4 ms·

The German U-Bahn has a brilliant solution to this. No turnstiles or gates, you're just expected to have a ticket. The penalty for getting caught without a tick

The German U-Bahn has a brilliant solution to this. No turnstiles or gates, you're just expected to have a ticket. The penalty for getting caught without a ticket is considered sufficiently high to make "Schwarzfahren" statistically more expensive.

dsfyu404ed 7y ago
"Screw 'em hard enough for breaking the rules and they'll follow the rules out of fear" is generally not considered to be a good model for organizational policy.
- hatchnyc 7y ago
  ??? But the alternative solution employed around the world is metal bars...
- baroffoos 7y ago
  For public transport it makes perfect sense. You don't care about people getting on for free, you care about ticket profits falling because of people getting on for free. If the fine is high enough that they totally cover all the lost profit from people not paying the you are doing well.
- MRD85 7y ago
  I feel you've made a huge blanket statement here. Militaries are one organisation where the rules have really sharp teeth and it works well enough. In fact, military organisations have had strong selection pressure applied to them over the past few thousand years and heavy-handed punishments are the norm.
Thorrez 7y ago
But I don't think that will work for corporate building security, where a single attacker could cause a large amount of damage, not just losing a ticket fare.
pcwalton 7y ago
Same with Muni and Caltrain in the San Francisco area.
leiroigh 7y ago
While I agree that the solution is brilliant (and obvious), I'd like to note that freeriding (Schwarzfahren) is not statistically more expensive in monetary terms (the fine is not that large, controls are not that frequent and tickets are not that cheap). The social stigma, unpredictability and inconvenience of having to pay the fine is a big part of it (not having a ticket is just stressful). Another part is that you don't need to prevent freeriding, nor recoup all the lost ticket sales. You just need enough of a nudge to keep most people honest most of the time.
- Piskvorrr 7y ago
  Indeed. The city I live in has this random-fare-inspection system, and considered turnstiles. The study's result was surprising: the additional fare from mandatory inspections was much lower than the capital and ops cost. Of course, this depends on an overwhelming majority of people being honest. Obviously "not having too many unauthorized riders" is a very different objective from "only allowing authorized access and refusing all else".
- 52-6F-62 7y ago
  This is how the GO Train system in metropolitan Toronto & southern Ontario works as well.
dredmorbius 7y ago
Very arguably, transit (literally) free-ridership isn't a problem. Nuisance riders are: disturbing peace, damaging proprty, assaulting passengers or staff. Police behaviour, not fares. (And have social and justice systems which can effectively deal with individuals in need of help or discipline / isolation.)

dsfyu404ed 7y ago

"Screw 'em hard enough for breaking the rules and they'll follow the rules out of fear" is generally not considered to be a good model for organizational policy.

hatchnyc 7y ago
??? But the alternative solution employed around the world is metal bars...
baroffoos 7y ago
For public transport it makes perfect sense. You don't care about people getting on for free, you care about ticket profits falling because of people getting on for free. If the fine is high enough that they totally cover all the lost profit from people not paying the you are doing well.
MRD85 7y ago
I feel you've made a huge blanket statement here. Militaries are one organisation where the rules have really sharp teeth and it works well enough. In fact, military organisations have had strong selection pressure applied to them over the past few thousand years and heavy-handed punishments are the norm.

Thorrez 7y ago

But I don't think that will work for corporate building security, where a single attacker could cause a large amount of damage, not just losing a ticket fare.

pcwalton 7y ago

Same with Muni and Caltrain in the San Francisco area.

leiroigh 7y ago

While I agree that the solution is brilliant (and obvious), I'd like to note that freeriding (Schwarzfahren) is not statistically more expensive in monetary terms (the fine is not that large, controls are not that frequent and tickets are not that cheap). The social stigma, unpredictability and inconvenience of having to pay the fine is a big part of it (not having a ticket is just stressful). Another part is that you don't need to prevent freeriding, nor recoup all the lost ticket sales. You just need enough of a nudge to keep most people honest most of the time.

Piskvorrr 7y ago
Indeed. The city I live in has this random-fare-inspection system, and considered turnstiles. The study's result was surprising: the additional fare from mandatory inspections was much lower than the capital and ops cost. Of course, this depends on an overwhelming majority of people being honest. Obviously "not having too many unauthorized riders" is a very different objective from "only allowing authorized access and refusing all else".
52-6F-62 7y ago
This is how the GO Train system in metropolitan Toronto & southern Ontario works as well.

dredmorbius 7y ago

Very arguably, transit (literally) free-ridership isn't a problem. Nuisance riders are: disturbing peace, damaging proprty, assaulting passengers or staff. Police behaviour, not fares. (And have social and justice systems which can effectively deal with individuals in need of help or discipline / isolation.)