Dealing with drunk bums on Kelowna transit

[Dizzy1]

You guys do know that transit buses are radio equipped ?

The transit drivers I've experienced have never had to use them for anything other than informing transit control of a possible delay due to traffic problems but I doubt for a minute that if a passenger was crrating any kind of havoc to another , they'd use it to call the cops ... They have before.

I've always felt safe on the bus and a with the addition of security cameras, security will improve...

The radios are used for calling the supervisors/dispatch or whomever if there is a safety or security concern - and they do get used quite frequently for that purpose.

Some radios in the BC transit fleet do not have access to any emergency channels, some do (if Kelowna does, I can't recall to be honest) - the channel used is a private channel which, along with the radio is owned by the operating contractor (in Kelowna's case - First Canada). As per BC Transit guidelines, a contractor (such as First) must guarantee that someone (supervisor, dispatcher) is listening at all times during hours of service to provide assistance if needed (police, ambulance). Not all transit agencies are required to have on-road supervisors such as Kelowna does, it all depends on the number of buses they have on the road - once it hits that number, they are required to have on road supervisors - other wise a dispatcher in the office is considered enough.

Hope that explains radio use a bit better - not that anyone cares LOL

[Dizzy1]

I do have to disagree, the bus driver if the BOSS on the bus. He has the right of refusal. IF someone is being a problem it is his duty to ensure the other passengers are safe.

I do not know their protocol but I think if he/she can not deal with it, then depending upon the circumstances the Police need to be called.

You are correct about people being responsible but if that was the case, we could run with one or two police in Kelowna on any given night. It just isn't that way today.

You would think the driver is the boss of the bus, but in today's world its the drivers boss who is the boss of the bus and their policy goes - whatever it may be.

Every agency has their own protocol and policies on how to deal with different types of passengers, I"m not going to go into detail what First or BC Transit's is but I don't see eye to eye with it compared to the work I've done with other agencies.

[just popping in]

At least the "drunk bum" wasn't driving a vehicle, could have been worse.

[MAPearce]

The radios are used for calling the supervisors/dispatch or whomever if there is a safety or security concern - and they do get used quite frequently for that purpose.

So .. you know at least .

Some radios in the BC transit fleet do not have access to any emergency channels,

Ever heard of the CREST system in Greater Victoria ? What a waste of loot that is .

[fall]

Oh, I thought maybe this thread was about some of the drivers. It's about some of the riders.

[Fancy]

Oh, I thought maybe this thread was about some of the drivers. It's about some of the riders.

Hmmm, would have thought the title of the thread might have been clear enough. But considering the drivers are responsible for their riders - it's all related.

[maryjane48]

why are all these sjw sticking up for alcoholics . and why does our govt sell such a dangours drug ?


seems crazy to sell a drug that kills so many in cars and liver disease . and people that use alcohol are always stealing and commiting crimes to support using the drug alcohol .

[TRIX]

The drivers are not the Boss of their bus, The concept of each individual having different standards to the next causes huge consistency problems. The operators are bound by policy which protects the operator to some extent. Leaving the seat is against the policy. An operator can and has been disciplined for leaving the seat to engage passengers. The protocol is to call a road supervisor, do not escalate the situation and defuse as best as possible until the police or a manager shows up.
The union president Scott Lovell has been championing the need for protection of his members and the ridership thru the implementation of Transit police. BC Transit has responded by putting cameras on approx. 40% of the fleet and talked about shields for the operators. Shields for the operators does nothing for the riders and studies show possibly escalates the risk due to the frustration of limited access to the operator aboard the bus. The Union president and his peers across he country have been the lone voices expressing the need for Transit police to protect the operators and the ridership by curbing the actions of the aggressive riders due to the security or possibility of security aboard the bus. Again, the option that will be taken will be the cheapest option as the system is severely under funded as best and unusable by regular constituents of the Okanagan because of inconsistent schedules at worst. The sooner we stop the Triple P private partners from taking our Transit dollars as profit, it this case back to Scotland to their shareholders, the sooner we can return those profits back into the system to address so many issues. The creation of the Okanagan Transit Authority is a must in an effort to bring control of the system back to the people of the Okanagan, as it should be..

[WalterWhite]

Bring back Green Coach Stage Lines.

[What_the]

Tl:dr
Methinks thou doth protest too
much.

The bus driver is responsible for the people in his charge.
You'd be screaming bloody murder if the driver did something to endanger the passengers, yet when the passenger is in danger he has no responsibility.
Ok, wrap that blanket around you and sleep warmer at night.

The bus driver is responsible for his own actions.
He's no more responsible for some lunatics behavior than you are for mine.

Consider who gets charges laid on them when law enforcement gets involved. Is it the bus driver or the aggressive looney?
Whoever it is is likely the one responsible.

I can't believe I'm engaged in this...

Just got back to this thread.
Ok seriously? Regardless of who is responsible of creating crap on the bus. At the end of the day the the driver is responsible for the safety of his/her passengers. Don't be obtuse and try say other wise. If the driver was irresponsible and *bleep* *bleep* up, he would be held to account. Your type would be most vocal.
Now here's the thing you're not understanding. Think of this. On a commercial aircraft, the captain has sole discretion whether he/she taxies or not.why? Because he/she is responsible for the souls in his/her charge. Why? Because the passenger safety, at the captain's discretion, is his/her, when regulatory authority dictates,is his/hers.
There's no distinction.
Bus drivers are responsible for their passenger safety. Bottom line.
Or haven't you been responsible for other's safety in that capacity, as I have, or as the law states; unless some one wants to set me straight.
You're right in a sense that the aggressor is ultimately responsible. don't try to say *bleep* about those in charge of others unless you've been on the hook.

[Jflem1983]

How on God's green earth could anyone be qualified to drive a bus . If u had to accept responsibility for the actions of the public . Could not pay me enuff

[WalterWhite]

I think what's not quite a clear line is what one thinks "responsibility" means. Yes, the driver is responsible for the passengers - while in the normal operations of driving the bus - that does not mean he must put himself in harms way to protect passengers from other passengers - and I think that's what's not being clearly understood. The driver is in charge of the bus and is responsible for the safety of all passengers aboard - the extent of which would likely end with a verbal warning(s) and after that it's up to transit managers and/or the police if warranted to deal with whoever is causing the disturbance/altercation.

[What_the]

Yes^^