But the conductor did not radio the transit command station about Ray's recklessness, as he was required to do. Several drivers interviewed by The New York Times said it was common knowledge that Ray drank on the job and reported for work drunk. Random tests carried out over such a large work force would not be likely to find a driver who showed up for work intoxicated unless he or she did so regularly. Moreover, definitive tests of drug and alcohol use yield results hours or days after testing, meaning the tests would not prevent operators from driving intoxicated on the occasions when they were tested. Despite the great concern for rider safety the testing program supposedly indicates, the system repeatedly ignored obvious signs that Ray was not performing adequately the night of the accident or in general.
Drug testing seems primarily a public-relations effort aimed at alleviating anxiety.
But less dramatic reforms would be far more effective at actually reducing the risk of another accident. The MTA needs to make sure all transit workers understand that drunken subway operators will not be tolerated and that employees are required to report immediately that a motorman is visibly intoxicated or otherwise unfit to drive. Supervisors, dispatchers, and conductors should know that identifying and halting intoxicated or unsafe drivers are imperatives and that they may be fired for not doing so. Meanwhile, transit-authority regulations should be sufficiently rigorous that unreliable drivers are quickly weeded out. Such policies are already on the MTA's books, even though they were not enforced in Ray's case.