This, that and rules

Do this! Don't do that! Rules, rules and more rules. Passive people accept, aggressive people rant but everybody follows rules, irrespective of whether they make sense or not. Last weeks happenings reminded me acutely of a chapter that we had studied in the 8th or 9th grade. Most of the content is hazy but this I remember:

The story was about a dog, a pekingese dog I think and its owner who was a lady on the verge of contracting pneumonia. The lady was accompanied by a female and a male friend and the party was returning from somewhere (from where, I forget). The only mode of transportation available to them at that hour was the bus. It was a double decker and the lady with the dog and her companions naturally chose to sit in the lower compartment. Trouble began to brew when the conductor, who was a stickler for rules, refused to let the dog be allowed in the lower compartment. Because the "rule", you see, was that pets be allowed to travel with their owners only in the upper compartment which was open air. Now this would have been fine if the lady were not ill, and not so badly attached to the little creature or if the conductor were a little more flexible. As fate would have it, neither was the case and the bus was halted mid-way causing greivance to the other users as well. At later point in the story a constable was also roped in to resolve the issue. But as is the case with most "men in uniform", he supported the conductor and the argument continued. It's a pity I don't remember the end but this I do remember:

At some point after the constable had been consulted there was a very sensible (if that's the word I am looking for) dialogue between the author (who happened to be a passenger on the bus) and the conductor. The gist of what the author said was "Rules are meant for the benefit and safety of the public. Some rules have to be followed come what may - like the traffic rules. They have to be followed without exception. Rules such as the one in question, on the other hand have no practical reason to be there in the first place except maybe for the satisfaction of the whims of people with power who thought it might be a nice idea to have them. Such rules need to be implemented with a forethought to whether they are actually benefitting the public or causing more damage".

There has to be a reason that this particular bit of dialogue has stuck, after all the time since high school, college and work life. The most probable reason why it stayed during high school - the story came at a time when the impressionable minds are absolutely against any form of restrictions being imposed on them. It stuck during college because of similar reasons. It stuck during work life because in the training that we receive, we are taught to question everything. Think of the problem/solution offered from every angle, scrutinize and evaluate for yourself, "Is this the best way to do it?". So when rules are applied by the dozen, the "trained" mind can't help but question "Is this the best way to improve security/improve productivity/determine who's worthy of promotions and who's not?". The answer that invariably comes up is "NO". But as I said, passive people accept, aggressive people rant but everybody follows rules, irrespective of whether they make sense or not.