The answer here to food and beverage service is: from a political point of view, it is a waste of money because it doesn't run the train or collect fares; from a private investor point of view it cannot be brought to the bottom line except as a loss; as an astute businessman, it is a neccessary adjunct to the service as a whole and the cost has to be hidden or otherwise absorbed--more riders could mean less loss and easier to hide; as a passenger, I want to have dinner or breakfast or lunch instead of waiting until I arrive.
RIDEWITHMEHENRY is the name for our almost monthly day of riding trains and transit in either the NYCity or Philadelphia areas including all commuter lines, Amtrak, subways, light rail and trolleys, bus and ferries when warranted. No fees, just let us know you want to join the ride and pay your fares. Ask to be on our email list or find us on FB as RIDEWITHMEHENRY (all caps) to get descriptions of each outing.
henry6 The answer here to food and beverage service is: from a political point of view, it is a waste of money because it doesn't run the train or collect fares; from a private investor point of view it cannot be brought to the bottom line except as a loss; as an astute businessman, it is a neccessary adjunct to the service as a whole and the cost has to be hidden or otherwise absorbed--more riders could mean less loss and easier to hide; as a passenger, I want to have dinner or breakfast or lunch instead of waiting until I arrive.
And if it could be included in the fare as with planes instead of as an extra-cost item no one would be able to raise the phony objections that they do. I am in fact sure that the crap I eat on planes is exorbitantly expensive to provide (probably something like $20 for the cold sandwich I had the last time I flew) because of the cost involved in loading it on a plane and wheeling it by hand down a narrow aisle, but it is included in the fare and invisible. If they were to charge $20 extra (by which I mean if you were paying for what you are already paying for but on a separate accounting) people would be throwing a fit over the $20 cold sandwich and $5 soda- highway robbery!- when in fact they are already paying for it. Just look at the debate over baggage fees. This whole ignorant debate reminds me of the farcical argument in Its a Mad, Mad World.
CMStPnPMost of the privately run LD trains prior to Amtrak had three or more classes of service.
Really? Which lines and what were the classes called? Looking at my NYC 11/25/1962 TT, there are two classes of fare, coach and a seat in a sleeping car/parlor car. Various accommodations are priced as an add-on: sleepercoach, roomette, bedroom, compartment, etc.
C&NW, CA&E, MILW, CGW and IC fan
Note the difference in labor costs in the below article as well:
http://www.dailyfinance.com/2012/08/20/post-office-vs-amtrak-which-one-is-more-wasteful/
I finally had an opportunity to read Food and Beverage Service: Opportunities Exist to Build on Program Improvement Initiatives. The numbers are scary. But the following items are my greatest concern.
Amtrak does not have a program-wide plan for improving cost recovery while maintaining service levels. Moreover, the planned initiatives will only result in small efficiency gains because they are being applied to the existing business model. Specifically, the initiatives do not adequately address losses on long distance routes or alternative business models for food and beverage service.
On 21 of the short distance routes food and beverage service breaks-even because Amtrak counts the state subsidies as revenue. This is unique accounting.
In 2005 the Department of Transportation Inspector General recommended that Amtrak implement pilot projects (food and beverages) to decrease losses. Nothing happened, and the business model remains largely unchanged.
If I remember correctly, one of the recommendations was to modify the dining cars on the Texas Eagle and City of New Orleans. One half was to be for table service and the other half was to serve as a lounge section. The lounge cars were to have been removed from these trains.
The dinning cars were modified and for a short time the attendant on the lounge car was removed. But the lounge cars were not removed from the Eagle and probably not from the City of New Orleans. The attendant is back on duty. Nothing has changed.
On a recent trip to Dallas on the Eagle the dining car had a lead service attendant, two attendants, and the cook. The loung car had an attendant. If nothing else it shows the power of Amtrak to ignore the wishes of Congress and the recommendations of the inspector generals.
CMStPnP Note the difference in labor costs in the below article as well: http://www.dailyfinance.com/2012/08/20/post-office-vs-amtrak-which-one-is-more-wasteful/
On my last trip to Dallas, the Texas Eagle had an engineer, a conductor, and a trainman. The conductor and trainman spent most of their time in the dining car whilst the train was moving. The dining car (cross country cafe car) had three servers and the cook. Or maybe we should call him the heater upper. The lounge car had an attendant. The three coaches had two coach attendants, and the sleeping car had an attendant.
The boarding process at Temple is labor intensive. The station agent opens the gate and makes sure that everyone in line has a ticket. The conductor or trainman inspects the ticket (now read with a scanner) and points the passenger to his or her car. The car attendant marks the passenger's destination on a seat check and hands it to him or her. Once on the train the conductor and/or trainman has a quick look at the seat checks to see who is getting off at the next stop and, then as far as I can tell, heads to the dinner. Or sometimes they camp out in the lounge car.
The on-board service personnel stay on the train from end point to end point. But the operating crews change out five or six times between San Antonio and Chicago. The best is the engineer from San Antonio to Austin or vice versa. He or she brings the train from San Antonio to Austin or vice versa. That's roughly 2.5 hours northbound; 3.5 hours southbound, although it seldom takes 3.5 hours to run from Austin to San Antonio. Then he or she spends the day in a nice hotel in Austin or is driven back to San Antonio or vice versa. How or why this arrangement was worked out is unclear, but it does not seem to be very efficient.
No wonder Amtrak needs more than 20,000 employees! Or does it?
Sam1 CMStPnP Note the difference in labor costs in the below article as well: http://www.dailyfinance.com/2012/08/20/post-office-vs-amtrak-which-one-is-more-wasteful/ On my last trip to Dallas, the Texas Eagle had an engineer, a conductor, and a trainman. The conductor and trainman spent most of their time in the dining car whilst the train was moving. The dining car (cross country cafe car) had three servers and the cook. Or maybe we should call him the heater upper. The lounge car had an attendant. The three coaches had two coach attendants, and the sleeping car had an attendant. The boarding process at Temple is labor intensive. The station agent opens the gate and makes sure that everyone in line has a ticket. The conductor or trainman inspects the ticket (now read with a scanner) and points the passenger to his or her car. The car attendant marks the passenger's destination on a seat check and hands it to him or her. Once on the train the conductor and/or trainman has a quick look at the seat checks to see who is getting off at the next stop and, then as far as I can tell, heads to the dinner. Or sometimes they camp out in the lounge car. The on-board service personnel stay on the train from end point to end point. But the operating crews change out five or six times between San Antonio and Chicago. The best is the engineer from San Antonio to Austin or vice versa. He or she brings the train from San Antonio to Austin or vice versa. That's roughly 2.5 hours northbound; 3.5 hours southbound, although it seldom takes 3.5 hours to run from Austin to San Antonio. Then he or she spends the day in a nice hotel in Austin or is driven back to San Antonio or vice versa. How or why this arrangement was worked out is unclear, but it does not seem to be very efficient. No wonder Amtrak needs more than 20,000 employees! Or does it?
I take it, Sam, you are objecting to so many people: ticket gent, trainman, car attendent, conductor/trainman. Or is it that when finished their work they sit in the lounge? Efficiency and service are served with the number of jobs...the system of selling tickets and opening the gate followed by ticket check and direction to car, then direction to seat, then collection of tickets and checking for next stops, etc. seems to make the boarding and ticket cheking work well and gives the customer the feeling of being cared for. As for sitting in the lounge or the diner when not checking tickets, etc., where would you have them go or sit? Can't sit in people's laps; going to visit the engineer can't be done regularly or often safely; no baggage car to run to; only officials ride in office cars; and thre is no caboose on a passenger train. In the course of a day, how much just standing at attention do you expect them to do? We in America have to come to terms with labor: it is needed to get jobs done; each job is different; each job adds to the service or quality of service; each job is for the benifet of the customer. Jobs are not created to take money away from bottom liners.
henry6 Sam1 CMStPnP Note the difference in labor costs in the below article as well: http://www.dailyfinance.com/2012/08/20/post-office-vs-amtrak-which-one-is-more-wasteful/ On my last trip to Dallas, the Texas Eagle had an engineer, a conductor, and a trainman. The conductor and trainman spent most of their time in the dining car whilst the train was moving. The dining car (cross country cafe car) had three servers and the cook. Or maybe we should call him the heater upper. The lounge car had an attendant. The three coaches had two coach attendants, and the sleeping car had an attendant. The boarding process at Temple is labor intensive. The station agent opens the gate and makes sure that everyone in line has a ticket. The conductor or trainman inspects the ticket (now read with a scanner) and points the passenger to his or her car. The car attendant marks the passenger's destination on a seat check and hands it to him or her. Once on the train the conductor and/or trainman has a quick look at the seat checks to see who is getting off at the next stop and, then as far as I can tell, heads to the dinner. Or sometimes they camp out in the lounge car. The on-board service personnel stay on the train from end point to end point. But the operating crews change out five or six times between San Antonio and Chicago. The best is the engineer from San Antonio to Austin or vice versa. He or she brings the train from San Antonio to Austin or vice versa. That's roughly 2.5 hours northbound; 3.5 hours southbound, although it seldom takes 3.5 hours to run from Austin to San Antonio. Then he or she spends the day in a nice hotel in Austin or is driven back to San Antonio or vice versa. How or why this arrangement was worked out is unclear, but it does not seem to be very efficient. No wonder Amtrak needs more than 20,000 employees! Or does it? I take it, Sam, you are objecting to so many people: ticket gent, trainman, car attendent, conductor/trainman. Or is it that when finished their work they sit in the lounge? Efficiency and service are served with the number of jobs...the system of selling tickets and opening the gate followed by ticket check and direction to car, then direction to seat, then collection of tickets and checking for next stops, etc. seems to make the boarding and ticket cheking work well and gives the customer the feeling of being cared for. As for sitting in the lounge or the diner when not checking tickets, etc., where would you have them go or sit? Can't sit in people's laps; going to visit the engineer can't be done regularly or often safely; no baggage car to run to; only officials ride in office cars; and thre is no caboose on a passenger train. In the course of a day, how much just standing at attention do you expect them to do? We in America have to come to terms with labor: it is needed to get jobs done; each job is different; each job adds to the service or quality of service; each job is for the benifet of the customer. Jobs are not created to take money away from bottom liners.
Amtrak is a failed business model for a variety of reasons. Near the top is a bloated labor force. If one thinks that Amtrak is a public welfare agency, whose primary mission is to created jobs, they see nothing wrong with the staffing levels on the Texas Eagle. I disagree.
I would not have a conductor and a trainman. One or the other. And I would have him or her walk the train and attend to customer needs or at least give the appearance of doing so.
Sam's statement about Amtrak being a welfare agency rubs me wrong for several reasons. First, it is the same thing anti union factions say often and used to throw out agains the railroads in the middle of the 20th Century. Yes there was featherbedding and overlaping and more jobs than work...but it was because unions and managment decided to be adversaries instead of working for a common goal of efficiency and industry. Often management didn't care simply because it was ready to retire or would so before the new contract would run out, so they just caved into union demands then blamed the union for the problems in a fantastic use of deflection and deception. Second it rubs me wrong because it echos contemporary investment managements whose sole purpose is to make as much money as possible for themselves forsaking the product's integrity, quality, safety and purpose with a customer be damned attitude and no care about the future of the product or service. When are American business people going to realize the importance of people and labor not as an expense but as an asset for quality and integrity and assurance of profits in the future. Its not the joke of how many whatever it takes to screw in a light bulb but the practice of how many investors does it take to close a business while blaming labor.
henry's statements about the relationship between management and labor and the short-sighted view of many in management to maximize profits in the near term ring true. However, that does not mean staffing levels on Amtrak should be carte blanche, especially when the work performed often seems so slipshod. The methods Amtrak uses to board trains is slow and inefficient, as anyone who has ridden on most passenger systems abroad can attest to.
I am deleting this post. It is irrelevant.
Sam1The boarding process at Temple is labor intensive. The station agent opens the gate and makes sure that everyone in line has a ticket. The conductor or trainman inspects the ticket (now read with a scanner) and points the passenger to his or her car. The car attendant marks the passenger's destination on a seat check and hands it to him or her
Anyone who was riding trains before 911 will remember when boarding was a lot more efficient. All you did was to climb on the train. No one checked your ticket until the train was moving. But the terrorist attacks on that terrible day have changed many things about America. Amtrak is not exempt from these changes. That is the reason for all of this checking before you get on the train and may explain some of the personnel. But it you think Amtrak has inefficient boarding procedures try flying. It is easy to find long lists of complaints about TSA officers. You may be able to get through airport security in minutes but you may find yourself in a line that takes an hour or more. I don't know enough about security to argue for or against these procedures. However, all government offices and some private companies now use them. Amtrak is not exempt.
henry6 Sam's statement about Amtrak being a welfare agency rubs me wrong for several reasons. First, it is the same thing anti union factions say often and used to throw out agains the railroads in the middle of the 20th Century. Yes there was featherbedding and overlaping and more jobs than work...but it was because unions and managment decided to be adversaries instead of working for a common goal of efficiency and industry. Often management didn't care simply because it was ready to retire or would so before the new contract would run out, so they just caved into union demands then blamed the union for the problems in a fantastic use of deflection and deception. Second it rubs me wrong because it echos contemporary investment managements whose sole purpose is to make as much money as possible for themselves forsaking the product's integrity, quality, safety and purpose with a customer be damned attitude and no care about the future of the product or service. When are American business people going to realize the importance of people and labor not as an expense but as an asset for quality and integrity and assurance of profits in the future. Its not the joke of how many whatever it takes to screw in a light bulb but the practice of how many investors does it take to close a business while blaming labor.
How many people does it take to screw in a light bulb? One. But, buy an LED bulb and you only have to do it every 20 years.
And, that's just the point. You can keep very busy doing something inefficiently and work up a real sweat but you aren't being very productive. The goal is productivity, to get the best service for the least cost, not the same old service, the same old way, for ever increasing cost.
I don't think it's always fair to tar mgt with the "profit over service" brush. These things are not mutually exclusive. I've recently had a good experience with AT&T (surprisingly) and a lousy one with IKEA (also surprisingly). Both these outfits are big on productivity, keeping people involved in the high value work (which is more rewarding to do) and trying to let people "self serve" for the easy stuff. The quality of the experience had to do with the attitude of the employees and not the nature of the work they were performing.
Selling a can of soda is "easy stuff". Why have a person do it? Even McDonalds lets you fill your own cup with ice and soda these days...
-Don (Random stuff, mostly about trains - what else? http://blerfblog.blogspot.com/)
Ok Don, walk into a fine hotel. Open the door and go the the front desk. Enter your name and information into a computer, insert your credit card number, take your reciept and extract your room swipe card. Then carry your luggage over to the elevator, press the buttons and fly to your floor remebering to pick uo your bed linins on the way to your room so you can make your bed.
Or, Don, what if you are met at the door by one who takes your bags, opens the door, guides you to the front desk and signs you in then takes you up to your room, bringing linin with him so as to make up your room when you get there?
Or, Don, walk into to a fine hotel the door opened and held by a doorman, a porter carrying your luggage. A person greets you at the front desk, handles your check in eye to eye, hands you a room keyswipe card as the porter accomanies you to the elevator to your room where a maid has already made the bed complete with a chocolate on the pillow.
Which is service you won't return to and which is service you'll never forget? Why in this country do we demean the value of people and service in the name of profit instead of holding it up the name of value? Do we think so little of our fellow citizens, our customers, that one's profit is ahead of properly servicing our customers and tending to needs and qaulity?
Nonsense! What a loaded set of alternatives! How about the most typical one? You check in with a polite reception person who uses a computer, get your pass card or key and you take your bags to the room (carts available) which has a bed or two with fresh linen, the bed is made and fresh towels are in the bathroom? That is what most Americans experience in the year 2012 at most hotels. Why on earth should Amtrak be staffed (in numbers, not quality of service) like a Ritz-Carlton? Because Amtrak is living in the past.
Very few of those commenting on this thread are working class, Henry, and most don't know how workers, the overwhelming majority of the population, work or live.
You really like to make assumptions without any factual basis. If you throw out sam1's comments, we are talking about having decent, modern food service on Amtrak, rather than its half-a***d approach which is either a horribly outdated, failed attempt at reviving the Lucius Beebe gilded age era (hardly working class!) or a diner which makes Mickey D's look like Tru or charlie Trotter's in Chicago in comparison. If the brains at Amtrak and their "market research" folks need a model that works, look at the DB or SNCF or FS. Or get a middle of the road restaurant chain to run the service the way the ATSF used Fred Harvey.
travelingengineerDenigration of "living in the past" is an unfortunate accusation, "schlimm," for in addition to passenger train travel, many folks pleasantly enjoy playing baseball, going to church, having dinner together as a family, talking on a telephone instead of tweeting, mowing one's own lawn, etc. by choice. I suppose that you consider these activities to be anathema, and thus inconsistent with present day life of impersonal efficiency, speed at all costs.
But what is missing is what people expect in service. Schlimm is at the extreme of wanting to get rid of as many people as possible without seeing what is lost when those people aren't there. Amtrak has to decide the level of services it needs on a train by train basis. Some trains need to cater more to the customers than others. There is a certain amount of civlity, modicum, service that is expected at every level and that has to be provided. If the service is one where bags are expected to be carried by porters and dinner served at tables with linin cloths, then there has to be personnel to provide. If one wants cold plate from behind a glass door and spun through a microwave, that's a different train. I know, I've handled hospitality for railroad presidents and CEO's of large companies and other managers as well as janitor's picinics. You always need enough people to make people happy and well served. Chince on it, and they will not be back...then you've not served your bottom line, but eliminate the bottom line and the company,
And again, you completely miss my point. I'm talking quality service. How many people would rate a night in a Pullman on the Lake Shore as a quality experience compared to a Hampton Inn or Fairfield, etc. Not many, yet that LSL would have a larger staff tripping over themselves. My point is this: it's not the number of staff, it's the quality, based on attitude and training. Judging from the labor costs on Amtrak, they are probably paid more than folks in comparable hotels. Are Amtrak non-operating employees trained in hotel programs at community colleges like many hotel folks? Doubtful.
I would agree with you Schlimm if they would pay the trained personnel at a better wage than offered. If you cut the staff by one or two leaving one to do the work of one or two, you've got to compensate accordingly and not leave his pay the same or reduce it. Amtrak is not allowed to do the job it has been charged with. It needs to be redsigned by Congress which has to keep its hands off. It is not an investor capital venture. And it is not a welfare program for unemployables, relatives, and feattherbedders nor a LIonel set around the Christmas tree, all concepts I have felt COngess has shown toward it. It has to have the freedom of marketiing but not on a cookie cutter one thing fits all. It has to have the freedom to make long term plans and committments which cannot be overturned by Congressional fiat. It has to be a non political entity with the freedom to be a passenger rail service either on its own tracks or freight railroad tracks..
Do you know the wage and benefits packages of food service folks on Amtrak compared to those of people in middle of the road chain restaurants? Someone should check it out. I think we'd be surprised at how much higher the Amtrak wage is for doing less and often poorer work.
At Marriott, 2012:
Line cook: $11.25 hourly
Hostess: $12.18
Restaurant Supervisor: $14.57
Kitchen supervisor: $17.17 - 21.32 hourly (NYC)
Bistro attendant: $9.54 (Atlanta)
You get the idea. If someone knows how to get the Amtrak numbers, we could compare. Perhaps Marriott isn't your cup of tea, but I believe a satisfaction survey of customers would rate them ahead of Amtrak.
I have never been able to find any direct information regarding Amtrak's pay scales. However, according to the BLS, persons engaged in support activities for other transportation, including rail, averaged $19.90 per hour before benefits during 2010. Presumably Amtrak's food and beverage personnel fall into this category.
According to another source, which appears to be an independent employment agency, Amtrak's train attendants average $19 to $21 per hour before benefits.
Lastly, a study prepared by an independent consult for Amtrak in 2007, which addressed the pay scales for Amtrak's shop employees, as opposed to the on-board employees, found that Amtrak's wages for this group were approximately 4 per cent below the national average for comparable positions in private industry. However, after adding in benefits, i.e. health insurance, paid vacations, retirement, etc., Amtrak's compensation package for this group was approximately 19 per cent above the comparable compensation package for employees in similar private industry positions.
Several years ago, when the Sunset Limited was having several schedule problems, a story in the San Antonio Express-News, if I remember correctly, noted that some of Amtrak's sleeping car attendants, due to overtime, were earning as much as $75,000 per year before benefits. Having watched on more than one occasion their making up a roomette bed, they earn every bit of it, at least if back pain is any indicator of value added.
Most of the Amtrak employees that I have encountered this year, as well in previous years, have done a good job. Several of them, in fact, were so good that I sent a letter to Mr. Boardman bringing them to his attention. The problem lies in a business model that is broken, i.e. long distance trains with diners, lounges, and sleeping cars. It is not the fault of the employees; it is the fault of the management, who are responding to political pressures and union pressures, to pay what may be above average compensation for the jobs performed.
I agree, sam1. I found a few Amtrak numbers 2012 from Pay Scale: Train attendant : $15.35. However, I've seen higher numbers, up to $23.00. On Career Bliss, chef salary range is $32-57K. On the same site, they say Amtrak's average salary is $69K compared to the transportation industry average of $43K, so Amtrak is paying more than 50% higher. There is nothing wrong per se in such a wage structure; what is deficient is the screening and training and supervision of employees and the policies and plans for service.
schlimm At Marriott, 2012: Line cook: $11.25 hourly Hostess: $12.18 Restaurant Supervisor: $14.57 Kitchen supervisor: $17.17 - 21.32 hourly (NYC) Bistro attendant: $9.54 (Atlanta) You get the idea. If someone knows how to get the Amtrak numbers, we could compare. Perhaps Marriott isn't your cup of tea, but I believe a satisfaction survey of customers would rate them ahead of Amtrak.
When you start keeping people away from home for periods of time - the cost to secure such people goes up.
Never too old to have a happy childhood!
BaltACD schlimm At Marriott, 2012: Line cook: $11.25 hourly Hostess: $12.18 Restaurant Supervisor: $14.57 Kitchen supervisor: $17.17 - 21.32 hourly (NYC) Bistro attendant: $9.54 (Atlanta) You get the idea. If someone knows how to get the Amtrak numbers, we could compare. Perhaps Marriott isn't your cup of tea, but I believe a satisfaction survey of customers would rate them ahead of Amtrak. How many days away from home are spent by the above employees in the performance of their duties? When you start keeping people away from home for periods of time - the cost to secure such people goes up.
Yep. Amtrak workers, as with long haul truck drivers, are essentially at work 24 hours a day, on top of needing to learn how to work on a train, you can't expect to pay them the same as the maids at the Super 8 if you want to keep them. A lot of the objections to Amtrak almost seem as though they are coming from people who know nothing about trains:
"Why can't they just eat when their trip ends?" (Do you want to go without food for 16 hours?)
"Why can't they eat a cold sandwich prepared beforehand as with an airplane?" (Do you want to subsist on that for 16 hours?")
"Airlines don't have food prepared on the spot, why must trains?" (That is actually an advantage for Amtrak, that they have room for a kitchen on a train, Airlines are also like riding in a culvert, looking out at nothing but sky.)
"Why must the workers be paid more than normal hotel staff?" (Would you work for that if you had to give up your home life?)
ETC. Forcing a square peg (the rules of other modes of transport) into a round hole (rail transport).
here is an interesting quote from deggesty on the wash union station thread.
" Columbus Circle is also being completely redesigned and rebuilt to accomodate buses, taxi/livery, and the hugely popular tour buses that originate from the front of Union Station."
Now I know why Columbus Circle appeared as it did when I was in Washington in April and May this year. I trust that work will have been finished when I next expect to be in Washington (2014?)
I have no quarrel with the current first class accomodations in the station, but I wish there were a little more variety in the snack food available."
there has been much argument about getting food at stations instead of on trains. If the above opinion is prevelant at our second busiest train station what can we expect at many of the smaller stations ? SANTA FE was sucessful with their harvey houses because of their mostly on time operation and frequency of trains. That in anyone's opinion is not the case with just a single pair of AMTRAK trains on most long distance routes ( exceptions part of the routes of florida trains and empire service using a 7 hrs break point ) .
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.