Tuesday, December 16, 2008

Post datum

On the heels of my collision with a bus from the Toronto Transit Commission, comes the news that a bus driver broadsided an SUV, killing its driver.

Evidently, I was luckier than that SUV driver. I also wondered who was to blame for the accident. How fast was the TTC bus traveling? Are the police and bus company using drivers of smaller vehicles as a scapegoat? What is the safety record of the TTC - exactly?

My doubts have their reasons.

For one, barely any detail on the SUV driver surfaced in the press. For another, I found it surprising that a police sergeant would construct - for public consumption - an a priori possibility of error on the part of the SUV driver.

A spokesman for the TTC sent condolences to the victim's family and friends, before he said: "The TTC is one of safest transit systems in the world." He added, "With 1,700 buses on the streets every day, from time to time there are collisions... usually very minor, but not in this case."

I thought back to my collision with the TTC last month. Back to the arrival of a representative from the bus company to the scene of the accident. The rep parked in front of the bus until the police arrived. And when the police did arrive, they spoke first to both the bus driver and his company's representative. I, alone, was the more expendable party, reflecting a little-known dictum, "ageism and sexism are alive and well on the road."

Was that the reason the police entered the data from the transport company in second position on the accident report, saving my subsequent data for the first position, even before I gave my testimony? The first position indicates at fault, for insurance and other purposes. Never mind the euphemisms.

So I wondered, was the SUV driver, too, more expendable? It would seem that way. Counselling services were provided to the bus driver. But there was no mention of any offering to the family of the deceased.

No comments: