Tom Cordiner and I (Mark Brader) wrote:
So my question is, is the MTA putting its passengers in danger, or
are the gates of the NYC system very different from London's...?

Sure. New York is a flat-fare system with the fare charged on entry, so
the exit gates don't need to be capable of stopping people from leaving.

So all those staff are there just to let people out when (as I
acknowledge it frequently does) one's ticket stops working?

You didn't ask about staffing *levels*, and I'm not commenting on
that. You asked why there have to be any staff, and the reason is
to let people out in case their ticket stops working *or* in case
the station has to be evacuated and there isn't time for tickets
to be checked.

I would have thought it more efficient to have fare charged on entry,
let people out the other end and save rather a lot of money on staff.

Of course it is -- but that requires a flat fare, which is considered
unacceptable. The other way is open stations, of course, but that
has its own problems. (Please change the subject line if you want
to debate these questions.)

Is this just a
small part of gate line duties? I can think of providing information and
assistance, but that doesn't fall into the "health and safety" argument.

Indeed. Compare air travel, where the number of cabin crew is
determined on "health and safety" grounds even though on a typical
flight they only spend a few minutes on that.

What's the heatlh and safety argument for gate-line staff that means
London needs them and NYC doesn't?

With the fare system used in London, the exit gates do need to be
capable of stopping people from leaving. Hence there has to be an
emergency override for this, which means a human.
--
Mark Brader, Toronto | There is no step function between "safe" and "unsafe".
| -- Jeff Janes

My text in this article is in the public domain.