|
|
| Re: MTA training (Re: Called A ''Terrorist'' By A T/O) (533431) | |||
 |
|||
| Home > SubChat | |||
|
[ Read Responses | Post a New Response | Return to the Index ] |
|
||
|
Re: MTA training (Re: Called A ''Terrorist'' By A T/O) |
|
|
Posted by Terrapin Station on Fri Dec 14 12:24:06 2007, in response to Re: MTA training (Re: Called A ''Terrorist'' By A T/O), posted by SelkirkTMO on Fri Dec 14 11:54:38 2007. I'm privy to details you may not be, but based on what I've been told by seven friends of mine who have seen this thread, 1059c is *NOT* mentioned.Um ... I never said it WAS mentioned. And in other posts I have said that it wasn't mentioned. I won't go into the other details of what IS in the training video, but photography *IS* a part of it, I'll just say that it relates to "photographing INFRASTRUCTURE and PROCEDURES (such as operating)" Yes, as I have said. I have not said anything contrary to this... and as far as I'm concerned, based upon rather VAGUE directions in the video, this particular T/O might have misinterpreted the training That's where we differ. I have not heard the video could be misinterpreted to mean that you should directly confront the suspicious person and tell them about a rule that doesn't exist. Sorry. You'll need to explain more what you mean in order for me to believe this. Feel free to email me. but the AUTHORITY will stand behind her decision to do what she did. I HIGHLY doubt that anyone in an official capacity to make such a statement to the public would claim that it is ok to directly confront a passenger about a non-existent rule and also essentially call him a terrorist within earshot. And I can *confirm* that she's STILL pounding the rails after all that's been seen here (and NOTED by her supervisors) ... First of all I don't see how anyone could possibly know which T/O this was (unless she has a history of this improper behavior), since I don't think he posted any identifiable info (though if he did and I missed it, I apologize). And even if they do know which T/O it is, OF COURSE SHE IS STILL WORKING!!!! Why wouldn't she be? No one has filed a complaint! And AFAIK, no supervisor witnessed what she did! And AFAIK, no one has officially brought any evidence against her! |
|
|
|