ABC News reported in World News Tonight with Charles Gibson at 6:30-7:00pm EST on January 8, 2007, that all Amtrak overnight luxury trains with dining rooms except for the Empire Builder have converted to paper plates and table cloths, and microwave food. This happened apparently because of required budget cuts. (a.k.a. Amtrak didn't want to make this change)
How do you all feel about this?
I guess the problem is that Amtrak, the people who operate, support, and fund it, are not quite sure what kind of operation they want it to be. While Amtrak is not the government, it is its own kind of organizational thing, it gets considerable funding from the government and hence is subject to governmental kind of thinking.
It is not so much that Amtrak loses money operating trains with white-linen tablecloth dining cars or will continue to lose pretty much the same amount of money with paper plates and foam cups food service, the question is whether the government should be subsidizing some higher level of service beyond some utilitarian function. Government money finds its ways in some measure to the arts -- an activity which is thought of for the betterment of the society as a whole but one which appeals largely to a cultural and in some measures socio-economic elite - and there is criticism of that kind of funding in that it only services elites.
I can see the government supporting long-distance trains as a kind of national heritage matter, much like the National Parks, especially the Western long-distance trains which cover such broad sweeps of parts of the country that are scenic for their low population density and mountains -- mountains are very scenic but not much use for practical real-estate development although they try in California to some bad effect on people losing everything to wildfires.
I am told Canada went through a meltdown in funding for Via, and they are down to one long distance train, but some friends who have taken it said it is rather expensive but quite nice and a worthwhile experience. I believe Canada runs the one long-distance train that covers the vast expanse of the Western part of Canada. As to complaining about the shortage of Superliner cars, that train is all "Heritage" cars -- I imagine bought for cheap from Amtrak in many cases - and F40's. The train is also very long -- if you are going to operate the one train, you may as well get the economy of scale of running as many cars as you can.
Then we are back to the infamous Inspector General's report that argued, the long-distance trains are primarily life-line service to the small communities up and down the line and that most trips are partial distances of the route, then fine, operate these trains as lifeline service - a P-42 with four Superliner coaches -- no diner, no baggage car, no sleepers. Back in the day, there were all manner of trains -- there were the name trains with the luxury service and there were the versions of the P-42 with the four Superliner coaches. I guess since we are down to so few trains, we want to serve the lifeline function along with the luxury train function all in one and are doing badly at all functions.
If GM "killed the electric car", what am I doing standing next to an EV-1, a half a block from the WSOR tracks?
.....And after 36 years no one has been able to decide what and how we should be running these trains....In fact, no one has been able to fund them properly yet to run decent full service trains...Too bad.
The trend line as it is running now with equipment damage and breakdowns and refurbishing going undone it's only a matter of time until they run out of equipment and will have to continue to downsize and then literally stop.....
Quentin
OK by me. As long as they take the china and silver flatware off the Beech Grove.
Maybe the White House and the Congressional Dining Rooms should also go to paper plates and plastic forks. Now we're taking big money.
By the way, Alex Kummant's salary is $100,000 a year more than Dave Gunn's.
"We have met the enemy and he is us." Pogo Possum "We have met the anemone... and he is Russ." Bucky Katt "Prediction is very difficult, especially if it's about the future." Niels Bohr, Nobel laureate in physics
......Don't forget to install the microwaves in both places in place of all the prepare kitchens too......
Datafever wrote:You mean to say that with the hefty prices that they were charging for food, that they were losing money on it? Unbelievable!!
Cutting off the nose to spite the face.
Not the first time someone has taken one portion of an operation out of context with the rest of the operation. People need to eat on a long-distance train. People might be attracted to take the train by good food. But good food doesn't make as much money as (or loses more than) the rest of the operation, so we'll cut that out. Now we lose the business of the people for whom the food may have been part of the appeal.
They'll kill Amtrak yet.
Larry Resident Microferroequinologist (at least at my house) Everyone goes home; Safety begins with you My Opinion. Standard Disclaimers Apply. No Expiration Date Come ride the rails with me! There's one thing about humility - the moment you think you've got it, you've lost it...
Is this the long-planned conversion to pre-plated meals? If so, my understanding was that the quality was to be pretty good and menu variety was to be equivalent. It's just that grilling would be discontinued and dining car crew reduced from 5 to 3.
It's not like the food cooked on board was always the best, anyway. I had a rather lukewarm "hot" breakfast on the Cal. Zephyr out of Denver last Spring.
Hardly the end of the world.
-Don (Random stuff, mostly about trains - what else? http://blerfblog.blogspot.com/)
I don't think that dining cars ever made money in and of themselves and this includes the so-called Golden Era of heavyweight equipment. That being said, most passenger departments viewed dining cars as an amenity that helped bring customers to their service and were willing to eat the operating loss on dining cars. Dining car service also had its quirks, one of which was "verbal orders not accepted", the patron had to write out his order on the check. Northern Pacific was one of the few roads that accepted verbal orders.
There is a general rule of thumb for the restaurant business. The revenue/cost ratio are 1/3 for food and beverage costs, 1/3 for labor and 1/3 for spoilage, rent, utilities, miscellaneous expenses and, out of that slice, profit. Keeping the labor cost at 1/3 of revenue is accomplished by having the service staff at the "wage plus tips" wage rates, which, last I knew, was at $2.35 an hour.
Amtrak is faced with different cost ratios. The biggest difference is in the labor cost. I don't have exact numbers, Amtrak dining car personnel are paid somewhere around the wage rates of the other non-operating on board personnel, somewhere around $15 per hour. In addition, Amtrak covers the lay-over expenses, covers the cost of a very good benefit package and pays the rates for Railroad Retirement coverage that are higher than Social Security. I don't know how the numbers work out for the cost of the dining"facility", but it isn't hard to imagine that the "rent" and other facility costs for a rail car are much higher than those for land based restaurant of comparable seating capacity and style.
The numbers I have seen indicate that the labor costs for Amtrak's dining operation take most of the dining revenue. The obvious obstacle to reducing the wage rates is that they are the result of a collective bargaining agreement. (Darn unions!) But even absent that constraint, how far down could the rates go before Amtrak would have to deal with the kind of labor turnover experience of the restaurant business.
I suspect that the efficiency or cost savings of using plastic comes from the elimination of the labor for dishwashing. The dining cars are equiped with dishwashing machines, but there is still labor involved.
My bottom line is that I could accept a hard plastic plate, but plastic knives and forks suck. Beyond that, if I want to eat on the cheap, I'll stop at the local fast food place.
The bottom line is that I suspect that the savings will be chicken feed and, while there is no way to measure the overall result, no doubt it will result in more "Amtrak? Never again!!!"
Paul Milenkovic wrote: the question is whether the government should be subsidizing some higher level of service beyond some utilitarian function. .
the question is whether the government should be subsidizing some higher level of service beyond some utilitarian function. .
FWIW, I think that is the most practical answer anyone has offered.
Makes perfect sense
TheAntiGates wrote: Paul Milenkovic wrote: the question is whether the government should be subsidizing some higher level of service beyond some utilitarian function. . FWIW, I think that is the most practical answer anyone has offered. Makes perfect sense
Paper plates and plastic flatware to you, too!
It would make sense if it actually reduced the business deficit. Ponder this. Would you pay $10 to $20 for a meal served to you on plastic? More than once??
jeaton wrote:Paper plates and plastic flatware to you, too!It would make sense if it actually reduced the business deficit. Ponder this. Would you pay $10 to $20 for a meal served to you on plastic? More than once??
LMAO!!
As a taxpayer, I have misgivings about paying for someone else's white tablecloth moment.
The Amtrak travel packages I've always encountered state meals are included in the fare . Those would be the meals the govt need only provide a basic food service for.
As for ala carte food service, pay as you go, well, I think the customers deserve whatever they are willing to pay for.
If they want chez ritz, then they should have that opportunity.
Maybe leasing a kitchen/diner to some operator such as Shoney's would be a solution.
My bet is that Shoney's would either balk outright, or exit soon
jeaton wrote: TheAntiGates wrote: Paul Milenkovic wrote: the question is whether the government should be subsidizing some higher level of service beyond some utilitarian function. . FWIW, I think that is the most practical answer anyone has offered. Makes perfect sense Paper plates and plastic flatware to you, too!It would make sense if it actually reduced the business deficit. Ponder this. Would you pay $10 to $20 for a meal served to you on plastic? More than once??
People pay MORE than that for a burger, pretzel and a beer at a ball game, served at a walk-up window on a cardboard tray!
My last Amtrak trip was on the Cardinal - one of the first trains to convert to plastic. The food was not bad but definately better than airline food (when they served anything). However, I was most impressed, when a tragic delay caused us to be 5+ hours behind schedule. The dining car reopened and served an unplanned meal because we would not get into Chicago until late afternoon. The staff was very accomodating - even though they did not have sufficient for their full menu - they were able to offer several choices. That trick would be hard to do with pre-plated food.
dd
jeaton wrote: There is a general rule of thumb for the restaurant business. The revenue/cost ratio are 1/3 for food and beverage costs, 1/3 for labor and 1/3 for spoilage, rent, utilities, miscellaneous expenses and, out of that slice, profit. Keeping the labor cost at 1/3 of revenue is accomplished by having the service staff at the "wage plus tips" wage rates, which, last I knew, was at $2.35 an hour. Amtrak is faced with different cost ratios. The biggest difference is in the labor cost. I don't have exact numbers, Amtrak dining car personnel are paid somewhere around the wage rates of the other non-operating on board personnel, somewhere around $15 per hour. In addition, Amtrak covers the lay-over expenses, covers the cost of a very good benefit package and pays the rates for Railroad Retirement coverage that are higher than Social Security. I don't know how the numbers work out for the cost of the dining"facility", but it isn't hard to imagine that the "rent" and other facility costs for a rail car are much higher than those for land based restaurant of comparable seating capacity and style.The numbers I have seen indicate that the labor costs for Amtrak's dining operation take most of the dining revenue. The obvious obstacle to reducing the wage rates is that they are the result of a collective bargaining agreement. (Darn unions!) But even absent that constraint, how far down could the rates go before Amtrak would have to deal with the kind of labor turnover experience of the restaurant business.I suspect that the efficiency or cost savings of using plastic comes from the elimination of the labor for dishwashing. The dining cars are equiped with dishwashing machines, but there is still labor involved.My bottom line is that I could accept a hard plastic plate, but plastic knives and forks suck. Beyond that, if I want to eat on the cheap, I'll stop at the local fast food place.The bottom line is that I suspect that the savings will be chicken feed and, while there is no way to measure the overall result, no doubt it will result in more "Amtrak? Never again!!!"
"the average Amtrak food service worker earns about $20 an hour and another $10 to $12 an hour in benefits." (from http://abcnews.go.com/WNT/Travel/story?id=2777294&page=1)
Not a new problem. Read this: http://prr.railfan.net/documents/TrainTalks_Aug1950.html Even talk of microwave ovens....in 1950!
....If we don't have the money to properly run passenger trains in this country......and now making these {half baked}, changes in the diner and other areas to save pennys and probably which will cause more ridership to leave......Stop running all the passenger trains.....!! including the NEC....Quit...Stop this madness....!
If it continues, it will be argued back and forth for the next 35 plus years just as it has been so far in this installment.....Just quit...! Throw the red signal....
The "picture" might actually be bigger than most of us realize, too.
Paper table cloths eliminate the laundry service and the on and off loading handling of linen table cloths, two cases of paper cloths probably go a long way.
China and silverware not only require washing, but they also require more care in busing dirty tables, require an inventory system be maintained, and probably suffer from shrinkage due to souvenier hunters
Wonder how much amtrak spent in a typical year, just replacing broken and "lost" dinnerware?
StillGrande wrote:I still think they should contract out the food service, or bid it out to franchises. Maybe a Starbucks or McDonalds right on the train. They could run food out the way they do for large events (I remember when there were 300 of us and a McDonalds in the Austin area brought out 600 egg mcmuffins and orange juices in a small insulated trailer). You would probably get the same groups that go in airports, but I know there are California Pizza Kitchens, TGIFridays, and others there too.
I stand corrected on the wage rates for dining car personnel. Higher than I had thought.
Dug up some numbers for Amtrak's Fiscal Year that ended September 30, 2006. Total revenue from trains was $1.565 billion. Included in that total was $47 million for food and beverage sales in the diner and lounge cars on the 16 long distance trains.
I have no information on the savings resulting from the use of plastic. Could we guess as much as 10% of sales or $4.7 million? I think that is a stretch, but even so, given that the total federal grant for Amtrak was $1.2 billion, that savings is sort of nibbling around the fringes.
I think that customer satisfaction is a far greater consideration. Passengers with sleeper accomidations pay fares averaging 3 times as much as coach fares. Food, excluding alcoholic beverages, is included in the sleeper accomidation fare. Seems to me that use of plastic in the diner may be enough to drive off some of that business. Lose 5% of the those passengers and the savings for use of plastic has been blown in lost revenue.
spokyone wrote: StillGrande wrote:I still think they should contract out the food service, or bid it out to franchises. Maybe a Starbucks or McDonalds right on the train. They could run food out the way they do for large events (I remember when there were 300 of us and a McDonalds in the Austin area brought out 600 egg mcmuffins and orange juices in a small insulated trailer). You would probably get the same groups that go in airports, but I know there are California Pizza Kitchens, TGIFridays, and others there too. A similar situation was tried on the Albany to NY trains when food service was cancelled in 2005. SUBWAY was awarded a contract but was terminated after one week. Those people would not or could not work with a unionized train crew. So your idea, although a good one, has already been tried.
I was going to say "Pulleeez" If you have ever seen a McDonalds or other chain restaurant located in a market population of 300-500 people, I'll bet the doors were locked and the windows boarded up. Those stores live on volume and they aren't going to find it on a train.
The problem is that if Amtrak were a for-profit operation, forget about that aspect, suppose the subsidy were more off-the-books and out-of-sight in the manner of the airlines so you could isolate a piece of it that operated on a profit basis, you could say, let management make that choice about paper plates and see if the few pennies saved in cost are balanced against dollars in lost passenger revenues. On the other hand, when you are subsidized at 50 cents on the dollar, you are insulated not only from the rewards of success but the penalty of failure.
Taking away the profit motive, the level of dining car service on Amtrak is no longer a matter that Amtrak management manages but becomes something that the rail advocacy groups are going to lobby Congress on. Over on www.thetruthaboutcars.com, all manners of opinions are being offered by armchair industrialists on how the car companies need to change what they are doing to get out of the financial mess they are in. But ultimately the management of these companies will have to make the decisions, although Congress or perhaps the NHTSA is telling them they will have to had automatic stability control by a certain date, but Congress is not going to hold hearings on whether the cheapness of plastics on the interiors of cars is the undoing of the American auto industry or pass legislation on the optimal number of cup holders.
My original comment was an observation that if you accept the government dollar, there will be political pressure to drive that activity in the direction of a utilitarian rather than a luxury service. I guess there is considerable government funding of those dens of political and corporate corruption known as stadium luxury skyboxes, and I once was in the company of a Professor of Economics when we walked by a Saturn automobile, who likened the Saturn car to a sports stadium, but as far as I can tell we don't have Federal money chasing after sports teams to keep them in country and not moving to Mexico or Canada and we seem indifferent to auto outsourcing to Mexico and Canada.
But I guess the thing that gets to me is that there is a faction in the rail-advocacy community arguing that Amtrak, or their vision of Amtrak with "proper funding" represents a kind of ideal world (i.e. early 1950's Diesel streamliners of conventional two-axle truck non-articulated configuration along with the style of sleeping car and other services of that era), and any deviation from that represents people trying to kill off the passenger trains.
One of the advantages of the conventionally-coupled passenger train over the lightweight articulated trains was "you can add cars for peak times." It seems Amtrak is wedded to fixed consists. The Hiawatha service has such growth in passenger traffic that there is talk of increasing the fixed consists from 4 to 5 cars. This service, vaunted for its ridership, operates at somewhere around 30 percent load factor, and I am told that it is simply not cost effective to switch cars in an out of the consists, and when I suggested an arrangement with Metra to put suburban gallery cars into the consists to deal with weekend peaks (OK, maybe not with Hiawatha but with Illinois trains with weekend traffic), it was suggested to me that I wanted passengers to ride in open freight gondolas while I was at it.
Folks are going to come back at me about the lack of passenger cars and the dead line at Beech Grove and how this represents the "inadequate funding of passenger service." The infamous Inspector General Meade report gives rather high operating costs numbers of maintenance, and with what Amtrak charges in fares and gets in subsidies, that such amount of money can hardly pay for the maintenance to keep Superliner cars out on the road speaks to some problems with the economics of running passenger trains.
Amtrak is subsidized, yes, but it is so politicized and hamstrung by the advocacy community and Congress and everyone else with an opinion that there is not a thing they can do to manage costs. For gosh sakes people, it is not written into the United States Consitution that the Federal Government shall insure that train food is served on china plates instead of on paper plates, and we should be concerned about development and improvement of corridor train service to alleviate highway and road congestion instead whether the standards of the 1950's "name trains" are upheld. The luxury standards of the famous trains were 1) not representative of service of the run-of-the-mill trains across the railroads, 2) were in some ways a rearguard action against dwindling passenger train patronage, and 3) were a form of corporate image polishing for the railroads, 4) were probably never justified on economic grounds.
You have it backwards. The union folk made noises about not working on the trains with non-union food service employees. There were even some hints that threats had been made against Subway. The service never got off the ground. Subway never served a single rider and those Empire trains remain without any food service!
What a shame.
Gee, Paul, your logical arguements are going to take all the fun out of arguing!
Paul Milenkovic wrote: The problem is that if Amtrak were a for-profit operation, forget about that aspect, suppose the subsidy were more off-the-books and out-of-sight in the manner of the airlines so you could isolate a piece of it that operated on a profit basis, you could say, let management make that choice about paper plates and see if the few pennies saved in cost are balanced against dollars in lost passenger revenues. On the other hand, when you are subsidized at 50 cents on the dollar, you are insulated not only from the rewards of success but the penalty of failure.
I couldn't agree more! Some how, some way, they have to change the Amtrak "game" so that the managers have some profit motive, or at least some reward based on subsidy productivity. Passenger miles per subsidy dollar or some such.....
Paul Milenkovic wrote: Taking away the profit motive, the level of dining car service on Amtrak is no longer a matter that Amtrak management manages but becomes something that the rail advocacy groups are going to lobby Congress on. Over on http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/, all manners of opinions are being offered by armchair industrialists on how the car companies need to change what they are doing to get out of the financial mess they are in. But ultimately the management of these companies will have to make the decisions, although Congress or perhaps the NHTSA is telling them they will have to had automatic stability control by a certain date, but Congress is not going to hold hearings on whether the cheapness of plastics on the interiors of cars is the undoing of the American auto industry or pass legislation on the optimal number of cup holders.My original comment was an observation that if you accept the government dollar, there will be political pressure to drive that activity in the direction of a utilitarian rather than a luxury service. I guess there is considerable government funding of those dens of political and corporate corruption known as stadium luxury skyboxes, and I once was in the company of a Professor of Economics when we walked by a Saturn automobile, who likened the Saturn car to a sports stadium, but as far as I can tell we don't have Federal money chasing after sports teams to keep them in country and not moving to Mexico or Canada and we seem indifferent to auto outsourcing to Mexico and Canada.But I guess the thing that gets to me is that there is a faction in the rail-advocacy community arguing that Amtrak, or their vision of Amtrak with "proper funding" represents a kind of ideal world (i.e. early 1950's Diesel streamliners of conventional two-axle truck non-articulated configuration along with the style of sleeping car and other services of that era), and any deviation from that represents people trying to kill off the passenger trains.
Taking away the profit motive, the level of dining car service on Amtrak is no longer a matter that Amtrak management manages but becomes something that the rail advocacy groups are going to lobby Congress on. Over on http://www.thetruthaboutcars.com/, all manners of opinions are being offered by armchair industrialists on how the car companies need to change what they are doing to get out of the financial mess they are in. But ultimately the management of these companies will have to make the decisions, although Congress or perhaps the NHTSA is telling them they will have to had automatic stability control by a certain date, but Congress is not going to hold hearings on whether the cheapness of plastics on the interiors of cars is the undoing of the American auto industry or pass legislation on the optimal number of cup holders.
It makes me queasy to think that we might be subsidizing "luxury travel" with tax dollars. According to NARP, the sleepers & diners do pay there way on a incremental basis, unlike the GAO's version of the truth
Paul Milenkovic wrote: One of the advantages of the conventionally-coupled passenger train over the lightweight articulated trains was "you can add cars for peak times." It seems Amtrak is wedded to fixed consists. The Hiawatha service has such growth in passenger traffic that there is talk of increasing the fixed consists from 4 to 5 cars. This service, vaunted for its ridership, operates at somewhere around 30 percent load factor, and I am told that it is simply not cost effective to switch cars in an out of the consists, and when I suggested an arrangement with Metra to put suburban gallery cars into the consists to deal with weekend peaks (OK, maybe not with Hiawatha but with Illinois trains with weekend traffic), it was suggested to me that I wanted passengers to ride in open freight gondolas while I was at it.
The PRR used to add and drop cars at Phila all the time - on NY to DC trains! They used to slam a few P70s on the rear end with a switcher during the station stop. Has the balance of the cost of equipment versus labor changed that radically since the 60s that it's no longer worth the effort to do such things.
Another example. The NJDOT U34CHs were puchased with the idea that the EL could use them in freight service on the weekends. I don't know how often this occurred, but it was a worthy idea.
I wonder if lack of profit motive has made Amtrak lazy and dimmed their imagination.
Even in the 1970s, Amtrak could do an engine change at Harmon and New Haven in about 5 minutes (even on HEP equipment). Last time I rode the Crescent, the engine change at DC took over 30 minutes - for no discernable reason other than thing just moved very slowly.
Paul Milenkovic wrote: Folks are going to come back at me about the lack of passenger cars and the dead line at Beech Grove and how this represents the "inadequate funding of passenger service." The infamous Inspector General Meade report gives rather high operating costs numbers of maintenance, and with what Amtrak charges in fares and gets in subsidies, that such amount of money can hardly pay for the maintenance to keep Superliner cars out on the road speaks to some problems with the economics of running passenger trains.Amtrak is subsidized, yes, but it is so politicized and hamstrung by the advocacy community and Congress and everyone else with an opinion that there is not a thing they can do to manage costs. For gosh sakes people, it is not written into the United States Consitution that the Federal Government shall insure that train food is served on china plates instead of on paper plates, and we should be concerned about development and improvement of corridor train service to alleviate highway and road congestion instead whether the standards of the 1950's "name trains" are upheld. The luxury standards of the famous trains were 1) not representative of service of the run-of-the-mill trains across the railroads, 2) were in some ways a rearguard action against dwindling passenger train patronage, and 3) were a form of corporate image polishing for the railroads, 4) were probably never justified on economic grounds.
After having read Kaufmann's "Leaders Count", that is exactly why GN/BN kept the Empire Builder going - corporate image.
I don't understand the bru-ha-ha over paper vs. china. It&nb
.....One of my petpeeves....Amtrak certainly could use the lines of "dead" passenger cars waiting for repairs, renovation, etc. to supplement trains that are running now with more capacity at the certain times of the year they are needed and as suggested above for new runs in Corridors to "build" additional service.
But with the budget structure now available how does it happen....Do we just let them set there until they are completely ruined....What economy is that...Long term, running stock if not serviced and renovated properly the complete fleet will falter and then what....Finally throw out the red signal.
oltmannd wrote: spokyone wrote: StillGrande wrote:I still think they should contract out the food service, or bid it out to franchises. Maybe a Starbucks or McDonalds right on the train. They could run food out the way they do for large events (I remember when there were 300 of us and a McDonalds in the Austin area brought out 600 egg mcmuffins and orange juices in a small insulated trailer). You would probably get the same groups that go in airports, but I know there are California Pizza Kitchens, TGIFridays, and others there too. A similar situation was tried on the Albany to NY trains when food service was cancelled in 2005. SUBWAY was awarded a contract but was terminated after one week. Those people would not or could not work with a unionized train crew. So your idea, although a good one, has already been tried. You have it backwards. The union folk made noises about not working on the trains with non-union food service employees. There were even some hints that threats had been made against Subway. The service never got off the ground. Subway never served a single rider and those Empire trains remain without any food service!What a shame.
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.