Trains.com

Amtrak to end food service losses

30975 views
308 replies
1 rating 2 rating 3 rating 4 rating 5 rating
  • Member since
    July 2004
  • 2,741 posts
Posted by Paul Milenkovic on Tuesday, November 5, 2013 12:19 PM

Sam1

Irrespective of whether one believes the long distance trains are an effective investment, as long as they exist, people who like to travel by rail should ride them if they are a practicable alternative. Everyone is paying for them. Riding them, however, does not make them an optimum investment.

In FY12 Amtrak's average cost per federal income tax filer was $14.68.  Not much!.  The average taxpayer would not even recognize it. But on-going losses have a nasty feature.  They add up over time. Amtrak had lost $29.2 billion as of the end of FY12.  Moreover, when adjusted for constant dollars, i.e. inflation, the loss is north of $40 billion. That's real money.  

In FY12 the long distance trains were responsible for 119 per cent of Amtrak's losses before depreciation, interest, and miscellaneous charges.  Why is it more than 100 per cent?  Because the long distance trains consumed all of the operating profit margin turned in by the NEC, which reduced the overall losses. Embedded in these losses are Amtrak's food and beverage service losses, most which are incurred on the long distance trains.  In FY12 they were approximately $75 million.

Highlighting the losses incurred by Amtrak's food and beverage services does not detract from the good job that most of Amtrak's food and beverage service providers render.

Understanding accounting and finance can be challenging. But it is a critical factor in any political, social, and economic decision.  Those who don't take the time to understand fundamental finance are subject to being whipsawed by special interest advocates.  Especially those who argue for a service that the supporters don't come close to paying for.

Those who don't like the numbers usually fall back on the everyone gets a subsidy argument. So we need to have one too.  That is irrelevant.  The key question is whether the long distance trains are the optimum use of the limited dollars available for passenger rail. Clearly, I don't think so. 

You must be new around here Storm

But seriously, your point about the accumulated losses/spending/investment is what could have been done with the money -- on trains -- in its place.

If GM "killed the electric car", what am I doing standing next to an EV-1, a half a block from the WSOR tracks?

  • Member since
    April 2003
  • 305,205 posts
Posted by Anonymous on Tuesday, November 5, 2013 10:26 AM

Irrespective of whether one believes the long distance trains are an effective investment, as long as they exist, people who like to travel by rail should ride them if they are a practicable alternative. Everyone is paying for them. Riding them, however, does not make them an optimum investment.

In FY12 Amtrak's average cost per federal income tax filer was $14.68.  Not much!.  The average taxpayer would not even recognize it. But on-going losses have a nasty feature.  They add up over time. Amtrak had lost $29.2 billion as of the end of FY12.  Moreover, when adjusted for constant dollars, i.e. inflation, the loss is north of $40 billion. That's real money.  

In FY12 the long distance trains were responsible for 119 per cent of Amtrak's losses before depreciation, interest, and miscellaneous charges.  Why is it more than 100 per cent?  Because the long distance trains consumed all of the operating profit margin turned in by the NEC, which reduced the overall losses. Embedded in these losses are Amtrak's food and beverage service losses, most which are incurred on the long distance trains.  In FY12 they were approximately $75 million.

Highlighting the losses incurred by Amtrak's food and beverage services does not detract from the good job that most of Amtrak's food and beverage service providers render.

Understanding accounting and finance can be challenging. But it is a critical factor in any political, social, and economic decision.  Those who don't take the time to understand fundamental finance are subject to being whipsawed by special interest advocates.  Especially those who argue for a service that the supporters don't come close to paying for.

Those who don't like the numbers usually fall back on the everyone gets a subsidy argument. So we need to have one too.  That is irrelevant.  The key question is whether the long distance trains are the optimum use of the limited dollars available for passenger rail. Clearly, I don't think so. 

  • Member since
    July 2006
  • 9,610 posts
Posted by schlimm on Tuesday, November 5, 2013 10:08 AM

dakotafred
Too much of what we hear on many of these passenger threads, in my opinion, involves taking away for the sole purpose of saving money. Such as suggestions (on other threads) to do away with sleeping cars and/or on-board dining altogether ... things that make trains TRAINS as opposed to buses on rails.

You attempt to reframe and distort what has been said by folks critical of Amtrak.   This is also known as the fallacious "straw man argument."   You define passenger service as running nostalgia trains of 50 plus years.  Times have changed.   I and others would like to see the money spent wisely on modern corridor services that serve far more people.  Trains today are (can be) fast, frequent, convenient services serving 100's of millions of passengers, competive with air and highway, not rolling museum trains running through 1000's of miles of sparsely populated areas.

C&NW, CA&E, MILW, CGW and IC fan

  • Member since
    July 2006
  • 9,610 posts
Posted by schlimm on Tuesday, November 5, 2013 9:52 AM

ACY:  You have changed the numbers in your account several times.   So let me see what it is.   In the dining service for sleeping car passengers, how many passengers are there and how many seats in the dining car?   How many seatings?  3,4, 5, 6, 7?   How long for each seating?  1:30 or 2:00?

C&NW, CA&E, MILW, CGW and IC fan

  • Member since
    July 2006
  • 1,530 posts
Posted by NKP guy on Tuesday, November 5, 2013 8:41 AM

Once again, Dakotafred, you speak for me.  I entirely concur with your comments on trains as TRAINS, not just accounting theories.

ACY:  Don't be too discouraged.  Your comments are enjoyed and appreciated by many of us coming, as they do, from someone who knows both the business as well as what customers are looking for in a LD train experience.

"Sleepers and dining cars, now and forever, one and inseparable!" as Daniel Webster said.  

  • Member since
    June 2002
  • 20,096 posts
Posted by daveklepper on Tuesday, November 5, 2013 8:32 AM

I second the above.   My sentiments exactly.

  • Member since
    December 2009
  • 1,751 posts
Posted by dakotafred on Tuesday, November 5, 2013 7:50 AM

CMStPnP

As for the perspective that Amtrak can't change because that's just the way things are.     Not a unique perspective, it's one held by a great many rail fans as well.     Not sure how that helps Amtrak improve or set the bar higher though.     I think if we want to see Amtrak survive, we need to embrace change vs resisting it.     Some of it may be radical change.    Some might be minor changes.     Change has to happen though.

 
Change ... yes and no. It depends on what it brings and what it takes away.
 
Too much of what we hear on many of these passenger threads, in my opinion, involves taking away for the sole purpose of saving money. Such as suggestions (on other threads) to do away with sleeping cars and/or on-board dining altogether ... things that make trains TRAINS as opposed to buses on rails.
 
Very odd coming from folks who admit to riding trains themselves and enjoying the experience.
 
I have always argued that Amtrak is well worth its small price in taxpayer support, and over 40 years the public and Congress have agreed. That is worth something as an argument. That and the minor miracle -- especially when you're old enough to remember how bleak the outlook was in 1971 -- that you can still book space on a LD passenger train at all.
 
First things: always useful in arriving at the right perspective. And they ought to be especially easy for self-described rail fans to keep in mind.
  • Member since
    January 2001
  • From: Atlanta
  • 11,971 posts
Posted by oltmannd on Tuesday, November 5, 2013 6:40 AM

ACY

I guess these comments are mostly for CMStPnP and Schlimm ---

First, Schlimm, when you asked about how large numbers are served, I presume you meant on the Auto Train.  As I've tried to explain, the Auto Train carries two diners for the coach section at the south end of the train.  The extra seating is needed, but these meals can be prepared using one working kitchen.  At the north end, the sleeping car section (serving 6 sleepers) is adjacent to the sleeper lounge.  When passengers drop off their automobiles at the station, they choose when to eat: 1st, 2nd, or 3rd seating.  Seating in the coach section is adequate to serve whatever number of passengers can fit in the coaches.  Sometimes the count in the sleepers is over 180, which means seats in the adjacent lounge car will be needed.  In those cases, one additional server is assigned.  Blue Streak should like this, but sometimes it prompts complaints from people who either don't want to eat in the lounge "annex" or from people who are not eating dinner, but want access to the lounge seats. So, we can get everybody served in three seatings at 5:00, 7:00, and 9:00.  Everybody eats at their scheduled time, so there is no reason anybody should think of having a "two hour wait".

If we begin seating in the Sleeper diner precisely at 5:00, we can get everybody seated by about 5:00 - 5:10 or 5:15.  We have placed salads & bread on the tables in advance, so passengers can begin eating right away. Usually we can take all orders for drinks and entrees  by about 5:20 - 5:25.  If any passenger arrives late, this interrupts the work flow and slows things down.  The first meals start to come up from the kitchen around 5:30 - 5:35, and we try to collect the empty salad bowls by then.  All 60 meals are usually delivered by about 5:50.  If the lounge car is needed for seating, there may be 80 or so meals to prepare, so it may take longer.  As people finish their dinner, those dishes are cleared and desserts delivered.  People begin to finish around 6:15.  We try to start changing tablecloths and resetting the car by around 6:30.  New salads from the kitchen are sent up and we get them on the tables around 6:40.  Bread comes up around 6:55 and we put it on the tables just before the second dinner seating is announced.  These various tasks are interrupted frequently by the  need to put away clean dishes that come up from the dishwasher in the kitchen; clean up spills; refill salad dressing caddies; remove full trash bags; refill beverages; serve coffee/tea/decaf with dessert; respond to various requests from passengers; etc. etc. etc.  It is rare that a server can begin a task and complete it without an interruption.  The second and third seatings follow the same pattern.  There is no designated meal time for the crew.   We have our dinner whenever we have the chance.  At my age, if I don't get to eat fairly early I usually have a piece of bread & maybe a dessert because I can't sleep well on a full stomach. 

When I asked how much time we should take to seat seven dinner seatings in one Superliner diner, nobody volunteered a number.  Let's say it can be done in 90 min. per seating, which is very doubtful. Then the 7 seatings could be scheduled for 1:30, 3:00, 4:30; 6:00, 7:30, 9:00,  and 10:30, finishing at midnight.  Still not practical.

Schlimm says 2 hours is "indefensible" because Amtrak is "not the Ritz".  One of the reasons people take the train is that they don't want to be rushed.  They also like the pleasant ambience.  Maybe we're not the Ritz, but none of our passengers wants us to become an assembly line either, and that's the logical conclusion to what you're suggesting. 

CMStPnP:  Was there really an onboard services chief on your train?  I'm surprised because in the year 2001 all chief positions were abolished nationwide except for those on A-T.  There are a few "step-on/step-off" supervisors at various locations, but very rarely do they stay with the train for any significant distance/time. 

Also, you say "Your (sic) expecting way too much of an Amtrak onboard service employee to make the decision to open both sides of the dining car to service the train faster.  Instead they would rather....."    Frankly, it doesn't matter what the o.b.s. staff would rather.  Management makes that decision --- not o.b.s.

As for staffing on the Capitol Limited's diner, they used to have a staff of seven:  Three in the kitchen and four upstairs.  That has been reduced to two and three respectively.

And CMStPnP,  it's possible that some o.b.s. employees are not so good as they could be, but your general, sweeping indictment of "untrained, incompetent staff" is just a plain, flat-out insult & doesn't deserve further comment.  But I am glad to see that you've finally realized we use convection ovens.

Refer to General Longstreet's comment.  It's still mathematical after all.

Tom

 

Tom-

Really enjoy reading your posts from the "inside"!  Rode the AT a couple years ago.  Service was very good from start to end!

-Don (Random stuff, mostly about trains - what else? http://blerfblog.blogspot.com/

  • Member since
    June 2002
  • 20,096 posts
Posted by daveklepper on Tuesday, November 5, 2013 6:35 AM

ACY:   I also greatly appreciate your participation in this forum.  To answer, to refer to a supervisor as obese has nothing to do with her performance as a supervisor, just as commenting that she or he has movie star looks has nothing to do with the performance.   Mentioning that a person is too fat to have someone forced to sit next to her/him is an entirely different matter because it affects the capacity of the dining car, it relates to function and is not intended as an insult.  I think a general policy of trying to keep insults to a minimum is a wise one, both between ouselves and when referring to passengers or train crew or supervision or management or law enforcement or anyone else.

But I do think the Acela approach is the most applicable for most Amtrak long distance trains.  I'd start with the Lake Shore LImited and the California Zephyr.  There are sure to be exceptions, and obviously the Autotrain is one.

  • Member since
    June 2009
  • From: Dallas, TX
  • 6,952 posts
Posted by CMStPnP on Tuesday, November 5, 2013 1:22 AM

Interesting and I knew I would provoke that reaction.

It's OK for a Amtrak employee to refer to paying passengers as too fat for a table in a dining car but if you turn around and point out the same is true of a large percentage of the on board service staff and they have troubles performing because of it...........it's insulting and has nothing to do with the discussion.     Do airline attendants have similar issues with body weight and job performance?

It's a fair point, IMO.

As for the perspective that Amtrak can't change because that's just the way things are.     Not a unique perspective, it's one held by a great many rail fans as well.     Not sure how that helps Amtrak improve or set the bar higher though.     I think if we want to see Amtrak survive, we need to embrace change vs resisting it.     Some of it may be radical change.    Some might be minor changes.     Change has to happen though.

  • Member since
    August 2013
  • 3,006 posts
Posted by ACY Tom on Monday, November 4, 2013 10:27 PM

Thanks, matthewsaggie.  wave if you see us going by.

Tom

  • Member since
    August 2006
  • From: Matthews NC
  • 363 posts
Posted by matthewsaggie on Monday, November 4, 2013 6:28 PM

Tom/ACY,

I have really appreciated your comments and explanations. Please stick with us, despite some folks poor comments.  I don't post often, but I wanted to thank you for your time. As a NC Train Host on the Carolinian, I see and work with a lot of crews and other then one or two folks, they are all hard working and care about the passengers comfort and safety. 

  • Member since
    August 2013
  • 3,006 posts
Posted by ACY Tom on Monday, November 4, 2013 4:01 PM

Oops!  To clarify, the first spelling of "obese" was "obeese".  I made the mistake of spelling it correctly with my "sic" note.

  • Member since
    August 2013
  • 3,006 posts
Posted by ACY Tom on Monday, November 4, 2013 3:57 PM

All:

This is getting awfully tedious, so I think I'll limit my future participation in this particular discussion.  I'm not necessarily going to drop out of it, but I feel like I'm repeatedly clarifying issues that I'd previously clarified.  Frankly, it's getting on my nerves.  I work with this stuff every day, and I'd rather keep it out of my hobby.

Schlimm, it's still math.  Start your first seating at 5:00.  Schedule the other four seatings at 45 minute intervals.  Theoretically, the last seating begins at 8:00.  This presumes a Superliner diner with 60 people in each seating.  If there is any real cooking done, or any real service given, or any attention given to F.D.A. regulations, or any attention given to passengers with special dietary needs, or any spills to clean up, then it will likely take longer.   When a passenger orders, there is no time to wait for him to hesitate before choosing whether to have the beef or the chicken. You have also neglected to allow for cleanup time between seatings.  You say the passenger is "spending 45 minutes eating". He's not going to spend 45 minutes eating if these other things have to be done.  And I seriously doubt you can do it anyway, if only because the diner has a good chance of running out of water before you're done.  And no state health department will allow a restaurant to operate if it has no water.  The F.D.A. most certainly won't.  I'm curious to know how many people you think would be required to run this mythical diner (to where?  Oz?).

Operations on other trains, including non-daily excursion trains and operations in other countries,  have been cited to refute what I say.  Apples & oranges. The operations on my own train (yes, we A-T people feel very possessive & proud of it)  are not necessarily applicable to other situations, and I've said that more than once, I think.

Most responders have been reasonably courteous, and I've tried to be courteous and respectful even when I've disagreed with someone.  However, I never got into this thing with the intention of being insulted, and a few people have crossed that line.  When someone says  something like "All Amtrak employees...." or "Most onboard service personnel......", they are talking about me, and I resent some of those grossly overgeneralized comments.  Examples?

Nov 3, 9:14 am  Sleeper attendant characterized "he was so obese (sic)........"  A gratuitous insult, and it had nothing to do with food service,

Nov. 3, 9:14 am  "The chef (if you can call him that)"

Nov. 3, 9:37 am   "untrained, incompetent staff"

Nov. 3, 11:39 am   "Majority of Amtrak employees just do not care and are there only for the paycheck."  I might ask why you go to work, and if you do it for free.

Nov. 3, 12:35 pm  Unidentified supervisor was "some obese lady."  Call her a supervisor, or even a chief if you want to, but calling her obese is gratuitous and insulting and clearly a device to cast her in an unfavorable light. Her physical characteristics are irrelevant to the issues we've been discussing.  If I spoke that way of a passenger, I'd be lucky to avoid firing, and I know a situation where someone was actually fired for precisely that infraction. I guess you, as a passenger, think you can get away with it.  Maybe you can as a passenger on the train, but not here.  But least you spelled it right this time.

I'm tired & have things to do.  Besides, I have to go to work tomorrow.  I won't be going in order to loaf.

Tom

  • Member since
    July 2006
  • 9,610 posts
Posted by schlimm on Monday, November 4, 2013 1:36 PM

So there seems to be a range of seating durations in practice, from 1-2 hours.   If the train needs to serve 300 patrons in a 60 seat dining car, there are 5 seatings needed.

At the risk of sounding like the AT&T guy on TV, "which is better? Eating dinner for a leisurely 2 hours, either being seated at 2:00pm or waiting to be seated to as late as 10 pm;  OR  spending 45 minutes eating and being seated sometime between 5:00 pm and 8:00 pm?"

C&NW, CA&E, MILW, CGW and IC fan

  • Member since
    January 2001
  • From: Atlanta
  • 11,971 posts
Posted by oltmannd on Monday, November 4, 2013 8:38 AM

Dixie Flyer
I guess it is not surprising what a active topic this as been.  I think it shows we as a group care and want things continue to improve.

+1

-Don (Random stuff, mostly about trains - what else? http://blerfblog.blogspot.com/

  • Member since
    July 2006
  • 40 posts
Posted by Dixie Flyer on Monday, November 4, 2013 8:23 AM

I guess it is not surprising what a active topic this as been.  I think it shows we as a group care and want things continue to improve.

On the California Z to Denver there was 2 attendants and the head attendant upstairs and whatever below preparing the food.  They servied one half the diner at 5:30, the other at 6PM and rotated back and forth.  So they tooks and hour to get you in and out and gear up for the next group.

I guess I am form the group that eats in 10=20 minutes and home and considers 40minutes a long time.  When you have had little kids an hour would see llike an eternity.

Lot of interesting comments. 

 

  • Member since
    August 2013
  • 3,006 posts
Posted by ACY Tom on Sunday, November 3, 2013 12:33 PM

CMStPnP:

Yep, we'll have to agree to disagree.  We have NEVER kept "passengers prisoner of the Dining Car for 2+ hours."  It's the crew that's kept captive.  ("That's a joke, Son"  ---Foghorn Leghorn)

And Sam1, thanx for your comments.

Tom 

  • Member since
    April 2003
  • 305,205 posts
Posted by Anonymous on Sunday, November 3, 2013 11:40 AM

ACY,

I have enjoyed your contributions to the forums.  Your views are expressed very well.  Your command of the written word is excellent.    

  • Member since
    June 2009
  • From: Dallas, TX
  • 6,952 posts
Posted by CMStPnP on Sunday, November 3, 2013 11:35 AM

ACY

CMStPnP:

I have no objection to your last two postings.  There are probably bad apples out there and I won't defend them.  When I worked the sleepers, I found that a lot of passengers didn't want to be bothered by frequent fawning over them.. My approach was to be sure they knew where the Attendant Call button was located, and to be visible and as available as possible.

Tom

Well first if it wasn't an onboard services chief it was some obese lady that was wondering the train with a radio set that was not the Conductor, so whatever her title was, she announced when Dinner was in the Diner.......she was not part of the Dining Car Staff.      She also stopped to answer our porter call even though our Sleeping Car attendant was nowhere to be found......so she had something to do with overall train operation.

As for the Dining Car.   We'll have to agree to disagree.    I really think your misreading Amtrak Passengers if you think they want to remain prisoners of the Dining Car for 2+ hours    It's not true on the Rocky Mountaineer and they pay a lot more for that service than Amtrak.     I would venture to guess it is not true on the Alaska Railroad either.     I agree with schlimm, if you used all the seats in the Dining Car and turned it better...........Dining Car loss would be a lot less than it is now.      Same with upselling menu items.    Of course the Amtrak menu needs to be revamped as well to have more upscale menu offerings including better entrees and wine offerings.      Most mid level to fine restaurants do have a polite way of encouraging non-spending clients to move on so that they can turn the table.    I don't think there is anything wrong with that approach and when it is done right it does not impact repeat business.

  • Member since
    August 2013
  • 3,006 posts
Posted by ACY Tom on Sunday, November 3, 2013 11:15 AM

CMStPnP:

I have no objection to your last two postings.  There are probably bad apples out there and I won't defend them.  When I worked the sleepers, I found that a lot of passengers didn't want to be bothered by frequent fawning over them.. My approach was to be sure they knew where the Attendant Call button was located, and to be visible and as available as possible.

Tom

  • Member since
    August 2013
  • 3,006 posts
Posted by ACY Tom on Sunday, November 3, 2013 11:08 AM

I guess these comments are mostly for CMStPnP and Schlimm ---

First, Schlimm, when you asked about how large numbers are served, I presume you meant on the Auto Train.  As I've tried to explain, the Auto Train carries two diners for the coach section at the south end of the train.  The extra seating is needed, but these meals can be prepared using one working kitchen.  At the north end, the sleeping car section (serving 6 sleepers) is adjacent to the sleeper lounge.  When passengers drop off their automobiles at the station, they choose when to eat: 1st, 2nd, or 3rd seating.  Seating in the coach section is adequate to serve whatever number of passengers can fit in the coaches.  Sometimes the count in the sleepers is over 180, which means seats in the adjacent lounge car will be needed.  In those cases, one additional server is assigned.  Blue Streak should like this, but sometimes it prompts complaints from people who either don't want to eat in the lounge "annex" or from people who are not eating dinner, but want access to the lounge seats. So, we can get everybody served in three seatings at 5:00, 7:00, and 9:00.  Everybody eats at their scheduled time, so there is no reason anybody should think of having a "two hour wait".

If we begin seating in the Sleeper diner precisely at 5:00, we can get everybody seated by about 5:00 - 5:10 or 5:15.  We have placed salads & bread on the tables in advance, so passengers can begin eating right away. Usually we can take all orders for drinks and entrees  by about 5:20 - 5:25.  If any passenger arrives late, this interrupts the work flow and slows things down.  The first meals start to come up from the kitchen around 5:30 - 5:35, and we try to collect the empty salad bowls by then.  All 60 meals are usually delivered by about 5:50.  If the lounge car is needed for seating, there may be 80 or so meals to prepare, so it may take longer.  As people finish their dinner, those dishes are cleared and desserts delivered.  People begin to finish around 6:15.  We try to start changing tablecloths and resetting the car by around 6:30.  New salads from the kitchen are sent up and we get them on the tables around 6:40.  Bread comes up around 6:55 and we put it on the tables just before the second dinner seating is announced.  These various tasks are interrupted frequently by the  need to put away clean dishes that come up from the dishwasher in the kitchen; clean up spills; refill salad dressing caddies; remove full trash bags; refill beverages; serve coffee/tea/decaf with dessert; respond to various requests from passengers; etc. etc. etc.  It is rare that a server can begin a task and complete it without an interruption.  The second and third seatings follow the same pattern.  There is no designated meal time for the crew.   We have our dinner whenever we have the chance.  At my age, if I don't get to eat fairly early I usually have a piece of bread & maybe a dessert because I can't sleep well on a full stomach. 

When I asked how much time we should take to seat seven dinner seatings in one Superliner diner, nobody volunteered a number.  Let's say it can be done in 90 min. per seating, which is very doubtful. Then the 7 seatings could be scheduled for 1:30, 3:00, 4:30; 6:00, 7:30, 9:00,  and 10:30, finishing at midnight.  Still not practical.

Schlimm says 2 hours is "indefensible" because Amtrak is "not the Ritz".  One of the reasons people take the train is that they don't want to be rushed.  They also like the pleasant ambience.  Maybe we're not the Ritz, but none of our passengers wants us to become an assembly line either, and that's the logical conclusion to what you're suggesting. 

CMStPnP:  Was there really an onboard services chief on your train?  I'm surprised because in the year 2001 all chief positions were abolished nationwide except for those on A-T.  There are a few "step-on/step-off" supervisors at various locations, but very rarely do they stay with the train for any significant distance/time. 

Also, you say "Your (sic) expecting way too much of an Amtrak onboard service employee to make the decision to open both sides of the dining car to service the train faster.  Instead they would rather....."    Frankly, it doesn't matter what the o.b.s. staff would rather.  Management makes that decision --- not o.b.s.

As for staffing on the Capitol Limited's diner, they used to have a staff of seven:  Three in the kitchen and four upstairs.  That has been reduced to two and three respectively.

And CMStPnP,  it's possible that some o.b.s. employees are not so good as they could be, but your general, sweeping indictment of "untrained, incompetent staff" is just a plain, flat-out insult & doesn't deserve further comment.  But I am glad to see that you've finally realized we use convection ovens.

Refer to General Longstreet's comment.  It's still mathematical after all.

Tom

 

  • Member since
    June 2009
  • From: Dallas, TX
  • 6,952 posts
Posted by CMStPnP on Sunday, November 3, 2013 11:04 AM

One more comment on this topic.     While it is true you can write Amtrak office of consumer affairs, Amtrak also has a LD Passenger Train advocate you can talk to via Email, I believe they have a group of them.    These are Amtrak Passengers that ride LD trains 1-2 times a year or more that meet regularly with Senior Amtrak Management on issues raised.     They also have passenger advocates for short distance trains.

In my view, using the passenger advocate method is a faster way to get items in front of Amtrak Senior management than is the Office of Consumer Affairs.     Passenger Advocate's email is on the Amtrak website somewhere.

  • Member since
    June 2009
  • From: Dallas, TX
  • 6,952 posts
Posted by CMStPnP on Sunday, November 3, 2013 10:39 AM

I believe one of the proposals to improve Food Service before the Amtrak board is to incent onboard Amtrak employees to sell the Dining Car Service.      It will be interesting to see how that is implemented because in my experience that is one of the problems.     The servers make no attempt to upsell or even sell what is on the menu, they just do not want to be bothered with the Dining Car clients and as a whole could care less about the success or failure of Amtrak itself.........it's sad..

I've seen a lot of posts on here speaking favorably of Amtrak Dining Car service.     Yes you will look at it more favorably if you only ride a LD train maybe once every five years or less.     I ride once maybe twice a year and I am pretty irritated at the lack of service and I don't care attitude I run into.     I get better service and attitude when I fly first class (650,000 air miles on American and counting).      No reason why Amtrak cannot approach those levels of service since American employees are unionized as well and their food prep area is a whole lot smaller on a plane encountering turbulence.      Really not a Union vs Non-Union issue outside of the Commissaries, IMHO.      Majority of Amtrak employees just do not care and are there only for the paycheck.

Now my opinion on Sleeping Car attendants is more positive, I have found poor attitudes in the Sleeping Car service area more an exception than the rule.    Which offers a small glimmer of hope for Amtraks future.    One complaint i have on the Sleeping Car attendants is they need to stop by and check on the passengers every so often instead of the "I am in this compartment, come and get me if you want me to do something" approach.     Really?    Why aren't you answering the porter call button when it is pushed?

So more training is needed in the Service area on Amtrak First Class I think.

  • Member since
    July 2006
  • 9,610 posts
Posted by schlimm on Sunday, November 3, 2013 8:37 AM

CMStPnP

It's between 1 and 1.25 hours on the Rocky Mountaineer per seating.    Why so fast?    The servers are faster delivering the food to the table because they have an incentive to do so.

None of the passengers on the Rocky Mountaineer complained about being rushed that I observed.

My recent trip in September on the Capitol Limited it took an ungodly 2 hours and 20 min from sit down to finish the meal.     Part of the problem is Amtrak charges for beverages and the pay the bill process easily eats up an extra 20 min per table with the Servers moving in slow motion.     Regardless, I limited my trips to the Diner precisely because it  took so long.    I'd rather pay for my meal in the Cafe and get it faster and so I did.     I had both adjoining Deluxe Bedrooms on the train for my party of three.    On the trip to DC the Sleeping Car Attendant had troubles sliding the partition open he was so obeese.    I assisted him.    Still we all felt sorry for the amount of effort he put forwards we did not want to put him through that the next day and face his leaving the train on a stretcher.     So even though Amtrak Reservations did a great job with the adjoining bedrooms in both directions  we didn't slide the partition open again.     BTW, the sleeping car attendant had to go get a crowbar to close the partition for the night which I thought was rather humorous.    I think the lesson there is Amtrak shop forces have to fix those partitions so they slide easier in and out or Amtrak needs to quit selling it as a feature..  

Anyways back to the crappy Dining Car Service.    The other two in my party do not travel as much as I do and so arguably their standards and expectations are slightly lower in the area of service and food quality.     However, they too complained about the highly screwed up Dining Car Operation and remarked it seemed like even though Amtrak employees had made the trip before that they appeared to be still learning on the job in the Dining Car.     When we first entered the Dining Car for Diner we were scolded by the Servers for having the gaul to want to be served Dinner during their "break" time.    My take from that is they did not hear the announcement by the onboard services chief for passengers to head to the Diner for the first seating.     They never apologized for bitching at us.     Instead the first 10-15 min of the meal we got attitude (very sad).    Later they turned friendly and one of my later walks through the Dining Car they asked me why I was not eating there.    I told them the truth which they didn't seem to want to hear.

I told my fellow passengers the reason for the rudeness.   Part of their mistake was sitting down and trying to take initiative with the Amtrak ordering system (on which the server scolded them).     I said on any government run service you have to wait for the instructions first any initiative taking is a punishable offense, especially in an Amtrak Diner.    I learned that first in Army Basic Training and it seems Amtraks Opertaion and attitudes towards it's customers  is similar.

Seriously, I hope they purchase an at table point of sale system like Chili's experimented with not too long ago.    Let the passengers enter their order, have it go right to the Chef (if you can call him that) and pay their bill at the table without Amtrak personell intervention.      It would speed things up (we can only hope) and probably result in less errors being made.    They also need to cut employment in the Dining Car, they have too much staff as it is on the 50/50 cars on the Capital Limited (50% Diner and 50% Cafe).     Most of the time the two extra people were just in the way.  

No way to run a dining service.  The problem is not government: DB Bord-restaurant cars serve pretty good food quickly. .  The problem is an out-of-date system populated by untrained, incompetent staff.  if Chili's et al can 'train" servers in one day to take orders, why can't Amtrak?  It isn't rocket science.   And the kitchen is basically a place where prepared food is cooked/heated/reheated in convection ovens, etc.  These examples are exactly why the food service needs to be out-sourced to folks experienced in food service.

C&NW, CA&E, MILW, CGW and IC fan

  • Member since
    June 2009
  • From: Dallas, TX
  • 6,952 posts
Posted by CMStPnP on Sunday, November 3, 2013 8:18 AM

blue streak 1
TOM:  Maybe if there is a large crowd for a seating at least 1/2 of the lounge car adjaecent to the kitchen side on single level trains could be used for seating.  On superliner trains 1/2  the adjaecent lounge car could be used ?  Maybe seat coach passengers in the lounge car ? Smell of food in lounge car might get some riders in other 1/2 of car to get a meal ?

blue streak 1
TOM:  Maybe if there is a large crowd for a seating at least 1/2 of the lounge car adjaecent to the kitchen side on single level trains could be used for seating.  On superliner trains 1/2  the adjaecent lounge car could be used ?  Maybe seat coach passengers in the lounge car ? Smell of food in lounge car might get some riders in other 1/2 of car to get a meal ?

Your expecting way too much of an Amtrak onboard service employee to make the decision to open both sides of the dining car to service the train faster.    Instead they would rather keep just half open and let a portion of the train go hungry or redirect them to the Cafe Car.     There was the demand for Dining Car service on the Capital but most of them went to the Cafe Car (including myself) for faster service.    Even though I had sleeping car vouchers I would rather pay for faster service then sit around for an hour watching the Keystone Cops version of how to run a railroad dining car.

  • Member since
    June 2009
  • From: Dallas, TX
  • 6,952 posts
Posted by CMStPnP on Sunday, November 3, 2013 8:14 AM

It's between 1 and 1.25 hours on the Rocky Mountaineer per seating.    Why so fast?    The servers are faster delivering the food to the table because they have an incentive to do so.

None of the passengers on the Rocky Mountaineer complained about being rushed that I observed.

My recent trip in September on the Capitol Limited it took an ungodly 2 hours and 20 min from sit down to finish the meal.     Part of the problem is Amtrak charges for beverages and the pay the bill process easily eats up an extra 20 min per table with the Servers moving in slow motion.     Regardless, I limited my trips to the Diner precisely because it  took so long.    I'd rather pay for my meal in the Cafe and get it faster and so I did.     I had both adjoining Deluxe Bedrooms on the train for my party of three.    On the trip to DC the Sleeping Car Attendant had troubles sliding the partition open he was so obeese.    I assisted him.    Still we all felt sorry for the amount of effort he put forwards we did not want to put him through that the next day and face his leaving the train on a stretcher.     So even though Amtrak Reservations did a great job with the adjoining bedrooms in both directions  we didn't slide the partition open again.     BTW, the sleeping car attendant had to go get a crowbar to close the partition for the night which I thought was rather humorous.    I think the lesson there is Amtrak shop forces have to fix those partitions so they slide easier in and out or Amtrak needs to quit selling it as a feature..  

Anyways back to the crappy Dining Car Service.    The other two in my party do not travel as much as I do and so arguably their standards and expectations are slightly lower in the area of service and food quality.     However, they too complained about the highly screwed up Dining Car Operation and remarked it seemed like even though Amtrak employees had made the trip before that they appeared to be still learning on the job in the Dining Car.     When we first entered the Dining Car for Diner we were scolded by the Servers for having the gaul to want to be served Dinner during their "break" time.    My take from that is they did not hear the announcement by the onboard services chief for passengers to head to the Diner for the first seating.     They never apologized for bitching at us.     Instead the first 10-15 min of the meal we got attitude (very sad).    Later they turned friendly and one of my later walks through the Dining Car they asked me why I was not eating there.    I told them the truth which they didn't seem to want to hear.

I told my fellow passengers the reason for the rudeness.   Part of their mistake was sitting down and trying to take initiative with the Amtrak ordering system (on which the server scolded them).     I said on any government run service you have to wait for the instructions first any initiative taking is a punishable offense, especially in an Amtrak Diner.    I learned that first in Army Basic Training and it seems Amtraks Opertaion and attitudes towards it's customers  is similar.

Seriously, I hope they purchase an at table point of sale system like Chili's experimented with not too long ago.    Let the passengers enter their order, have it go right to the Chef (if you can call him that) and pay their bill at the table without Amtrak personell intervention.      It would speed things up (we can only hope) and probably result in less errors being made.    They also need to cut employment in the Dining Car, they have too much staff as it is on the 50/50 cars on the Capital Limited (50% Diner and 50% Cafe).     Most of the time the two extra people were just in the way.  

  • Member since
    July 2006
  • 9,610 posts
Posted by schlimm on Sunday, November 3, 2013 7:27 AM

Tom:  You say 2 hours per seating so patrons do not feel rushed.  But if your capacity is 60 and you have 300 passengers, that is 5 seatings.  So are you teliing me that dinner is served at 2, 4, 6, 8 and 10 pm starting times?

C&NW, CA&E, MILW, CGW and IC fan

  • Member since
    December 2007
  • From: Georgia USA SW of Atlanta
  • 11,919 posts
Posted by blue streak 1 on Sunday, November 3, 2013 7:22 AM

ACY

OK Schlimm, how much time do you suggest?

Tom

TOM:  Maybe if there is a large crowd for a seating at least 1/2 of the lounge car adjaecent to the kitchen side on single level trains could be used for seating.  On superliner trains 1/2  the adjaecent lounge car could be used ?  Maybe seat coach passengers in the lounge car ? Smell of food in lounge car might get some riders in other 1/2 of car to get a meal ?
 
  • Member since
    July 2006
  • 9,610 posts
Posted by schlimm on Sunday, November 3, 2013 7:02 AM

ACY

OK Schlimm, how much time do you suggest?

Tom

I do not know, but pretty obviously that would be an unacceptably long wait for many patrons.  I wonder if henry6 or Dave Klepper can recall how it was on trains like the

Broadway or 20th Century back in the 1950-60s?   I remember eating in the dining car on the CZ and El Cap in the 1960's and I do not think it was "two hour seatings" then.

C&NW, CA&E, MILW, CGW and IC fan

Join our Community!

Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.

Search the Community

Newsletter Sign-Up

By signing up you may also receive occasional reader surveys and special offers from Trains magazine.Please view our privacy policy