Why Can't New York Get Rid of 2-Person Subway Crews?
Gov. Kathy Hochul vetoed a bill mandating two-person subway crews, but union contracts and bipartisan support ensure New Yorkers will keep paying for them anyway.
Late last year, New York Gov. Kathy Hochul vetoed a bill that would have required two-person operating crews on New York City subways, despite heavy pressure from transit unions. While the veto looked like a win for fiscal sanity, two-person train crews—and needlessly expensive transit systems—are likely here for the foreseeable future.
The bill, which would have mandated both a driver and a conductor on each train, cleared the state Legislature somewhat unexpectedly last year. It was pushed by the Transport Workers Union (TWU) to permanently codify more union jobs into state law.
Most NYC subway lines already operate with two-person crews under the current labor contract between the TWU and the Metropolitan Transportation Authority. Hochul's veto stopped two-person crews from spreading systemwide, and it theoretically left the door open for the topic to be renegotiated in future labor talks, rather than being cemented into state law.
NYC's two-person system is a global outlier. An analysis from New York University's Marron Institute of Urban Management found that just 6 percent of the world's commuter rail lines use two-person crews, with most operating safely with a single driver for decades.
Although unions insist two-person crews are essential for safety, evidence suggests otherwise. The Manhattan Institute's Adam Lehodey has documented that London, which uses one-person crews, operates one of the safest rail networks in the world. Research from the Association of American Railroads, which compared one-person trains in Europe to America's multiperson freight train system, similarly found no evidence of a safety impact.
But, as TWU President John Samuelsen told The New York Times, "It doesn't really matter to us what the data shows," adding that a driver and a conductor make trips "visibly safer."
The fight over crew size extends beyond New York. Under President Joe Biden, the Federal Railroad Administration enacted a rule mandating two-person crews for freight trains nationwide. While one might expect this rule to be repealed in a Republican administration, the GOP's continued bear hug with organized labor has muddied the waters.
President Donald Trump's Transportation Secretary Sean Duffy and FRA Administrator David Fink both voiced support for the Biden-era two-person crew rule during their confirmation hearings. During his time in the Senate, Vice President J.D. Vance co-sponsored—along with numerous other Republicans, including Sen. John Hawley (R–Mo.) and then-Sen. Marco Rubio (R–Fla.)—the Railway Safety Act, which would have legislatively mandated two-person freight crews.
The contradiction is especially stark in rail policy, as Trump recently fired numerous Surface Transportation Board members, presumably in an effort to greenlight railroad mergers—the type of pro-railroad stance that collides with the administration's pro-union crew-size priors.
Beyond failing to improve safety, two-person crews are substantially more expensive. Switching to one-person crews would save the MTA $442 million a year. That money could fund real safety improvements, such as the installation of platform doors, which provide a physical barrier between passengers and the train until the train has come to a complete stop. After platform doors were installed in Seoul, South Korea, annual subway deaths dropped from 70 to two.
If anything, Hochul's veto merely gives new NYC Mayor Zohran Mamdani more flexibility in future labor negotiations between the TWU and the MTA. Based on the mayor's track record, it's unlikely he'll be a voice for one-person crews.
Given likely political support from both City Hall and the White House, two-person crews appear entrenched—and riders will keep paying for them.
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please to post comments
Seems like an easy thing to automate
It's the conductor who the union clings to. Nothing to automate there.
Considering all the stories of subway crime, that conductor sure doesn't make trips "visibly safer". Maybe the law should mandate the conductor role be filled with an armed policeman.
The driver probably could be automated. But one step at a time.
Precisely. The 2nd person should be a cop.
Would YOU take that job?
The driver probably could be automated.
Automated and/or abstracted/promoted.
There are still issues with failures and exceptional emergencies that aren't handled well, but there's no reason to think that one "driver" who used to handle one train 100% of the time couldn't handle, e.g., 10 trains, 10% of the time there's a chance of exceptional emergency.
Cut the crews in half, cut democrat "donations" in half.
We can't have that!
Am I wrong in thinking that 2 people is a reasonable number to staff a train full of people? 1 to monitor basic operations and another to deal with any other circumstances that could arise with machinery and people.
Seems like a good idea until someone gets stabbed in the throat.
yes, you are wrong. Simply automate the trains. You have staff at the major stops. If there is a problem, people can call 911, like they do everywhere else.
Everywhere else doesn't have homeless people setting riders on fire.
I think 2 might not be enough.
Hey now! People being set on fire is just trivial culture war nonsense. There are no good reasons to avoid mass transit.
I learned that from chemjeff.
In the shuffling madness
Of New York subway train
Runs the all time loser
Headlong to his death
He feels the pistons scraping
Gasoline on his brow
But Hochul stole the handle
And the train it won't stop going
No way to slow down
Cultural bonfires racist.
Chicago has entered the chat.
https://www.fox32chicago.com/news/cta-fire-arson-attack-charges
Chicago should also be placed under martial law.
You have staff at the major stops. If there is a problem, people can call 911, like they do everywhere else.
It's this kind of comment that makes me rethink my libertarianism.
FYI, it's not that I think your comment is 'wrong' per se, but the hairs on the back of my neck always stand up whenever someone says, "If you have a problem, just call 911! Easy peasy!"
After 5 years of 'defund the police' at the exact same time there was an explosion of insane meth addicts setting fire to everything and coming through people's front window, we were constantly waved off and dismissed with "just call 911", from literally the same people who said there should be no 911, only a social worker hotline.
They already have two man crews, and the conductor does not improve safety, judging by the true crime stories in the news.
Given the crimes that occur, they may need to multiply that by 5.
Mamdani won’t let them do anything other than call for an emergency social worker.
You are wrong. There are no "circumstances that could arise with machinery" that any person inside the train could do anything about. If it's minor, it can be ignored until the end of the shift. If major, you'll have to take the train out of service and go to the depot for repairs regardless.
There might be "circumstances that could arise with ... people" but the subway staff are explicitly trained not to deal with any of them under any circumstances. As a couple of folks above noted, there might be value to replacing them with police. That would put someone with training in place to deal with crime or violence. But it would do so at the cost of vastly increased police contact, generally not something we want in a free society.
I'm exactly opposite on both points.
A major machinery issue and you just "take the train out of service and go to the depot"? Just hang the "out of service" sign and walk away? Or would someone radio in while the other person goes and throws the switch? One person mans the controls and/or radio, while the other person gets out and checks the severity of the "circumstances"? I understand that radios are portable and proactive communications can prevent the need for redundancy, but the idea that it automatically works for all circumstances, minor or major, let alone works at any given criteria of peak efficiency (time or dollar), seems spurious.
As far as the people, the subway is no different from the street. The categorical distinction is moot and concerns over police interaction is moot. Setting people on fire in the street isn't more or less illegal than setting them on fire on the subway, criminals are simply exploiting the opportunity where police aren't. If subway staff were, e.g., somehow trained and expected to jump onto a moving train in case of emergency, I could understand their exceptional status, but, as is, it sounds like they're just performing (less than) the job of a normal officer and being effectively counted as one.
Slightly askance from this point has me at least partially reconsidering my statement above.
There certainly are cases for other trains and machinery, where one person at the controls while the other troubleshoots machinery is well more than twice as productive.
NYC chose mamdani. Let them rot. Most of dont give 2 shits about NYC other than to laugh at. After decades of skimming the financial centers and banking they can have a slow burn death.
NYC can burn. The democrat filth their deserve it.
Despite their sometimes love for Rand, bet we dont hear this speech here.
https://justthenews.com/government/congress/refugees-wont-get-welfare-under-groundbreaking-new-bill-care-will-transfer
"You have many of these church charities involved in bringing people here, and then the church charity thinks that charity involves signing them up for welfare. No. Charity is if your charity brings them here, and they can't or aren't working enough to have food, you feed them. It's charitable to give your own money. It's not charitable to take someone else's money."
Paul, along with other members of Congress in both the House and the Senate, have been sounding the alarm on a key component of welfare program eligibility, which was redefined by the Biden administration, who ushered in millions of illegal immigrants under novel parameters for eligibility.
One item Rand missed was funding NGOs as a pass through for this welfare.
I don't see how any libertarian could disagree with this.
Lots of liberaltarians will disagree.
Backhandedly compromising their own "You only favor religious/class exemptions for your preferred religion/class."
argumentprojection.Are you unfamiliar with Jeff?
Its only required because you wont voluntarily donate enough comrade.
It turns out Jeffy is just an AI called ‘FatGPT’.
Thanks for sharing, Jesse.
This just makes sense.
a key component of welfare program eligibility, which was redefined by the Biden administration
Another reason to curb the imperial presidency. Biden was able to change these rules via bureaucratic rules without congress. And smart for Rand to try to codify it by law. The only spine in the Senate.
1, who gives a shit
2. Other states need to put a preemptive ban on any person from NY that moved from voting.
Seattle is lost.
Katie Daviscourt
@KatieDaviscourt
NEW: A Seattle jury has acquitted a criminal illegal alien who rammed his vehicle at ICE agents during an operation last year.
Victor Vivanco-Reyes, a Mexican national convicted of drive-by shooting, accelerated his vehicle at ICE agents and intentionally collided head-on with one federal vehicle, striking another.
Leftist activists are praising the acquittal, saying no Seattle jury will convict subjects accused of targeting ICE agents. They are calling for more attacks.
https://thepostmillennial.com/illegal-immigrant-charged-in-wa-with-assaulting-officers-after-resisting-arrest
Want to remind the leftists who will cheer this jury nullification...
Youre returning to do the days of the KKK south, where bad and violent acts are defended by the jury pool. This is an incident that is potentially lethal. And the activists are getting on juries to not hold them accountable. This is not moral. This is not justified nullification. This is one sided defense of political violence.
Dox the jury
"Dox the jury". Talk about a fast way to get sent to prison. Jury privacy is taken VERY SERIOUSLY by judges. Trying to intimidate a juror results in a 20 year prison sentence in federal court.
After the trial, they are no longer jurors - - - - - - - - -
I know right....
https://www.ms.now/opinion/msnbc-opinion/emily-kohrs-talking-georgia-grand-jury-process-reckless-rcna71864
And nothing else happened.
Washington State is a joke.
I can understand, even if I vehemently disagree, with the “borders are just constructs” people.
What I will never understand is protecting violent criminals (convicted or otherwise) in pursuit of such policies.
I can understand, even if I vehemently disagree, with the “borders are just constructs” people.
Closest I can get is sympathy. Fat, drunk, and stupid is no way to go through life, son.
"Youre returning to do the days of the KKK south,"
Seems to be a recurring Dem meme, does it not?
All juries should be empaneled with non democrats only. Democrats are not trustworthy, lawful, or honest.
>NYC's two-person system is a global outlier
NYCs coddling of criminals is a global outlier. Maybe they need the conductor?
Hochul doesn't know - she isn't ever going to ride the subway.
I wouldn't say that given France, Germany, and Britain.
I haven't lived in NYC in like a decade but...
Back then in the middle of each platform up high was a zebra striped strip. When the train stopped, a conductor in the middle of the train would open the window and point at the strip before opening the doors.
Anyone in NYC, feel free to see if that's still the case.
Too local. Oh wait, I forgot that Reason writers all live around NY and DC, which they believe are the center of the universe.
Too Local
Democrats vote for shit like this. Charge Democrats more to ride the subway (and higher taxes, too).
Do I have to think of everything?
Also, chain big metal plates to them. 50-100 lbs.. this will simulate what they do to productive people. And shock collars that randomly activate.
I'm old enough to remember the 'featherbedding' controversy of the 1950's. Railroad unions pushed to mandate having a person in the caboose of a freight train, in spite of the fact that railroads no longer needed cabooses.
Unions are the opposite of efficiency and will always push for that which benefits the union itself.
hey hey this story linked at Citizenfreepress ... Bannon is a fraud, Kane. go Hoosiers.