Welcome to Part I of our exciting new series, Underground Ethics. As the name implies, we'll be talking about things that take place far below the day-lit realm, things dark and ugly, seamy and salacious, perhaps unholy.
Yes, that's right. The New York City Subway System.
I realize 99% of humanity doesn't have direct experience with New York's MTA. (It just feels that way when you're trying to board the 6 train at 8:30 AM.) All I can say to those who've never had the pleasure is... congratulations. Words like "sticky," "stinky," "sweaty," "contagious," "dangerous," "overcrowded," "rat-infested" and "poorly lit" barely begin to scratch the surface of this malodorous, mismanaged, bedraggled, Hieronymous-Boschian system that gets us five-borough-dwellers where we need to go (most of the time). It is, at best, a necessary evil, and at worst a nightmare of truly epic proportions.
However, it is also a unique opportunity to observe the full spectrum of human behavior, from the utterly reprehensible to the astonishingly heroic. Sometimes, you'll see both on the same commute--even the same subway car. One man may hold the door for you--at great risk to his own life and limb. Another will grope your derierre without a moment's hesitation or shame. There've been mornings when I've witnessed six people competing to rise and offer a pregnant woman their seat, and others when a group of rowdy teens have pushed an old man out of the way to get to that same seat.
Great fodder for an ethics blogger, to be sure. And hopefully, an interesting journey for readers of the blog as well. Even if you can't relate to the perils of rush hour commuting in NYC, I'm sure there's an analogous situation where you live, whether it's two-hour traffic backups in suburban Houston or road-rage on the LA freeways. When we gotta get where we're going, we really show who we are.
So here, in Part I, I'd like to begin by sharing a lesson the subway has taught me about my own ethics. Herewith: How the Emergency Gate Shames Me...
Lesson 1) My personal code of ethics is, shall we say, more "flexible" than "absolute."
Each morning, as I approach the IRT line, the dilemma looms larger and larger. The Subway Emergency Exit. Meant, as is so clearly blazoned on its push-bar, to be used only in cases of, you know... emergency. Should you dare to make it your egress, it will shrill loudly--nay, I daresay deafeningly--piercing the eardrums of all those around you. The sound echoes off the dingy station tiles, lingers unendingly in the air, pisses off the riders on the platform, wears out the alarms, and drives the beleaguered station agent just that tiny bit closer to a lethal meltdown.
So why the f*&k does everyone and his brother think it's OK to use it instead of the turnstiles?
My inner ethics snob says, "I would never do such a thing. I will always use the turnstiles, even if the gate is already open and there is a stream of people holding it open, even if I personally don't have to touch the gate to hold it open, but may simply pass through it as part of the river of humanity. I will not use it even if I'm being pulled along helplessly by said river of humanity, nor will I use it even if the tide of commuters using the turnstiles to enter when I'm trying to exit is so great I'd have to wait hours to fight my way out. Not even if the turnstiles are covered in frat-boy vomit, damn it! The gate says it's for emergencies, the alarm is annoying, and I don't want to be one of those people who promotes that kind of behavior. Not. Gonna. Do. It."
And yet, dear readers, I doubt I could count the number of times I have violated that oh-so-unbreachable code of honor. And for what reasons? None others than those very shameful ones above.
- The line for the turnstiles was too long, and I was lazy.
- It was closer.
- It was already open.
- I was pissed at myself for worrying about the whole issue, so I did it to be a rebel.
Add to Del.icio.us
Add to Technorati
Add to Digg
Add to Newsvine
Add to Facebook
Add to StumbleUpon
Subscribe
As a commuter, I have to say I've definitely used the Emergency Exit...and not for emergencies either. The subway exit nearest to my apartment have only a full-height turnstile (the kind that requires your whole arm and body to push) and an EE.
Sometimes, if I'm carrying a huge duffel bag, a suitcase, or just a lot of bags in general, I'd rather use the EE than get stuck in the space-limited, rickety, vertical turnstile. In doing so, I spare everyone from: 1- waiting for me to adjust myself, with all my bags; 2- me getting stuck and causing the line to grow longer.
Technically, I could walk all the way to the end of the platform to go through the shorter, regular turnstiles, but I'd rather save a few seconds in my commute. :)
Observe, and you will notice that most (all?) emergency exit malefactors wear iPods. They don't *hear* the alarm. 9
I don't really worry about it. I would almost never use the EE bar for a non-emergency myself, but here's the catch - you're not supposed to trip the alarm for a non-emergency, but if you simply have heavy luggage or a stroller or something, you can easily buzz the attendant and (ideally) they will just open it for you anyway, especially to get out. The door itself serves the dual purpose of allowing an emergency exit and permitting a convenient wide exit for people with disabilities or luggage. If someone before you has already had the door opened for them through the officially permitted procedure, there is no particular reason for you not to use the open door as an exit. Likewise, if someone else has tripped the alarm in violation of MTA rules, you are not ethically to blame for simply using the exit. I would guess that many MTA attendants would rather let people push the bar than have to respond to many tedious requests to open the gate.
Also, since use of the exit for convenience is a de facto norm in most stations, I think it is akin to crossing the street against the light or honking one's car horn against the law. It is a technical violation, but of little ethical import (other than the noise and annoyance to other people, which you can't be blamed for if you weren't the one to push the bar).
The purpose served by the rule, much like the purpose served by traffic lights in New York, is to ensure safety and (for the MTA) to make it harder for fare evaders to slip through in the opposite direction. New Yorkers, ever seeking efficiency, tend to find a way to bend those rules for innocuous yet useful ends. People who actually do abuse that situation tend to get in trouble, so I don't think the system is broken per se.
The only concern I might have is that widespread use of EEs for normal exit might mask inadequate capacity at stations to handle normal traffic loads. This in turn could lead to insufficient flow of fast traffic in case of real emergencies, leading to loss of life. However, it is all incumbent on the MTA to address these issues, and I am sure that any sane MTA administrator realizes that the practice is widespread, and should account for that when planning emergency traffic capacity.
Glad to finally find someone who thinks like me!!! I've been living in New York for 2.5 years , taking the MTA every day but I still can't get used to people using the emergency exit for non emergency reasons. It really pisses me off to hear that loud alarm just because selfishness/laziness of a few assholes...
Post a Comment
By submitting these comments, I agree to the beliefnet.com terms of service, rules of conduct and privacy policy (the "agreements"). I understand and agree that any content I post is licensed to beliefnet.com and may be used by beliefnet.com in accordance with the agreements.