MARTA Drivers and Passengers Need Better Protection from Violence

Using public transportation should not mean taking your life in your hands. Accepting a career providing this vital public service should not mean accepting a life, and possible death, as the target of threats and violence.

Unfortunately, that’s exactly the horrifying reality that many passengers and drivers have faced during their travels around Metropolitan Atlanta.

A Newly Hired MARTA Driver Is Dead After a Dispute Over $2.50 in Bus Fare

On January 3rd, 47-year-old Leroy Ramos was shot and killed at the Decatur MARTA station, while working as a bus driver. The shooting allegedly arose from an argument between Ramos and three juvenile passengers who refused to pay the fare.

Two suspects were arrested shortly after the shooting, and a third turned himself in three days later. While their identities have not been released due to their age, all three have been charged with murder and will be tried as adults.

Ramos had just started working for MARTA three months earlier, and leaves behind a wife and three children.

There was reportedly no MARTA police presence on the bus at the time of the incident, although officers did respond soon after.

In the first days after the shooting, MARTA Police Chief Scott Kreher told the press that the Decatur station was “generally considered a safe area,” but Britt Dunams, president of the MARTA bus drivers’ union, disagrees. Dunams has stated that Ramos’s route was one known among drivers for its safety issues, and even recognized by the MARTA police as requiring additional monitoring.

Drivers Take Issue with MARTA’s Use of De-Escalation

In an official comment issued two days after the incident, a MARTA spokesperson acknowledged an “uptick” in violence against bus drivers, pointed to the COVID-19 pandemic as the origin of this trend, and emphasized MARTA’s “strict de-escalation policy” as a strategy for preventing incidents like the one that ended Ramos’s life.

De-escalation is a set of techniques intended to minimize the intensity of a conflict, potentially preventing violence before it starts. The term is most commonly associated with the law enforcement and psychiatric professions, but training in de-escalation can be life-saving for many kinds of workers who interact with the public, including bus drivers.

Ideally, no one should have to face the threat of violence in the workplace at all, but when that threat does come up, it’s crucial for workers to know the safest way to respond, and to be able to trust that their employers will support them in that course of action.

That’s not the experience that all drivers have had with MARTA’s particular de-escalation policy, however. Rather than empowering drivers to avoid conflict and prioritize lives over property, the policy has allegedly been used as a basis to get rid of drivers who have been exposed to on-the-job trauma.

Multiple MARTA drivers have been fired and even arrested by MARTA police for “fighting” guests, only to have their actions later confirmed as self-defense. One of those drivers, John Harrison, has since sued MARTA for malicious termination and won.

There’s No Sign of an End to MARTA Violence

Even when perfectly applied, de-escalation policies aren’t magic. There are situations where a violent instigator can’t simply be talked out of inflicting harm on others, and MARTA needs to have additional protections in place for these situations.

Businesses, and even government organizations like MARTA, have a duty to protect their staff and guests from known dangers, including violence. The appropriate level of security depends on the level of the threat. Surveillance cameras and a modest security guard presence might be more than enough for most businesses, but MARTA isn’t a simple bricks-and-mortar store, with a single neighborhood’s crime patterns to consider. The mobile nature of the service MARTA offers means more risks, and more security needs.

In addition to increased MARTA police presence on vehicles, some drivers have suggested installing bulletproof driver compartments, or banning weapons from public transportation.

At this point, MARTA should be carefully considering all options for improving driver and passenger safety. Current measures are clearly not enough.

Already since Ramos’s death, there has been another shooting, on another MARTA bus. On January 8th, two passengers began shooting at each other while exiting a bus at the Clayton County Station. One of the suspected shooters and one bystander were hospitalized in critical condition.

Worker’s Comp Law Can Make Suing an Employer for Wrongful Death a Challenge

Even though employers theoretically have a duty to keep workplaces safe, collecting fair compensation can be extremely difficult for victims of workplace negligence.

The way the worker’s comp system is set up, all employees injured during the course of work have the right to employer-funded medical care. Those who miss work due to injury can also collect two-thirds of their lost income through worker’s comp, and the families of workers killed on the job are entitled to a small payout.

These benefits are not conditional upon proving fault, but they typically represent a tiny fraction of what a civil court would award in a successful personal injury or wrongful death suit. And no matter how confident the victims are of being able to prove employer negligence, there is no option to waive worker’s comp coverage in favor of the right to sue.

There are some situations, however, in which victims of workplace violence can still sue for full compensation:

• When worker’s comp coverage has been denied. Employers who refuse to provide legally required coverage forfeit their immunity to civil suits.
• When the employer has caused deliberate harm. Willful disregard for safety isn’t enough to void employer immunity, but if the victim or family can prove that the employer intended to cause injury or death, that’s grounds for a civil suit.
• When someone else shares responsibility for the incident. Employer immunity only protects the employer. It doesn’t prevent the victim or family from suing other negligent parties. For example, a family that has lost someone to a shooting might be able to sue the shooter, the shooter’s liability insurance company, or anyone who participated in illegally putting a gun in the shooter’s hand, if applicable.

The Stoddard Firm is passionate about helping families affected by gun violence get the best possible compensation. If you are Mrs. Monique Ramos, or if you have also lost a loved one to MARTA violence, please feel free to reach out at any time for a free consultation on your options.