oltmannd wrote: I have had similar hot & cold experiences. All it takes to scare any first time rider from taking a second trip, is a bad experience. If 1/4 or 1/3 of the time you give passengers a bad experience, how can you ever build ridership?I don't think finding the right person at Amtrak to complain to will change at thing because at the heart of it, it's a culture issue - and it appears that Amtrak has several sub-cultures working within it.To change the culture, for starters, you have to get employees and their managers to care. So, why should anyone at Amtrak care about service? Is there a reward for giving great service - other than the somewhat smarmy working for tips? Is there accountablility for poor service? Has anyone ever known of an attendant that got fired for anything short of embezzeling?There are companies out there that give first-rate customer service. Disney comes to mind. And, even within the gov't, National Park Sevice gets the job done right nearly every time, despite lousy pay and housing for the rangers. I've never had a bad experience at a National Park.So, it can be done, but how can Amtrak get from where they are to where they need to be?
I have had similar hot & cold experiences. All it takes to scare any first time rider from taking a second trip, is a bad experience. If 1/4 or 1/3 of the time you give passengers a bad experience, how can you ever build ridership?
I don't think finding the right person at Amtrak to complain to will change at thing because at the heart of it, it's a culture issue - and it appears that Amtrak has several sub-cultures working within it.
To change the culture, for starters, you have to get employees and their managers to care. So, why should anyone at Amtrak care about service? Is there a reward for giving great service - other than the somewhat smarmy working for tips? Is there accountablility for poor service? Has anyone ever known of an attendant that got fired for anything short of embezzeling?
There are companies out there that give first-rate customer service. Disney comes to mind. And, even within the gov't, National Park Sevice gets the job done right nearly every time, despite lousy pay and housing for the rangers. I've never had a bad experience at a National Park.
So, it can be done, but how can Amtrak get from where they are to where they need to be?
How? A kick-*** President of Amtrak. But there are so many political considerations, even then I am not sure.
I don't want to see Amtrak try to break its union ties just to have more fluidity in hiring and firing. But insofar as surly, rude or inefficient behavior comes from Amtrak employees on duty who are also union members, there should be some disciplinary mechanism. Amtrak doesn't just run trains, it provides transportation services; but the agency often doesn't act that way.
The whole governing ethic of (or so it seems) "Good enough for government work," should be quickly phased out in favor of something like "Amtrak riders are our customers and they have choices."
-Don (Random stuff, mostly about trains - what else? http://blerfblog.blogspot.com/)
AmtrakRider wrote: I think the single biggest long-term problem with Amtrak is customer perception. As long as Amtrak service is perceived to be slow, tired, rude and crude, the customer will feel he / she is spending more for the service than it is worth.So this brings me to employee attitudes. Someone earlier in this thread said that employee attitudes cost nothing - i. e. you can't pay the employee for that; no labour clause insists that employees have a certain attitude if they want job security. Since coach car attendants don't even get a tip, it is probably fair to say that many train service personnel genuinely receive nothing for being nice to the customer. I suspect that as a result some employees have confused payment with value.I can genuinely assert that my positive or negative impression of a particular Amtrak train, especially LD, depends much less on whether that train is on time and much more on what the service personnel is like. Part of what makes the Empire Builder and the Southwest Chief stand out is the consistently high quality of service. For example, on one of my trips on the Chief the announcement system in our car was not working properly. Our attendant came back to let us know what was being said after every announcement. In contrast, in a similar situation on train 50 from Chicago to Charlottesville, the attendant wouldn't even tell people when their stop was coming up. When we asked about the poor sound quality, the attendant first told us that no announcements were being made - an outright lie - and then suggested that the sound had been turned down because it was getting late and there were people sleeping. His tone throughout the conversation was offended, as if astonished that we dared not only to question him, but to even stop him to ask for assistance of any kind. In each case the attendant's attitude made a big difference to our impression of the train trip as enjoyable or horrendous. Unfortunately, the experience I had then was not much of an anomaly. I would say that 4 in 10 coach attendants on the Viewliner trains have been indifferent, offensive, or in one instance openly hostile towards passengers. One attendant on train 19 out of PHI castigated a passenger for sitting in a reserved seat, even though there was no sign saying the seat was reserved, and as good as accused the passenger of lying about removing the sign, even though other passengers had passed the seat before the man's arrival and seen there was no sign on it. Another attendant on a different train refused to accept my international ID - a passport - and continued to harrass me for over 1/2 hour while we waited for the conductor to arrive and "check me out".I have found that service on the Superliner trains is consistently better than on the single decker trains. One reason is simple: the restrooms. In particular, restrooms on 91,92, 97, 98, and even the shorter haul Carolina trains, are consistently offensive. Granted, some of the fault for this must be laid at the feet of nasty customers. I'm sure at least some of it also has to do with the quality of the equipment. However, a large portion of the problem stems from how frequently restrooms are serviced and well they are monitored by staff members. I rode one Superliner train where the attendant make a humourous announcement in the car after every major city, reminding passengers that they were responsible for cleaning up after themselves and that children using the restroom should be supervised. Then he checked the restrooms every couple hours like clockwork. The garbage containers never overflowed; the floor stayed clean. This guy stood out, but I've found that I've rarely stepped into a restroom on a Superliner that was "nasty". On the other hand, I'm still waiting to ride even ONE east coast train where the restrooms were properly maintained throughout my trip. I've ridden trains like 91 and 97 from the second stop on the route, and the longest the restrooms have stayed clean is until Orlando - about 4 hours. The attendants were not emptying garbage; paper and water was all over the floors. On one train I rode last year (you guessed it, train 50), the toilets in two cars malfunctioned for hours before the attendant even realized. Even then there was no attempt on his part to either notify the customers by posting an out of order sign, or to make alternative arrangements, not even to inform us of alternative working restrooms. In another car on that same consist, the restroom was so filthy that the seats, handles and washbasin were covered in a thin, greasy film. Obviously no attempt had been made to ensure that it was clean before leaving the station, so what do you think happened en route? Even things like handing out pillows, ensuring that announcements are clear or that passengers are notified when their stop is coming up make a big difference. Where attendants were proactive about things like this, passengers had good trips, even when the train was late. On one train, we were informed by a surly attendent that there were no pillows. (Could that be because SOMEbody didn't want to change the little cases?) On another, we were asked before people even started getting ready to sleep if we needed one, and where possible passengers who asked for two were accommodated. Guess which trip was better. Attendants who were organized, as in arranging seating so that passengers getting out at 3 a. m. didn't have to disturb the entire car, were also appreciated. What all this requires is that train service personnel actually think about the passengers as people, not as nuisances or as enemies. It also requires the ability to think ahead, to consider possible obstacles and ways around them, along with an adaptable mentality and an optimistic outlook. If this is too much for someone, maybe direct customer service is not for that individual.I take back what I said about not getting paid for a good attitude. Amtrak workers are paid to provide a certain quality of service. If poor attitudes are resulting in poor service, one has to question whether such employees are actually doing their jobs. In any case, as long as Amtrak employees don't buy in to the importance of changing public perception of their service, customers will continue to feel they are being cheated (poor value for money), and the negative stories about Amtrak will continue to pile up.
I think the single biggest long-term problem with Amtrak is customer perception. As long as Amtrak service is perceived to be slow, tired, rude and crude, the customer will feel he / she is spending more for the service than it is worth.
So this brings me to employee attitudes. Someone earlier in this thread said that employee attitudes cost nothing - i. e. you can't pay the employee for that; no labour clause insists that employees have a certain attitude if they want job security. Since coach car attendants don't even get a tip, it is probably fair to say that many train service personnel genuinely receive nothing for being nice to the customer. I suspect that as a result some employees have confused payment with value.
I can genuinely assert that my positive or negative impression of a particular Amtrak train, especially LD, depends much less on whether that train is on time and much more on what the service personnel is like. Part of what makes the Empire Builder and the Southwest Chief stand out is the consistently high quality of service. For example, on one of my trips on the Chief the announcement system in our car was not working properly. Our attendant came back to let us know what was being said after every announcement. In contrast, in a similar situation on train 50 from Chicago to Charlottesville, the attendant wouldn't even tell people when their stop was coming up. When we asked about the poor sound quality, the attendant first told us that no announcements were being made - an outright lie - and then suggested that the sound had been turned down because it was getting late and there were people sleeping. His tone throughout the conversation was offended, as if astonished that we dared not only to question him, but to even stop him to ask for assistance of any kind. In each case the attendant's attitude made a big difference to our impression of the train trip as enjoyable or horrendous.
Unfortunately, the experience I had then was not much of an anomaly. I would say that 4 in 10 coach attendants on the Viewliner trains have been indifferent, offensive, or in one instance openly hostile towards passengers. One attendant on train 19 out of PHI castigated a passenger for sitting in a reserved seat, even though there was no sign saying the seat was reserved, and as good as accused the passenger of lying about removing the sign, even though other passengers had passed the seat before the man's arrival and seen there was no sign on it. Another attendant on a different train refused to accept my international ID - a passport - and continued to harrass me for over 1/2 hour while we waited for the conductor to arrive and "check me out".
I have found that service on the Superliner trains is consistently better than on the single decker trains. One reason is simple: the restrooms. In particular, restrooms on 91,92, 97, 98, and even the shorter haul Carolina trains, are consistently offensive. Granted, some of the fault for this must be laid at the feet of nasty customers. I'm sure at least some of it also has to do with the quality of the equipment. However, a large portion of the problem stems from how frequently restrooms are serviced and well they are monitored by staff members.
I rode one Superliner train where the attendant make a humourous announcement in the car after every major city, reminding passengers that they were responsible for cleaning up after themselves and that children using the restroom should be supervised. Then he checked the restrooms every couple hours like clockwork. The garbage containers never overflowed; the floor stayed clean. This guy stood out, but I've found that I've rarely stepped into a restroom on a Superliner that was "nasty". On the other hand, I'm still waiting to ride even ONE east coast train where the restrooms were properly maintained throughout my trip. I've ridden trains like 91 and 97 from the second stop on the route, and the longest the restrooms have stayed clean is until Orlando - about 4 hours. The attendants were not emptying garbage; paper and water was all over the floors. On one train I rode last year (you guessed it, train 50), the toilets in two cars malfunctioned for hours before the attendant even realized. Even then there was no attempt on his part to either notify the customers by posting an out of order sign, or to make alternative arrangements, not even to inform us of alternative working restrooms. In another car on that same consist, the restroom was so filthy that the seats, handles and washbasin were covered in a thin, greasy film. Obviously no attempt had been made to ensure that it was clean before leaving the station, so what do you think happened en route?
Even things like handing out pillows, ensuring that announcements are clear or that passengers are notified when their stop is coming up make a big difference. Where attendants were proactive about things like this, passengers had good trips, even when the train was late. On one train, we were informed by a surly attendent that there were no pillows. (Could that be because SOMEbody didn't want to change the little cases?) On another, we were asked before people even started getting ready to sleep if we needed one, and where possible passengers who asked for two were accommodated. Guess which trip was better. Attendants who were organized, as in arranging seating so that passengers getting out at 3 a. m. didn't have to disturb the entire car, were also appreciated.
What all this requires is that train service personnel actually think about the passengers as people, not as nuisances or as enemies. It also requires the ability to think ahead, to consider possible obstacles and ways around them, along with an adaptable mentality and an optimistic outlook. If this is too much for someone, maybe direct customer service is not for that individual.
I take back what I said about not getting paid for a good attitude. Amtrak workers are paid to provide a certain quality of service. If poor attitudes are resulting in poor service, one has to question whether such employees are actually doing their jobs. In any case, as long as Amtrak employees don't buy in to the importance of changing public perception of their service, customers will continue to feel they are being cheated (poor value for money), and the negative stories about Amtrak will continue to pile up.
Proactive is the word! There should be sound-off or opinion cards for every trip for every rider. And yes, since I do understand the irony that the most poorly-stocked comment-card holders will be on the coaches with the most negligent service people, I'll hold that a comment card itself should be incorporated into a ticket holder. You've seen what other companies do: "Let us hear about your service!" and offering toll-free numbers, and that sort of thing.
Amtrak is "proactive" in charging NEC riders all the traffic (almost literally) will allow, but do we know how to contact a customer service mgr or ombudsman at Amtrak headquarters? Because some very fine and pointed complaints are showing up on this post; AmtrakRider, you really should find a way to send your post (or letter version thereof) to Amtrak, especially because your experience extended to today. There are others; I wish you would sound off. The cost of non-participation is non-representation! - a. s.
In 2005, I traveled 52,000 miles within the good old USA on airplanes, mostly United. During that same year, I traveled round trip on the Acela 3 times. All I can say is Amtrak, wow! Best travel I've ever had anywhere, anytime, including German and Japanese trains. I also rode a non-Acela train on the same route and found it only a little less pleasant than the Acela. One can go from downtown NYC to DC in the time it takes to go through Idlewild or La Guardia. In the past few years I rode the allegedly awful commuter trains from NYC into Connecticut and found the experience tobe, well, better than any taxi ride I ever had and still better than any post 9-11 plane ride.
If you think that onboard food, attendants, accomodations and efficiencies are lost on Amtrak, then you'll just love the airlines. And I never mentioned the wonderful airport experiences where one is proded, stalled, questioned and examined by government employees who have not yet found a need to master the common language of the USA.
And since the Church was mentioned, perhaps you could refer to the missionary journeys of the Apostle Paul. He had first class accomodations on ships of the day. Actual study of ship travel of the time would suggest that none of us could imagine the horror of the conditions he and other passengers endured just to go a few hundred miles on the Med.
If lower management which has to work with the attitudes of the workers and run into the unions on a daily basis discovers that no one above them really cares or is willing to risk a union grievence to back them up, true supervision goes out the window.
Did anyone besides me think it was silly for the arbitration board to go about comparing Amtrak's workers to the Class I freight carrier's when it came time to settle their dispute? First, the freight carriers are making good money and, second, they normally have tougher working conditions than Amtrak. Also, the fact that Amtrak couldn't even establish a new, AND UNION, position for repairing toilets shows just how little control management has over the operations of Amtrak. The entire situation reminds me of the former big USA steel companies and what led to so much of their collapse, starting just after AMTRAK was formed. That might not be a coincidence since much of how labor was structured and operated in the US was based on the steel industry at that time. Of course, Amtrak can't fail because the Feds will keep it in existence so there's no real incentive on the part of the workers or unions to compromise. But the evidence so far indicates that even if the feds would suddenly start putting many more $'s into it, its inefficency would not improve and very possibly get worse.
alphas wrote: I'm acquainted with one Amtrak long-time supervisor and I've gotten the impression that much of the negative attitude problem is due to the employees who were hired at its start--coming from the private rail carriers with poor attitudes. They passed it on to new hires and so on. I also gathered that the union rules being what they are, don't look for much change since bad attitude doesn't appear to be something that can get one fired very easily, if at all. (It kind of reminds me of the US Post Office of whom I've known some of their employees over the years. Many of them grumbled all the time about their jobs but none of them left since the odds of their finding employment that paid as much were slim and none.)
I'm acquainted with one Amtrak long-time supervisor and I've gotten the impression that much of the negative attitude problem is due to the employees who were hired at its start--coming from the private rail carriers with poor attitudes. They passed it on to new hires and so on. I also gathered that the union rules being what they are, don't look for much change since bad attitude doesn't appear to be something that can get one fired very easily, if at all. (It kind of reminds me of the US Post Office of whom I've known some of their employees over the years. Many of them grumbled all the time about their jobs but none of them left since the odds of their finding employment that paid as much were slim and none.)
Grumbling among the crew is one thing; many people in the Armed Forces are of the opinion that "It's a soldier's right to complain" and that people who complain often have the best ideas. I mean among themselves, at lunch, or at parties. Carrying out such sour attitudes and extending them to the traveler doesn't really advance anyone's cause. Except for one regional and two medium-sized railroad companies, any former staff grandfathered in from pre-Amtrak passenger trains did so in the early Seventies or as soon as any expanding traffic required more hires. In other words, a bar attendent hired by GN to work the Empire Buillder, if he was only 21 in 1970, would turn 59 this year. But most of the l-d private-co varnish employees were older; in other words, "the originals" are of retirement edge or very near it. Early attrition might help reduce the numbers of employees who perform at a subpar level. Without some more discipline, and really I mean not so much punishing underperformers or personality employers as celebrating the many who do their work well, it's no surprise that Amtrak staff come cross as a little bored, distracted or K-martish in their behavior. And that means somebody lets them, or isn't paying enough attention. Is the level of supervision going on here adequate?
I think there's a site elsewhere about what I'd to do reform Amtrak if I were in charge. Perhaps I could sound off more there.
Never too old to have a happy childhood!
daveklepper wrote:The very good reason not to answer your question is not to lower the chances of having these laws altered. They must be altered by people working within and not seem to be guided by foreign criticism. I hope you understand. The country does want foreign investment, or at least one newspaper reporter with a good following really wants it (a opposed to lip service), and that is why I learned of the situation.
Well, if it's the French all I can say is tht Mr. Sarkozy has his hands full. And that the ordinary French person doen't give a ratatouille about my effect on foreign policies or media, since I have none and they know it.
You may know that potential and actual shareholders receive a form 10-K every year; it is mandated by the Securities and Exchange Commission and is pretty intricate in terms of financial detail. When Americans own foreign investments (overseas, at least) the compensating document is called a 20-F (I think).
Not by planning but by acqusition I hold a very few shares in a French telecommunications outfit. The 20-F was about three times as large as the large as the typical big blue-chip type of 10-K. Since it was a French document and had to meet the needs of the French gov't, potential shareholders, the bureaucrats in Brussels, and our SEC, it had a lot to say. In fact, almost a third of that document was the company trying to prove it didn't violate the letter or spirit of the shortened work week that's been in effect for nearly ten years (30 hrs. but I'm not sure). The pertinent French gov't agency has refined a lot of questions that corporate officers answer under threat of perjury if they lie. The biggest focus seemed to verify that the company hadn't shifted to a series of conjoined part-time workers to get around the law -- if a fifteen-hour a week employee gives 20 hours a week instead (1 hr. extra each day) and her share-a-desk partner does the same, combined they'll be putting in a quite legal combined 40 hour work-week. But the gov't frowns on picking up temps by the handful -- the gov't does its best to punish those who are trying to work through difficult situations. Fortunately, as one Frenchwoman told me, "In France the government is afraid of the people, but it seems to me that in American, the people are afraid of their own . . . .
daveklepper wrote: I would like to Amtraks labor situation and perhaps the USA's in general into perspective. This is a story that Phil Hastings could comment on, or any of the USA railroad people who have tried and who are making a buck overseas. In a county with a modern political history far shorter than the USA and that was started by Socialists (not Communists) a couple from an English speaking country with similar culture as and ties to the USA immigrated with strong technical knowledge for a particular industry, let us call it pottery making. They used their capitol to establish themselves, were popular in thier community, and after six months of operation their business grew to where they needed one extra hand. A young man turned up, terms were agreed upon, and the business prospered even more. On the first anniversary of the firm's startup, they held a party in the factory, and the young man was honored for his assistance. But the next morning, he came a little late, and did only about two hours worth of work instead of the usual seven (with one hour lunch break). They let this go for a few days, and finally asked what was up. Did he want to be fired? He replied that he did not want to be fired, but suggested the couple look at labor laws and see just what would be involved in firing him. They did spend the cash for consultation with a lawyer and found the situation pretty terrible, since there had been no signed agreement with the worker on specific job conditions, and after a certain time, six months in the particular industry, a worker in this particular country essentially "ownes" his job! The lawyer said that to avoid bankrupcy, they should plan on closing the business. Even this required something like a month's notice to the worker, a month during which they would continue to run the business at a loss. Fortunately, they did get out without going into debt, and now the couple run a convenience and candy store in their neighborhood, and act as consultants on occasion for the firm that did buy their equipment. One of the couple also tuters English and the other assists in running a child day-care center where one of their own children is enrolled.
I would like to Amtraks labor situation and perhaps the USA's in general into perspective. This is a story that Phil Hastings could comment on, or any of the USA railroad people who have tried and who are making a buck overseas. In a county with a modern political history far shorter than the USA and that was started by Socialists (not Communists) a couple from an English speaking country with similar culture as and ties to the USA immigrated with strong technical knowledge for a particular industry, let us call it pottery making. They used their capitol to establish themselves, were popular in thier community, and after six months of operation their business grew to where they needed one extra hand. A young man turned up, terms were agreed upon, and the business prospered even more. On the first anniversary of the firm's startup, they held a party in the factory, and the young man was honored for his assistance. But the next morning, he came a little late, and did only about two hours worth of work instead of the usual seven (with one hour lunch break). They let this go for a few days, and finally asked what was up. Did he want to be fired? He replied that he did not want to be fired, but suggested the couple look at labor laws and see just what would be involved in firing him. They did spend the cash for consultation with a lawyer and found the situation pretty terrible, since there had been no signed agreement with the worker on specific job conditions, and after a certain time, six months in the particular industry, a worker in this particular country essentially "ownes" his job! The lawyer said that to avoid bankrupcy, they should plan on closing the business. Even this required something like a month's notice to the worker, a month during which they would continue to run the business at a loss. Fortunately, they did get out without going into debt, and now the couple run a convenience and candy store in their neighborhood, and act as consultants on occasion for the firm that did buy their equipment. One of the couple also tuters English and the other assists in running a child day-care center where one of their own children is enrolled.
Well told anecdote, but what was the year and the nation you were alluding to? This is not a "political" question--more geographic than anything. - a. s.
Sounds like what we get from lawyers makeing all the rules. We have too many there in DC makeing laws right now. Don't forget there is a lawyer running for president. God help us.
BaltACD wrote: The Amtrak issues that I see relate to 'Esprit d'corp'. I don't get the feeling from Amtrak employees that the truly believe in their company....and with the funding, and thereby, employment uncertantities that have been a staple of Amtrak's existance is it next to impossible to motivate a work force that they could be out of a job tomorrow just as well as working tomorrow. Amtrak was, is and will always be at demoralized organization until their funding issues are behind them....until the budget makers decide that Amtrak is here [redaction by a.s.]...FUND IT.Amtrak, like any other passenger operation in the world, will not be a profit making enterprise. It is a public service. Deal with it.
The Amtrak issues that I see relate to 'Esprit d'corp'. I don't get the feeling from Amtrak employees that the truly believe in their company....and with the funding, and thereby, employment uncertantities that have been a staple of Amtrak's existance is it next to impossible to motivate a work force that they could be out of a job tomorrow just as well as working tomorrow. Amtrak was, is and will always be at demoralized organization until their funding issues are behind them....until the budget makers decide that Amtrak is here [redaction by a.s.]...FUND IT.
Amtrak, like any other passenger operation in the world, will not be a profit making enterprise. It is a public service. Deal with it.
Definitely agree with the second paragraph but IMHO would like to qualify the first. Working for a company on the brink can be unnerving; I once worked for a law firm that went belly-up during an era that no law firm worth its salt could go bankrupt. The reason? Attitudes, largely, in this case prima-donna posturing.
I forget the name of the man who said that everything worth knowing he learned in kindergarten, but beneath both [possibly] untenous situations at law firm and "quasi" passenger-train corp., the unifying theme is that not being able to "Work and play well with others" has consequences.
When I think of all the commercial airline companies that have gone into receivership (biggest effect seems to have been to escape funded pension obligations), and then downsize their employee ranks, it gives me pause. Did the flight crew with the nastiest attitudes toward the flying public have privilege to show their hostility to people who only want what they paid for? Seems to me attitudes have brightened in the past several years, after the post-9/11 gloom had a chance to thin-- does that mean it was the cheerful ones who retained or that some of the staff realized that they don't have a right to dump their grievance on strangers? Perhaps a little of both?
At Target, we were told that unless we were on break we were "on stage." If acting nice when you'd rather not is the key to success, then yes, I didn't see people at my store indulging their feelings at the public's expense. Yes, there is the occasional flaming ole to be encountered, but dealing with them as tactfully as possible draws praise. In one particular instance at Target, the people in line at the register were impressed at my behavior; later it somehow got to management because they congratulated me. I didn't think it was all that difficult, at least not in that situation because there was no way I needed to take it personally. So Senators and Congresspersons are dolts who have a rotten track record of managing the economy? What does that matter to Family Bedroom "C"?
And in the last analysis, if doing their job peeves some people so much, there are other jobs out there. Even Target has a "backstage": shipping and receiving. Can Amtrak employees find jobs that are less stressful? Quite likely. At a starting salary as high as or higher than they currently receive with Amtrak? That remains to be seen. I don't think Amtrak employees are in a special class all their own outside of all people who must deal with the public come-what-may, though I am willing to admit that the fact Amtrak is a private-acting corporation with a [sometimes] hypocritical gloss of representative government creates a challenge. Those who can't take it should leave. - a. s.
The Amtrak issues that I see relate to 'Esprit d'corp'. I don't get the feeling from Amtrak employees that the truly believe in their company....and with the funding, and thereby, employment uncertantities that have been a staple of Amtrak's existance is it next to impossible to motivate a work force that they could be out of a job tomorrow just as well as working tomorrow. The continuing funding issues of Amtrak, as well has working without having a labor contract in full force and effect, leaves the Amtrak work force wondering what tomorrow will bring and the realization, that no matter what they do, good or bad, it won't have an effect on that tomorrow. Amtrak was, is and will always be at demoralized organization until their funding issues are behind them....until the budget makers decide that Amtrak is here...FUND IT.
Bergie, I give you credit for being selective. So, thanks for being selective.
But the point of view I have expressed regarding particular politicians' opposition to long distance rail passenger service, and the unhappyness of railfans and rail passengers with the firing of Gunn has been printed in TRAINS MAGAZINE already! One leader's long opposition and proposals for zero funding are so well known that it is no longer really "political" but more "historical." So, suppose if Gunn had had a good working relationship with Mineta: After the well-known refusal by the mayor, he would have called Mineta, and those 22 nearly empty coaches and sleepers would have been filled with evacuees whose lives would have been saved. This is too important a lesson for the USA to simply be wiped off the internet.
One thing that Phil Hastings or someone like him could do (maybe you) in talking to McCain, Obama, and Hillary, is to discuss just how valuable Amtrak was after 11.09.01. All the trips senior government officials and important businessmen were able to complete that would have been impossible in those few days if Amtrak had not been around.
Falls Valley RR wrote: I once visited the Smithsonian years ago and it was time for lunch.They had a wonderful McDonalds sort of contract resturant very well done but no one was eating (Too expensive) and there were three staffers mean and onery.Spare me.. . .
I once visited the Smithsonian years ago and it was time for lunch.
They had a wonderful McDonalds sort of contract resturant very well done but no one was eating (Too expensive) and there were three staffers mean and onery.
Spare me.
. . .
You make a good point. Grouchy or surly employees often are the result of overwork, but sometimes they are the result of underwork. Those mean and ornery waiters at the overpriced restaurant apparently had little to do than grouch about how they'd rather be anywhere else.
Solution: give them something to do! I can offer in one instance one of the many reasons K-Mart is failing. Yes, they cleaned up their stores but they didn't clean up their employees' attitude. The last time I was in a K-Mart three(!) floor staff had parked their butts on the super-clean floor. I asked a question, but since it would have required one or two to get on their feet, I got no help. I wanted to put in a complaint but the service desk had eleven people in line waiting to get to the one person behind the counter. That was the last and will be the very last time I patronize K-Mart.
It is almost inconceivable to me that such idiocy would be tolerated at, say, Target. I worked for Target and believe me, it never occurred to us to sit on the floor! And without a good reason, such a malingerer would probably have been fired on the spot.
Likewise I have little sympathy for the kind of Amtrak staffer I've seen on occasion, who is simply not to be found 45 mins. out of the hour and then gets p.o'ed that he or she can't get all the work done in the remaining 15 mins.(say); and then berates the paying passengers for having the termerity to ask questions, etc. Such awfulness is a minority percentage of Amtrak staff behavior, but I've seen it enough and in enough different situations to believe it needs to be addressed and eradicated. Amtrak passengers, like those of Jet Blue, deserve a new "Bill of Rights" as to what they're entitled to when they travel, and how to react against it when they don't get what is rightfully due them.
Bad Amtrak performance is the result of three factors:
1. [Political viewpoints removed] - Bergie
2. Freight railroad congestion and the UP's attitude, to some extent CSX's, with NS and BNSF doing all they can under strenuous circumstances. Hats off to NS and BNSF. And everyone is working on congestion, so this can only improve.
3. Labor force. Gunn was working on this problem and had ideas. He is the expert on how to alleviate it (cannot be solved completely in the current USA labor situation) and I would not attempt to second guess what he intended to do.
From that day forward, I bring my own lunches. That way I dont worry about the now-irrevelant food court with grumpy people. Now I just wolf it down at a empty table and be on my way before they chase me with unauthorized food. "Im sorry Sir. Your food is unauthorized in this facility..."
I point to Southwest as a good travel example. Ive flown them a few times and have been lucky with my schedules, good weather and people who actually took a moment to actually give a *** about my question... I'll fly em again.
Now, Amtrack will never be a valid transport until a true HST or other method arrives Nationwide. Sure, I can call up a ticket for Chicago thence to DC out of Little Rock with a sleeper but the fares are twice the flying and time two to three days with potential for delay in Chicago requring a motel room or worse.
Sorry Amtrack, too iffy. Im not going to risk it.
I just took Amtrak from Portland, OR to Charlotte, NC.
First leg, Empire Builder, I couldn't have had a better sleeping car attendant. Food was good and we arrives in Chicago within 45 minutes of our scheduled time.
Second leg, Capitol Limited, sleeping car attendant was fat lazy worthless individual. Food was good and we arrived into DC within 45 minutes of our scheduled time.
Third leg, The Crescent, I rode coach, the car attendant was good, dining car sucked and we arrived into Charlotte 5 minutes early.
Overall, I had a great time, would/will do it again. We always left on time which is more than most airlines do, didn't have to stand in a security line and get half naked to pass through it. If I had the luxury of time, I'd always take the train. Keep in mind, many, in fact most of the delays are not of Amtrak's making.
Perhaps Amtrak could inaugurate a new train called "Death by a Thousand Cuts" and staff it with its lowest-rank staff, because there are elements of such slovenliness in at least half, if not more, of every Amtrak journey I've had. Rude (or sleeping, or nonexistent) sleeping-car attendants. Diner food that changes level of quality and style of service seemingly every year, the only given that the "gourmet" items are fakey and overblown, and everything is beyond expensive past any standards except maybe Midtown Manhattan's. (If you get a diner: one train I rode out of Charlottesville did not have the promised diner, and nobody knew or cared to find out why it was missing.) Missing equipment that no one seems to know or care about. Schedules so unrealistic they border on science-fiction.
At least I wasn't on one of the "Lincoln Corridor" trains that got stuck in the snow not quite a year ago. Four different trains, four solutions: one being "Our day is over" from one staff on one train. In fact, the happiest solution was on another train, the last or next-to-last of the four IIRC, where the passengers basically mutinied against a crew with their cell phones and 9-1-1 service. [Which begs the question as to why the third and fourth trains were even allowed to set out from Chicago -- apparently Amtrak standard ops. doesn't use anything resembling the speed and specificity of a consumer-owned cell phone: sad!]
Several years ago, before the BNSF Northern Transcon shifted to the north (CB&Q out of Chgo, not the old ATSF mainline), I persuaded a friend from Peoria to take the Southwest Chief to Chillicothe. He arranged for a friend with a cab co. to meet the train for the last approx. twenty miles to Peoria. Train had no air-conditioning or open diner until it left -- 45 mins. late -- with no explanation. This was on a hot muggy summer afternoon in Chicago and the "All Aboard" had already been called -- why is this permitted? No one tried to explain or had an explanation. My friend came into Chilli an hour late, and of course was embarrassed at imposing on his cab-company buddy. And I was embarrassed to have recommended Amtrak service, even on a so-called "crack" or "top-tier" train. There are people who take Amtrak corridor, Amtrak l-d, and loved it. Good for them, and I can only hope or suppose that that is more the norm than disappointment.
Yet among my acquaintances at church are people who have asked my opinion about Amtrak. Frequently I can refer them to members or others who have ridden their intended route recently; but if not I feel I have to be intellectually honest. If they are going Chicago-to [either]-Coast, depending on "host" line and past performance, I'd had occasion (too often!) to say something like: "It doesn't always happen but that train [if it does] has a reputation for tardiness. If it would totally bollix up your plans to be [2, 4, 6, more] hours late, if you cannot take such a chance, then I'd advise either budgeting more time or trying another mode of transport." Besides my own, I've done my best to learn of others' Amtrak experiences. The common thread (sorry) seems to be that, while screw-ups are not inevitable, if they do occur they can be fatal. A pleasant trip from Chicago to destination can be ruined if the travelers have relatives meet them who then have to wait hours, re-park the car, etc.; or if connecting trains won't be held, that kind of thing.
Amtrak these days is supposedly so "market-oriented," but some of those factors I can only attribute to [certain] politicians who think that anything that works like private business must be better than the alternative. For example, lacking the budget to keep up its dormitory cars for onboard service staff, IIRC from TRAINS they are being moved into regular sleeping cars -- leaving less room for paying passengers -- who apparently will have to pony up more and more for first-class overnite travel. What's next? Trying to drop diner/sleeper service as did so many Class One's in the late 1960s/early 70s?? One of the reasons Amtrak was formed, IIRC, was to get away from that sort of cheese-paring.
If Amtrak wanted to serve the people, why hasn't it moved in the opposite direction? Something like slumbercoaches, say? Try to make L-D travel available to more people? I am not opposed to the idea of "elite" or "first-class" accommodations and service, but I think perpetuating a gap between "all-inclusive" and "steerage" is absurdly overwrought. To turn the metaphor around, if private companies want to run land cruises about the most scenic parts of the USA and Canada, let 'em! Let them charge whatever they can get! But let's not confuse it with the ideas of meeting ordinary people where they live, both in terms of point-to-point service and of pocketbook. "Ordinary" these days referring to practically everyone who isn't affluently retired, or who don't belong to the "price is no object" set. Dang few IOW.
Another example -- the wretched and wretchedly overpriced trip my partner and I took from Newark to Phila - 30th Street. Sixty bucks for coach?? and there was even another price level of regular coach fare above that, depending on time of day, apparently. HVAC: close to non-existent. Type of car: Metroliner shells. Footrests: inoperable. Food? Hole in the wall. What annoyed me the most was not my experience so much as the fact that the train, while technically a corridor train because it fit into the NEC train schedule, was in fact a thru train Boston to Tidewater Virginia. I feel for anyone 5'10" or taller or 170 lbs. or heavier who had to tolerate those coaches for an entire day. Those coaches are way too confining for long trips!
Even worse, on more than one occasion I've seen the Silver Meteor, very impressive with its all-stainless consist (even baggage car was clad), but the coaches -- those Metroliner shells again. People ought to be able to elevate their feet and legs when they sleep like on the pre-Amtrak reclining seat coaches -- at best these Metroliner shells have footrests, when they work, that elevate the feet a few inches. Legs need to be elevated, especially on these long overnight trips. It isn't just a matter of comfort; leg elevation helps forestall cramps, varicose veins and worse (and is also a clear and potentially marketable advantage over coach class on longish or long air flights.)
Years ago, when VIA was quite new, I went to Toronto and took the old Super Continental CN route to Vancouver and the old C.P. Canadian route back. Wonderful, on the whole, including post-prandial games of Bingo and affordable and well-prepared if somewhat pedestrian, and reasonably-priced, dining-car fare. There were disap
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.