I dont understand why the MTA refused to consider firing him, let alone discipline him in any form. It was clear that he was reckless from his three accidents and that he had already brought them bad press, so why keep such a liability? Finding a bus driver to replace him in NYC should take about 5 minutes, he didn't possess any hard to find talents. The whole point of suing was about accountability, which even after the lawsuit he would not be held to.
shareNot to mention there would be video footage from inside the bus implicating him. Being in NYC, there's also a high probability that the accident was recorded by security cameras at the intersection.
I also find it hard to believe that there were no other witnesses other than Lisa and the bus driver. There would be pedestrians as well as other cars at the intersection who would offer testimony.
They didn't want to fire him as part of the settlement because that would indicate he (and them) were at fault. They paid the money to avoid a long and expensive trial, but basically paying the settlement doesn't mean they admitted guilt. But firing a bus driver might admit guilt, which they probably felt could lead to other worse things for them.
But it is very possible they will find a way to fire him within the next year or so, so he can not do any more harm to them. It just couldn't be part of the settlement.
Lisa and Emily were sufficiently naive and misguided to think that a lawsuit would result in the driver's dismissal rather than a monetary settlement to the distant relative who was the only one with the standing to sue. Ironically, their actions ensured that the driver would NOT be fired. Should have been a wake-up call to both of them that they couldn't orchestrate the universe that they thought was within their control.
shareEven if he was reckless from three accidents,no one died because of it.Lisa was part of the catalyst which caused the fatal accident.She distracted him enough for him to miss the red light.Sometime random tragedy just happens,whether we like it or not.The bus driver has two kids to feed and losing his job would greatly affect and disturb his life,while Lisa just wanted his blood because she was suffering the guilt of the accident and wanted to him to get the same consequences.I don't hate Lisa,I understood her trauma.But the fact that she is watching opera with her mother dressed to the nine while the bus driver is out there working his butt off doing night shift makes me sympathies with him way more.
shareI thought both lawyers explained the reasons he hasn't and wouldn't be fired very well.
_______
The sun is shining... but the ice is slippery.
It was an accident. Lisa was partially at fault though not legally. What would firing the bus driver accomplish? Nothing. He was clearly haunted by what happened. He had a wife and children. He had a high-stress, terrible job.
shareTry watching the movie next time instead of fiddling with your iPhone. All your points were clearly and convincingly explained in the movie.
Also, we were only viewing things from the "offensive" camp. For example, he had had two accidents before and was not disciplined. For all we know, they could have been thoroughly investigated and he was found to be blameless.
In the real world, it sometimes happens that the government employers don't take immediate action then quietly retire the *beep* a little later -- see Mark Fuhrman, for one.
share