4 ms·
The site's headline is ambiguous. At first I wondered if it was some weirdly premature bill against individualized automated travel-pods. Instead, it's about r
by Terr_ 1y ago
The site's headline is ambiguous. At first I wondered if it was some weirdly premature bill against individualized automated travel-pods.
Instead, it's about requiring at least one "conductor" (separate from a driver) to be on every train. I feel the reasonableness of this varies depending on the route and how easily the driver can summon assistance without abandoning their post.
- Ericson2314 1y agoI editted it to clarify. (I had started with the piece's original subtitle.) Hope that helps!
- steveBK123 1y agoAfter 20 years of riding, I can assure you that no conductor on an MTA subway train is coming to save you if anything goes down, whether there are 0, 1, 2 or 10 of them on every train.
- benatkin 1y agoThe "conductor" could be in a compartment completely separate from the passengers right? This doesn't sound anything like a NJ Transit or a Caltrain conductor.