drum118
Superstar
You will never see TTC allowing riders using staff washrooms like you want, as they will be abused 100% and I would support the not allow policy.
Toronto Spadina Subway Extension Emergency Exits | ?m | 1s | TTC | IBI Group
- Thread starter 299 bloor call control.
- Start date
Sandpit
Active Member
With the transition to the CSA model, a policy of allowing use of staff washrooms by request makes sense, at least for passengers with a medical condition. It's an accessibility issue.
Edit: Look at page 8 of this booklet by Hong Kong's MTR. Note how it references washrooms in "non-public areas"
http://www.mtr.com.hk/archive/ch/services/caring_for_our_customer_booklet.pdf
Last edited:
LNahid2000
Senior Member
On the first day of service, I was on a northbound train that went out of service at Finch West, and the guard said over the PA system, "This train is now a southbound train to Union. The next train is right behind us and will take you to Vaughan Mills Centre".
LNahid2000
Senior Member
I don't think most riders think about who owns a washroom at a subway station when they have to pee.
drum118
Superstar
Easy to say Vaughan Mills Centre than Vaughan Metropolitan Centre. Even typing Vaughan Metropolitan Centre is not fun. Vaughan Centre is a hell lot simpler then Vaughan Metropolitan Centre considering its going to be 20 years or more to become what they want.
Sandpit
Active Member
They really should just have called it (both the station and the development) Vaughan Metro Centre, but I guess that's too generic and reminds people of Metro Toronto.
drum118
Superstar
Sorry, but this not Hong Kong' or anywhere else and time to deal with what here not elsewhere. What works one place may not work in other places. Yes, TTC needs more washroom and to say it a medical issue fails 100% since that line is abused so badly these days, its not funny. How many driver do you see using the handicap card illegal, as I see it far more than it should be by lazy health drivers??
44 North
Senior Member
TTC is an essential service, both literally and figuratively. Being able to go to the bathroom freely should unequivocally be part of that. You want your train or bus late because the guard or bus driver has to wait 15mins at a locked bathroom door while John Q is doing something (that likely may not even involve using the actual facilities)?
Megaton327
Senior Member
The post I replied to said "I don't think they count the ones where you have to exit the fare-paid area.". I was addressing that point by saying the one at VMC is counted despite being outside the fare paid area.
On an unrelated note I agree that the actual basis is ownership by the TTC or not, but that's a ridiculous distinction for them to make.
Megaton327
Senior Member
Hah! I would love them to try it and get cleaned up by the Human Rights Tribunal of Ontario. Especially since they make a big deal out of claiming the AODA and OHRC would make them play presto balances audibly if they were to display them visually on readers (which is false, as none of the other ~dozen agencies in the GTHA and Ottawa are required to, and have shown balances for years), then something that's actually required like letting people use washrooms would be unacceptable? Oh boy, let them try it.
pstogios
Senior Member
Wtf? How hard is it to learn that VMC is NOT Vaughan Mills? This must be corrected lest people become even more confused.
Sandpit
Active Member
Well, someone said:
I'm fine with limiting this to passengers with special needs, but then the question becomes how do you prove someone has special needs? Not all disabilities/medical conditions are visible, and not all of them carry a special card. Also, I think most people would rather just go to a regular washroom than contact a CSA, request to use the operator washroom, get escorted to said washroom, have someone wait outside while you use the washroom, and then get escorted out of the staff area. I'm not even sure if most people realize there are staff washrooms at every station.
Edit: Also it is precisely because the TTC is an essential service that reasonable accommodations must be made to passengers with special needs. Allowing them the use of staff washrooms by request is an example of one such accommodation. Able-bodied passengers can get by with the limited number of public washrooms, but those with medical issues need extra washrooms to enjoy the same quality of service (in terms of washroom access) as an able-bodied passenger. Hence, the accessibility issue. Of course, the TTC could also choose to "level the playing field" by removing ALL public washrooms...
Last edited:
Transportfan
Senior Member
Some people actually don't like the extension: When I went to TO with a friend who's a TTC driver on Tuesday, he was driving the Steeles West bus and said some passengers (Including some who boarded at Finch station!) complained that a branch no longer went into York U, forcing them to take the subway one stop.
speedkar9
New Member
Agreed on these accounts here. Those lights were quite blinding, there should have been a diffuser or it aimed away from the escalators.
The worse part is the distance from the YRT terminal to the subway, let alone to the TTC buses! And its all outdoors in the cold! I opted to cross Steeles at grade to check out the south-east entrance.
The ironic thing was I found this sign on the YRT platform at Pioneer Village on Sunday:
I don't see how shelters that look like this can be heated
?:
speedkar9
New Member
And that's how they get ridership on the subway! By forcing people to take it one stop.