Ryan
Court Jester
WMATA has a very generous photo policy. Basically, no tripods, stay out of people's way, and you can shoot what you want.
Sadly, not everyone employed there is on the ball. Here's the fulltext of my complaint to WMATA, it's kind of long and rambling, but coherent writing isn't something that's coming easily at this point. I may have been able to handle the situation better, but I'm not (as you may have guess) the type to take this sort of thing laying down, and utterly cannot handle someone being rude and factually incorrect very well at all.
Sadly, not everyone employed there is on the ball. Here's the fulltext of my complaint to WMATA, it's kind of long and rambling, but coherent writing isn't something that's coming easily at this point. I may have been able to handle the situation better, but I'm not (as you may have guess) the type to take this sort of thing laying down, and utterly cannot handle someone being rude and factually incorrect very well at all.
Edited to redact names.While proceeding home from work, I entered the Navy Yard station at approximately 3:30. While waiting for a train, I began taking pictures of an outbound train as it approached the station (taking pictures into the tunnel) - something that I have done many times in the past without trouble. A metro employee came out of the tunnel and asked me if I had a permit. I replied in the negative, and stated that the WMATA website said that there was no permit needed, as long as I was within WMATA's guidelines. He said "Hold on while I check on that", and a few minutes later another employee came out of the tunnel. He told me that I did in fact require a permit, and quickly became agitated when I stood my ground and said that none was required. He told me "Come here with me" and gestured back towards the tunnel - I politely refused and said that I was going to remain on the platform. He repeatedly told me to "read the back of your farecard", so I put my camera away (I had stopped taking pictures and put the lens cap back on as soon as I started talking to him). and pulled my SmarTrip card out of its holder. When I asked him what he wanted me to read, he said "Read Number 5.", which I did aloud (SmarTrip contains sensitive electronics. Do not bend, perforate or expose to extreme temperatures.) and asked him how that was relevant, he looked at me disbelievingly. I showed it to him, and he attempted to take it from my hands. I refused, and pulled back the card. He directed me to "read the rest of it" - looking over it quickly, most everything on the card referred to how to use the card and care for it. The only thing that looked to be relevant was the first line, which said in part that "it must be produced on demand by an authorized transit employee or police". He the demanded that I give him my farecard. I refused, saying that I had complied with his request to produce it and was not willing to go any farther. At some point during this exchange, a train headed toward my destination entered the station, and I asked if I was free to go. He replied "You're going to stay here until I say that you can go." I questioned him again, and he told me that I "wasn't going anywhere, except maybe be arrested".
At this point, he got on his radio and told whomever he was talking to that he had someone taking pictures of the tunnels and was refusing to go with him to see the station manager. I interjected and said that I would be happy to see the station manager, and he had never asked me to see the station manager. After some disagreement over what he had asked, we finally went upstairs to the ballpark entrance of the stadium where we met J., who introduced herself as the station manager. In a much more reasonable fashion, her and I discussed what the situation was. She too tried to tell me that I wasn't permitted to take pictures into the non-public areas. When I disagreed, the gentleman from downstairs would rudely interrupt with comments such as "See, he's just being difficult and unreasonable" and "Just wait for the police to get here" (He didn't say "police", but used some three letter acronym that I'm not familiar with). At this point he also told me that he "hoped that I would give him a reason to be arrested", and that I "was going to be arrested when they get here". J. referred to the man as "Mr. L.", and when I asked him what his first name was, he refused to provide it, and acted incredulous that I would be making demands of him.
Finally, J. convinced Mr. L. to go back to his office, and explained that he was an ATC person and some type of a dispatcher (not exactly how she explained it, but I wasn't familiar with the terminology she was using) and that he tended to be "overprotective" of the managers. Her and I went up to her kiosk to await the transit police, and she asked if I had an ID or business card that she could use for her report. I gladly gave her a business card, and the transit police arrived a few moments later. The officer asked me what had happened, so I explained to him the entire situation. He was very polite, and agreed that I was in the right, and that this was not the "hostile dispute" that he had been called out over. He told me that I was free to go, and before we parted ways, I asked him and J. if they could provide me with Mr. L.'s name since he was uncooperative. She told me that she thought that it was "G.".
There are two main issues that I would like to comment/receive clarification on:
1. The permissibility of the photography. Metro's Use Regulations posted online say that "Sill photography that does not require a tripod, special lighting, film crews, models, impair the normal ingress/egress or operation of WMATA services and can be accomplished by a hand-held camera by one person is not regulated". My activities fell under all these guidelines, and I would like confirmation that there are no issues going forward with my photography inside Metro train stations. If this is the case, I believe that further education of public-facing Metro employees would be helpful. If the Station Manager was correct an confident in the policy, she could have corrected Mr. L. and the situation would have resolved itself.
2. The conduct of Mr. L. was completely unacceptable. As (presumably) a non-public facing employee, he should have immediately transferred the situation over to someone that was trained to deal with the situation, rather than be rude and harassing on the train platform. His constant threats and repeatedly expressed desire to see me arrested were completely out of line and inappropriate, and his demeanor was completely out of sync with how WMATA should be dealing with its customers. His arrogance and refusal to identify took what could have been a very simple situation and made it into a very stressful situation for all. His demeanor were in a stark contrast to the station manager and police officer's, who were an absolute pleasure to deal with and should be commended for their efforts.
I am more than happy to answer and questions either by phone, email or in person concerning this regrettable incident.
Last edited by a moderator: