zang
Senior Member
Is that from the TTC or the union?
Hard to believe any requested time off after something like this would ever been deemed “unnecessary”.
|
|
|
TTC: Other Items (catch all)
- Thread starter drum118
- Start date
Is that from the TTC or the union?
DSCToronto
Superstar
Member Bio
- Joined
- Jan 13, 2008
- Messages
- 21,809
- Reaction score
- 35,276
- Location
- St Lawrence Market Area
I think some people prefer to return to their regular routines at times like this and the choice appears to be theirs.
Jonny5
Senior Member
This sounds like a matter of the insurance provider, who I assume is paying out a short-term disability payment of the employee's wages, and they may have some maximum limitations on how long is "necessary" in the contract, or may rely on doctor evaluations to decide when someone is ready to come back or not, even if the employee disagrees.
JBR
Active Member
Not sure where you’re getting your info on PriorityOne procedures but you’re still wrong.
Step1 is to stop the train using the emergency brake
Step2 is to exit the train via the staff door and cut traction power in an attempt to preserve life
Step3 is to establish communication with TransitControl via the PAX phone at the Traction Power Cut Station
More steps follow…
JBR
Active Member
Not seeing how talking about PriorityOne helps the forum and may be triggering to any members that are operators that may have experienced this in the past.
RapidTransit
Active Member
Again your wrong Dan.
The first thing an operator is suppose do is cut the power. Theres a phone from there where they can call control.
If too traumatized, sure stay in cab. But procedure is cut power, first. Always assume the person is alive, and for emergency personnel to get down safely.
Anyways I'm not going to keep correcting you.
But I'm literally with a family member looking at the rule book and discussing it.
nfitz
Superstar
I don't see any fundamental difference between what the two of you are saying.
Says the person splitting hairs. With consecutive unnecessary posts!
I'd think for the purposes of this forum, if one is worried about messaging, is to remind those who are more likely to be standing on the platform, than in the cockpit, to walk to the end of the platform and cut the power themselves.
Check the rule book to see if it explains how you cut the power while the train is still moving, and you are inside the train. I'm quite curious about that!
Northern Light
Superstar
Ok........while I think this discussion should move on.............I feel the need to say here, I don't actually see the contradictions some of you seem to between various posts/posters.
This incident occurred with the train still mostly or entirely in the tunnel, on approach to Union, as I understand it, from the witness account.
In that context, the operator would be expected to remain with the train so long as passengers are on board. Particularly true if the cab had not physically entered the station, which is unclear to me, from the post.
Which is what I believe Dan was suggesting.
Remember that Line 1 is now Single-operator, no guards. So you're not going to leave a loaded train of passengers unattended.
Once the train is moved into a station, they can be easily relieved, I'm sure relief would be brought to the train if the operator were unable to manage. Which would be understandable, but will also take time.
At a station, the train would be evacuated, and with the doors closed, the operator could exit and leave the train unattended while station staff and supervisors takeover.
The rule book description is correct, but applies to an in-station scenario. Where evacuation to the platform is possible. Clearly once EMS and other help had arrived the choice was still made not to offload at Union.
***
No one posting here had ill intent, this starts as an explanation to a poster who was on scene, first hand, wondering why things were handled the way they were. There was an attempt to give answer to that, and while the wording might be quibbled with the substantive answer was correct in the context of the situation.
If anyone who works for TTC here feels procedure was not correctly followed, you have an internal mechanism for flagging that.
Elsewise, its sufficient to say that procedure was followed, and yes that's hard on the operator, for whom we all ought to have sympathy, in addition to the person whose life was lost.
***
Now let me return to.........full-height Platform Edge Doors are what would, to a near certaintly prevent 90% of these incidents from ever happening, at a minimum. It should be close to 100%, but nothing is 100%.
The primary need is to address this as preventable. However one feels about the TTC, or those suffering mental illness or engaging in irresponsible conduct (being at unauthorized track level for a reason other than suicide) or TTC management of this or any other situation..........the object should be that it never happens in the first place which remedies the situation.
This incident occurred with the train still mostly or entirely in the tunnel, on approach to Union, as I understand it, from the witness account.
In that context, the operator would be expected to remain with the train so long as passengers are on board. Particularly true if the cab had not physically entered the station, which is unclear to me, from the post.
Which is what I believe Dan was suggesting.
Remember that Line 1 is now Single-operator, no guards. So you're not going to leave a loaded train of passengers unattended.
Once the train is moved into a station, they can be easily relieved, I'm sure relief would be brought to the train if the operator were unable to manage. Which would be understandable, but will also take time.
At a station, the train would be evacuated, and with the doors closed, the operator could exit and leave the train unattended while station staff and supervisors takeover.
The rule book description is correct, but applies to an in-station scenario. Where evacuation to the platform is possible. Clearly once EMS and other help had arrived the choice was still made not to offload at Union.
***
No one posting here had ill intent, this starts as an explanation to a poster who was on scene, first hand, wondering why things were handled the way they were. There was an attempt to give answer to that, and while the wording might be quibbled with the substantive answer was correct in the context of the situation.
If anyone who works for TTC here feels procedure was not correctly followed, you have an internal mechanism for flagging that.
Elsewise, its sufficient to say that procedure was followed, and yes that's hard on the operator, for whom we all ought to have sympathy, in addition to the person whose life was lost.
***
Now let me return to.........full-height Platform Edge Doors are what would, to a near certaintly prevent 90% of these incidents from ever happening, at a minimum. It should be close to 100%, but nothing is 100%.
The primary need is to address this as preventable. However one feels about the TTC, or those suffering mental illness or engaging in irresponsible conduct (being at unauthorized track level for a reason other than suicide) or TTC management of this or any other situation..........the object should be that it never happens in the first place which remedies the situation.
Last edited:
urbanclient
Active Member
A nitpick here, considering leaks on the true frequency of "injury on the tracks" on the TTC, I would be fairly certain the number is closer to 100% than 90%. Full height PSD metro systems have fatal incidents, like what, once every 2-3 years? Just looking at Shanghai with many times more route length than Toronto, going back two decades to now. (~800 km with PSDs vs. 70 km; as of today). And looking into those cases, I doubt people in Canada would be just as likely to place punctuality over life so carelessly.
With full height PSDs, we're looking at a per route km incident rate that is easily 100 times less than the TTC.
Last edited:
nfitz
Superstar
It would certainly reduce it - but not 100%. Perhaps 90%. But sadly there'll be some that are very motivated to just find other ways to get themselves in front of a subway train. There's certainly spots you could jump off a bridge in front of a train, or just hop a fence and climb down/up a bank.
What it might do is shift more suicides to other locations, such GO trains, high bridges, and maybe even streetcars.
I'd think one could pull data from lines on other systems, where there is outdoor sections of lines with enclosed platforms.
Why do you think there's only an incident every 2 or 3 years?
It's not like you can trust any information about civilian deaths that the lying corrupt communist party in China says. They still claim that there was few if any deaths in the Tiananmen Square, with multiple reliable reports of more than 10,000+ dead, and the evil tyrannical dictator Xi Jinping being aware that bodies of victims were crushed by armored personnel carriers until they were "ground up" and the remains hosed down into the drainage and sewer systems to dispose of the evidence.
Would you believe civilian death data from such an evil backwards place?
Last edited:
urbanclient
Active Member
@nfitz brother, I was referring to incidents involving the platform at the station. The context of the whole conversation should have alerted you to this. Again, you are pulling made up stats out of nowhere, because your gut feeling and vibes without a shred of research make you think ummm aCtUaLly iT's mOrE LiKe 90%. When I brought up fatal incident rate, instead of only suicide, it was in good faith to address the fact full height PSDs very rarely hurt people while also preventing suicide.
Full height PSDs are not 100% fool proof, but they are far far more effective than 90% at reducing suicides and other deaths, like accidents and homicide on the subway system. The idea with PSDs isn't to prevent all suicides in general from happening, but to prevent them affecting subway operation.
From basically the only relevant review on this topic afaik:
"After screening 623 studies and their references, 51 studies were included; 26 empirically assessed rail-related prevention interventions and 25 provided relevant qualitative insights. [...] Full-height PSDs eliminated all suicides" emphasis mine
Strategies for Reducing Suicide at Railroads: A Scoping Review of Evidence and Gaps - PMC
This review aims to systematically evaluate existing literature on reducing suicides along railroads, with specific focus on effectiveness, limitations, and research gaps in the current evidence base. Database searches were conducted in PubMed, ...
pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov
They're not 100% fool proof because people have wedged themselves between the two layers of doors and gotten hurt. Again, I did the napkin math for Shanghai's case, the last fatal platform screen door incident was in 2022, when the system was already ~800 km long. There were many minor ones prior to that across a decade. I was being very generous saying fatal incidents happen once every 2-3 years so as to not overestimate the difference in platform safety. The paper I cited derived its full height PSD conclusions from Shanghai, Japan, and Seoul. According to @nfitz all 3 regimes might be cooking their data to mislead these poor researchers? Let's be real here. it's not easy at all to get hurt with full-height PSDs.
We're comparing apples to apples here, not apples to oranges+apples when you included jumping in front of the train after spidermanning down from the Prince Edward Viaduct. I exaggerate, but even including oranges, the vast vast majority of incidents happen at the platform.
"There's certainly spots you could jump off a bridge in front of a train, or just hop a fence and climb down/up a bank."
Those examples you listed are practically infinitesimal. The average Canadian is not even fit enough to climb the tall fences surrounding above ground subway tracks.
You are ragebaiting again: "What it might do is shift more suicides to other locations, such GO trains, high bridges, and maybe even streetcars." This is completely off-topic and out of the purview of this conversation.
We're not talking about how to solve mental health, we're talking about nitpicking this: "full-height Platform Edge Doors are what would, to a near certaintly prevent 90% of these incidents from ever happening, at a minimum. It should be close to 100%, but nothing is 100%." @Northern Light
Last edited:
txlseries4
Active Member
I don't follow, has there been an assertion that the numbers the TTC releases are incomplete, that they're hiding information, or something else? Are you saying the numbers leaked are different than what they provide publicly?
urbanclient
Active Member
They're not hiding anything per se, but stats on these tragic events aren't widely disseminated in mainstream news. And certainly not every incident is reported on. You have to intentionally look for this info. Leaks wasn't the best word, my bad. At the time, I couldn't think of any better way to describe it. Bottomline is they don't want copycat cases. It's why info usually only comes out following a Municipal Freedom of Information request. Otherwise we'd hear about more platform incidents. We fortunately aren't subject to the sensationalist American 24 hour news cycle.
"The TTC has always been reluctant to release info 'citing health and safety concerns, and the contagion, or copycat, effect suicide reporting may pose, particularly as it relates to the method of suicide,' according to the release." viewer discretion is advised
See the full TTC data for yourself *trigger warning*: https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lanam/article/PIIS2667-193X(24)00081-4/fulltext
Full-height PSDs absolutely reduce fatal incident numbers to virtually 0 at the subway station. Very few, if any people with suicidal intent will be able to wedge themselves into a tiny gap between two doors and so on and so forth.... after they somehow weren't noticed by the operator and/or sensors. Modern PSD systems will have systems to prevent door closing when obstructions are detected; it's genuinely not easy to get hurt, much less worse. Fair to say, virtually all, if not all those injured in PSDs are people rushing to catch a train.
"The study concluded that full-height screen doors could completely eliminate subway suicides [at subway platforms]."
https://www.nordiclabourjournal.org/rail-suicides-a-joint-nordic-approach-to-reduce-numbers/
Last edited:
81-717
Active Member
If only MAiD were available to everyone (not just terminally ill people), this person would've had the option to end their life in a peaceful & dignified manner (if they were certain that's what they wanted), without having to attempt something like this and risk it going horribly wrong as well as traumatizing other people in the process. Anyone who opposes MAiD is partly to blame for why things like this happen (they claim to be against it out of compassion & regard for human life, but in reality they have none, because they couldn't care less if people off themselves in such a violent manner, but heaven forbid they have access to a much better option
)RapidTransit
Active Member
I don't expect you to see the fundamental difference.I don't see any fundamental difference between what the two of you are saying.
Says the person splitting hairs. With consecutive unnecessary posts!
I'd think for the purposes of this forum, if one is worried about messaging, is to remind those who are more likely to be standing on the platform, than in the cockpit, to walk to the end of the platform and cut the power the
Check the rule book to see if it explains how you cut the power while the train is still moving, and you are inside the train. I'm quite curious about that!
As for how to cut the power while the train is moving, that tells me it's already going above your head.
Last edited: