In 2015 salaries, wages, and benefits were 49.6 per cent of Amtrak's consolidated operating expenses and 67.8 per cent of its consolidated operating revenues.
For CSX compensation and benefits were 37.3 per cent of consolidated operating expenses and 26.7 per cent of consolidated revenues. For UP compensation and benefits were 33.3 per cent of consolidated operating expenses and 22.5 per cent of consolidated operating revenues.
The financial statements don't show what percentage of salary, wage, and benefits expense is attributable to overtime.
The numbers for the other freight carriers are probably similar to those for CSX and UP. There may be some category definition issues between the companies, but the accounting would be comparable.
Rio Grande Valley, CFI,CFII
Since this thread is about the NEC, it seems like a good opportunity to slip in some analytics regarding the NEC.
Thank you for the interesting figures. It shows if quality, semi-HSR service is provided, the public will pay a premium for it. But the speculative percentage of 80% is probably too high.
C&NW, CA&E, MILW, CGW and IC fan
JPS1 In 2015 salaries, wages, and benefits were 49.6 per cent of Amtrak's consolidated operating expenses and 67.8 per cent of its consolidated operating revenues. For CSX compensation and benefits were 37.3 per cent of consolidated operating expenses and 26.7 per cent of consolidated revenues. For UP compensation and benefits were 33.3 per cent of consolidated operating expenses and 22.5 per cent of consolidated operating revenues. The financial statements don't show what percentage of salary, wage, and benefits expense is attributable to overtime. The numbers for the other freight carriers are probably similar to those for CSX and UP. There may be some category definition issues between the companies, but the accounting would be comparable.
I fail to see any labor cost correlation between a 2 person freight crew hauling 100 cars, vs., an Amtrak LD train with a dozen crew members. As far as overtime goes, when ATK's trains are running hours late (often by causes beyond their control) what is the mystery.
MidlandMike JPS1 In 2015 salaries, wages, and benefits were 49.6 per cent of Amtrak's consolidated operating expenses and 67.8 per cent of its consolidated operating revenues. For CSX compensation and benefits were 37.3 per cent of consolidated operating expenses and 26.7 per cent of consolidated revenues. For UP compensation and benefits were 33.3 per cent of consolidated operating expenses and 22.5 per cent of consolidated operating revenues. The financial statements don't show what percentage of salary, wage, and benefits expense is attributable to overtime. The numbers for the other freight carriers are probably similar to those for CSX and UP. There may be some category definition issues between the companies, but the accounting would be comparable. I fail to see any labor cost correlation between a 2 person freight crew hauling 100 cars, vs., an Amtrak LD train with a dozen crew members. As far as overtime goes, when ATK's trains are running hours late (often by causes beyond their control) what is the mystery.
No correlation was intended. The figures show that passenger trains, especially the long distance ones, are labor intensive.
The number of workers required for a NEC or California corrider train, as examples, is considerably less than the long distance trains. Moreover, given their better on-time performance, primarily because of the shorter distances covered, they require less over time and away from home quartering expense.
JPS1No correlation was intended. The figures show that passenger trains, especially the long distance ones, are labor intensive. The number of workers required for a NEC or California corrider train, as examples, is considerably less than the long distance trains. Moreover, given their better on-time performance, primarily because of the shorter distances covered, they require less over time and away from home quartering expense.
And that is strong evidence of why short corridor segments are much more efficient than stringing several togther into an LD train route. Eg.: the CZ. Better if shorter corridors, such as CHI-Omaha; Omaha-DEN; SLC-DEN run separately. There could be services during the hours passngers want, trains would be more likely to be on-time and labor costs would be far less than long, sleep-equipped LD trains.
JPS1: What's your accounting opinion of the restructuring?
FRA account structure
Victrola1 The Transportation, Housing and Urban Development and Related Agencies appropriations bill passed by the Senate last week includes a measure that would require Amtrak to spend profits from its Acela and Northeast Regional service on critical capital and safety improvement projects in the Northeast Corridor (NEC). The bill calls for $1.42 billion for Amtrak, a $30 million increase from last year's spending bill. That amount would include $345 million for a new NEC account and $1.075 billion for Amtrak's national network, according to a press release issued by U.S. Sen. Chris Murphy's (D-Conn.) office. http://www.progressiverailroading.com/amtrak/news/Legislation-would-require-Amtrak-to-spend-NEC-profits-on-the-corridor--48345 What are the implications of this bill should it pass and become law?
The Transportation, Housing and Urban Development and Related Agencies appropriations bill passed by the Senate last week includes a measure that would require Amtrak to spend profits from its Acela and Northeast Regional service on critical capital and safety improvement projects in the Northeast Corridor (NEC).
The bill calls for $1.42 billion for Amtrak, a $30 million increase from last year's spending bill. That amount would include $345 million for a new NEC account and $1.075 billion for Amtrak's national network, according to a press release issued by U.S. Sen. Chris Murphy's (D-Conn.) office.
http://www.progressiverailroading.com/amtrak/news/Legislation-would-require-Amtrak-to-spend-NEC-profits-on-the-corridor--48345
What are the implications of this bill should it pass and become law?
Ahhh, the Northeast again. Demanding all profits Amtrak makes in the NEC be spent in the NEC but at the same time refusing to pay what Amtrak asks it to......
http://www.universalhub.com/2016/mbta-sues-amtrak-derail-29-million-demand-running
I personally do not care about the provision that NEC profits are spent on NEC projects. However, I must strenously insist that each NE Commutter line pay fair and reasonable costs to Amtrak for running their trains and until that happens the NEC will continue to be a financial basket case.
Here are some additional compensation and benefits statistics from carriers that haul people.
For Southwest Airlines compensation and benefits in 2015 were 40.6 per cent of consolidated operating expenses and 32.2 per cent of consolidated revenues. For Jet Blue the figures were 29.6 per cent and 24.0 per cent. For Megabus, which is owned by StageCoach Group, the figures were 40.1 per cent and 37.6 per cent.
For VIARail the numbers were 41.9 per cent and 91.5 per cent.
Commercial airlines and intercity bus operators deliver a different service than a passenger train. They have different labor contracts.
Cross border comparisons are difficult. The U.S. includes in compensation and benefits costs items that in many other countries are paid for by taxes. Health insurance is the biggest example that I can think of now.
Amtrak's on-board employees appear to be paid more than comparable employees for the carriers that they are competing with.
A waiter, or any other Amtrak on board service employee, received an average wage of $25.54 per hour in 2012. The total cost, including benefits and employer paid taxes, was $41.19 per hour according to the Office of Inspector General.
Clearly, to get a better understanding of the comparative labor costs, as well as the numerous other factors the impact Amtrak's cost structure, one would need to spend a great deal of time pulling the numbers together. And be able to understand what she or he is reading.
The fact that Amtrak's compensation and benefits expenses consume a high percentage of its revenues and expenses should be an indicator for management to take a serious look at the root causes. If Amtrak were privatized, which I favor, it would be compelled to get a better handle on its costs.
schlimm JPS1 No correlation was intended. The figures show that passenger trains, especially the long distance ones, are labor intensive. The number of workers required for a NEC or California corrider train, as examples, is considerably less than the long distance trains. Moreover, given their better on-time performance, primarily because of the shorter distances covered, they require less over time and away from home quartering expense. And that is strong evidence of why short corridor segments are much more efficient than stringing several togther into an LD train route. Eg.: the CZ. Better if shorter corridors, such as CHI-Omaha; Omaha-DEN; SLC-DEN run separately. There could be services during the hours passngers want, trains would be more likely to be on-time and labor costs would be far less than long, sleep-equipped LD trains.
JPS1 No correlation was intended. The figures show that passenger trains, especially the long distance ones, are labor intensive. The number of workers required for a NEC or California corrider train, as examples, is considerably less than the long distance trains. Moreover, given their better on-time performance, primarily because of the shorter distances covered, they require less over time and away from home quartering expense.
Corridor only trains may be more efficient in a physical sense, but I wonder if average travelers would find them always useful. As a railfan, I would love the Zephyr route broken down into daylight segments, provided there were station attached hotels (like in Canada.) I get to see the railroad and scenery by day, and then get a good nights sleep in a bed on solid ground. However, I don't know how many average passengers want to take 2 days to Denver and 3 to SLC. Amtrak wanted to start a corridor train to Omaha, via Quad Cities/Des Moines, but Iowa was not interested. I also doubt Nebraska would support a corridor thru their state.
JPS1 Here are some additional compensation and benefits statistics from carriers that haul people. For Southwest Airlines compensation and benefits in 2015 were 40.6 per cent of consolidated operating expenses and 32.2 per cent of consolidated revenues. For Jet Blue the figures were 29.6 per cent and 24.0 per cent. For Megabus, which is owned by StageCoach Group, the figures were 40.1 per cent and 37.6 per cent. For VIARail the numbers were 41.9 per cent and 91.5 per cent. Commercial airlines and intercity bus operators deliver a different service than a passenger train. They have different labor contracts. Cross border comparisons are difficult. The U.S. includes in compensation and benefits costs items that in many other countries are paid for by taxes. Health insurance is the biggest example that I can think of now. Amtrak's on-board employees appear to be paid more than comparable employees for the carriers that they are competing with. A waiter, or any other Amtrak on board service employee, received an average wage of $25.54 per hour in 2012. The total cost, including benefits and employer paid taxes, was $41.19 per hour according to the Office of Inspector General. Clearly, to get a better understanding of the comparative labor costs, as well as the numerous other factors the impact Amtrak's cost structure, one would need to spend a great deal of time pulling the numbers together. And be able to understand what she or he is reading. The fact that Amtrak's compensation and benefits expenses consume a high percentage of its revenues and expenses should be an indicator for management to take a serious look at the root causes. If Amtrak were privatized, which I favor, it would be compelled to get a better handle on its costs.
Southwest and Jet Blue are discount airlines, and you would need to also consider legacy airlines for an average. Rather than that, I looked at Bureau of Labor Statistics wage tables:
http://www.bls.gov/oes/current/oes_nat.htm#53-0000
Airline pilots annual wage= $ 136,400, Flight attendant= $ 46,750
They did not give hourly wages apparently because of seasonality/part time.
Bus drivers, intercity= $ 19.31/hr, $ 40,160/year
Locomotive engineers= $ 28,54/hr, $ 59,360/year
Rail transportation workers= $ 27.52/hr, $ 57,230/year
An ATK onboard service worker earns about $5,000/year less than the average railroad worker, and $5,000 more than a (part seasonal?) flight attendant, $10,000 more than a bus driver, and way way less than an airline pilot. So it puts the ATK onboard worker in the middle.
Comparing ATK's compensation percent of costs with other forms of transportation, ignores other costs of doing business among the various modes. Airlines pay so much for fuel, that Delta bought their own refinery. I agree that to understand what is going on here, one would need to spend a great deal of time pulling numbers together. It kind of takes the fun out of railfaning.
MidlandMikeCorridor only trains may be more efficient in a physical sense, but I wonder if average travelers would find them always useful. As a railfan, I would love the Zephyr route broken down into daylight segments, provided there were station attached hotels (like in Canada.) I get to see the railroad and scenery by day, and then get a good nights sleep in a bed on solid ground. However, I don't know how many average passengers want to take 2 days to Denver and 3 to SLC. Amtrak wanted to start a corridor train to Omaha, via Quad Cities/Des Moines, but Iowa was not interested. I also doubt Nebraska would support a corridor thru their state.
Several posters in the past have contended that the western LD ridership is not primarily between the endpoints, but rather the intermediate cities. Amtrak is not there for railfans. If NB or CO or IA or UT do not want to pay for services but their citizens want it, then they can exert pressure at the ballot box. If they do not, let the CZ die an unmourned death, except for a few thousand railfans.
MidlandMikeLocomotive engineers= $ 28,54/hr, $ 59,360/year
I am not a Locomotive Engineer but are you sure that is correct? I would tend to think 70k / year. I thought Senior Amtrak Engineers make over 6 digits. Am I wrong here?
CMStPnP MidlandMike Locomotive engineers= $ 28,54/hr, $ 59,360/year I am not a Locomotive Engineer but are you sure that is correct? I would tend to think 70k / year. I thought Senior Amtrak Engineers make over 6 digits. Am I wrong here?
MidlandMike Locomotive engineers= $ 28,54/hr, $ 59,360/year
I thought it should have been higher also, but the above figure is what BLS said. This may be a problem with averages for statistics. If you average $70,000 for class I engineers with those on the extra board and short line engineers, maybe $60,000 is a good average.
schlimm Several posters in the past have contended that the western LD ridership is not primarily between the endpoints, but rather the intermediate cities. Amtrak is not there for railfans. If NB or CO or IA or UT do not want to pay for services but their citizens want it, then they can exert pressure at the ballot box. If they do not, let the CZ die an unmourned death, except for a few thousand railfans.
Railfans are not the majority of the average passengers I was talking about. Most voters don't seem to even want to raise their gas taxes to fix the crumbling roads, so what is the chance they will support corridor trains? Only a handful of states support rail service. A Balkanized/disconnected rail service would be too weak to be effective.
http://www.payscale.com/research/US/Job=Locomotive_Engineer/Salary
http://www.payscale.com/research/US/Employer=Amtrak_(The_National_Railroad_Passenger_Corporation)/Salary/by_Job
schlimm MidlandMike Corridor only trains may be more efficient in a physical sense, but I wonder if average travelers would find them always useful. As a railfan, I would love the Zephyr route broken down into daylight segments, provided there were station attached hotels (like in Canada.) I get to see the railroad and scenery by day, and then get a good nights sleep in a bed on solid ground. However, I don't know how many average passengers want to take 2 days to Denver and 3 to SLC. Amtrak wanted to start a corridor train to Omaha, via Quad Cities/Des Moines, but Iowa was not interested. I also doubt Nebraska would support a corridor thru their state. Several posters in the past have contended that the western LD ridership is not primarily between the endpoints, but rather the intermediate cities. Amtrak is not there for railfans. If NB or CO or IA or UT do not want to pay for services but their citizens want it, then they can exert pressure at the ballot box. If they do not, let the CZ die an unmourned death, except for a few thousand railfans.
MidlandMike Corridor only trains may be more efficient in a physical sense, but I wonder if average travelers would find them always useful. As a railfan, I would love the Zephyr route broken down into daylight segments, provided there were station attached hotels (like in Canada.) I get to see the railroad and scenery by day, and then get a good nights sleep in a bed on solid ground. However, I don't know how many average passengers want to take 2 days to Denver and 3 to SLC. Amtrak wanted to start a corridor train to Omaha, via Quad Cities/Des Moines, but Iowa was not interested. I also doubt Nebraska would support a corridor thru their state.
I think some LD routes should be federally funded but others should require state support to continue to run. I'm not sure the CZ should be one of the ones that should require state funding because there are five fairly large markets (Chicago, Denver, Salt Lake City, Sacramento, and San Francisco Bay Area) along the route and if the CZ went away Denver and SLC would have no service at all. If I had to axe a western LD train, I'd say Empire Builder and run corridor service between Chicago, Milwaukee, and Minneapolis and between Seattle/Portland and Spokane. In between Minneapolis and Spokane are there any major cities? But the EB does have good ridership and revenue, more than the California trains.
MidlandMike schlimm Several posters in the past have contended that the western LD ridership is not primarily between the endpoints, but rather the intermediate cities. Amtrak is not there for railfans. If NB or CO or IA or UT do not want to pay for services but their citizens want it, then they can exert pressure at the ballot box. If they do not, let the CZ die an unmourned death, except for a few thousand railfans. Railfans are not the majority of the average passengers I was talking about. Most voters don't seem to even want to raise their gas taxes to fix the crumbling roads, so what is the chance they will support corridor trains? Only a handful of states support rail service. A Balkanized/disconnected rail service would be too weak to be effective.
Johnny
We could argue about the statistics until the cows come home. A phrase that reveals my dairy farm upbringing!
Amtrak's labor costs appear to be high for a variety of reasons. If it were privatized and forced to compete on a level playing field with alternative service providers, it would need to do a better job of managing its personnel costs.
This is true whether we are talking about the NEC or any segment of passenger rail in the U.S.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.