recognize when something is not in fact a problem.
There should be very quick response to real trouble, but in the sense of training agents in intelligent crowd control and being able to summon help when there’s a problem, not in the sense of the individual agents having itchy trigger fingers and a desire to throw their weight around because they can.
And if there’s an issue with people getting in without paying, it should be studied and fixed before it happens. The STM is visibly spending a lot on PR these days, with all that new soft-cornered green fontage telling us how environmental they are and patting us on the back for being transit users. Fine, as far as it goes – but then this business of slapping a large fine on someone who absently tosses away a one-time ticket undoes the work they’re doing to make transit attractive and sexy. If nothing else, the PR folks have to dogpile on to the STM and get security to back off.
MB 13:59 on 2010/08/01 Permalink
Marc, those really wouldn’t solve anything, as other cities have shown.
Regarding the Gazette article…I feel like those complaining are so spoiled. Living in Paris, fare-checkers were a regular aspect of taking transit there. The fare-checkers had their own little uniforms. You’d see roving bands of them all over the network. They have little hand-held machines to check your ticket as you were exiting the station. You even have to swipe your ticket again at the turnstiles to exit RER stations or transfer to the metro. And you know what they complain about in Paris? Fines being too low. Fare evasion co-ops have emerged, where for a set monthly fee the co-op will pay your fine whenever you get caught. I guarantee those would start to crop up here if the fines ended up under $100.
Can we take just an ounce of personal responsibility here? It’s laughable. It’s simply absurd to describe this as “draconian” or “from the dark ages” when it is an everyday feature in just about every modern transit network on earth (problems on our bus network notwithstanding). Providing customers with proof-of-payment is a novel feature. Losses from fare evasion are significant (regardless if you “believe” them), and being able to keep track of paid fares is a huge step.
If you didn’t know that you have to keep your ticket, it should be a lesson in awareness. The ticket says, right on the front, in plain French, “Conservez cette carte jusqu’à son échéance. Celle-ci est votre correspondance et votre preuve de paiment.” The ones in Paris don’t say much of anything, and the London Underground tickets have the enigmatic “Issued subject to conditions.” I don’t buy the appeal to ignorance, since this is THE ONLY INSTRUCTION ON THE TICKET beside the arrows that show you how to put it in the machine.
Here’s an interesting story on the matter. I was waiting for a friend at the puck at Berri-UQÀM last week. Out of boredom I decided to count how many people evaded the fare as there was not an agent at that kiosk (contrary to our dear blog owner, I see people jumping the turnstiles all the time). In less than ten minutes, I counted not fewer than 18 people evading fare through just six turnstiles, and from all walks of life. People were literally watching others do it before deciding to do it themselves. I saw two elderly women waiting in line at the machine to purchase tickets who, laughing, decided to duck under the turnstiles after watching a group of people do it. Hell, I’ve even done it before, though I knew that if I got caught, it’s a hefty fine.
So, which is the least draconian?
1) monstrous barriers preventing people from passing through a locked turnstile (ever try to get past one of those with a suitcase? not to mention it’s not difficult to jump *over* them)
2) turnstiles constantly staffed with fare-checkers at every single turnstile (kinda fascist, and prohibitively expensive anyway)
3) or random sweeps for proof-of-payment? (Keep in mind that people often confound “random” with “inconsistent” or “unfair.”)
It’s #3, or we go back to the spirit of ’66! : complacently accepting millions lost every year through fare evasion.
Ian 15:17 on 2010/08/01 Permalink
Honestly the biggest problem the STM faces is getting the Opus card readers to actually consistently work. I can understand the desire to cut down on fare evasion but half the time the card readers on buses barely work – a few drivers told me they get overheated… even when they work well they’re so slow it’s painful. New York managed to make card readers work, why can’t we?
admin 16:40 on 2010/08/01 Permalink
MB, if I’m in a hurry and get down into a station to find that the ticket guy’s gone for a break and left the turnstile open – which happens – what then? I don’t know the answer myself.
I would like to see some honest numbers showing what they pay security vs. what they save on fare cheating. I’m willing to bet it doesn’t turn out in favour of lots of fare checks. I’m almost sure it’s mostly that people who’ve just sunk $70 into their monthly pass don’t appreciate seeing other people get past without paying. It’s more a moral issue than a practical one.
But if it’s so important, why not make our metro like Paris and London so that people need to slide their ticket through to get out, as well as in?
Tux 08:50 on 2010/08/02 Permalink
I think it’s fair enough that they check fares, but I object to the way they do it. Small armies (like 8 guys… with 2 readers) of these faux-cops (can we stop dressing up security guards in uniforms designed to look like cop uniforms? It’s dishonest AND inflates their tin badge egos) blocking hallways, causing bottlenecks and checking every single person with their slow readers… maybe fare checks could be restricted to people waiting on the platform, and one or two guards at a time please, I am really sick of feeling like they’re trying to intimidate me. Plus, they absolutely need training. I heard one say “If you run I will have to take you down” – Take you down? What is this, die hard?