"On the revenue side the train operates with 2-3 coaches and two sleepers."
But if the new Route Director position is not allowed to order new/additional revenue equipment can they really be accountable for the full profit and loss? They are not allowed to vary the most important variable in the transportation profitability question, operational scale.
Sam1 "The new route directors who are responsible for profit and loss, business planning, and decision-making for specific long-distance trains will report to him." Amtrak should reword this sentence. The new route directors, who are responsible for controlling the long distance train losses, will have any plans to make significant changes in the long distance trains thwarted by the 535 egotistical, independent contractors in the U.S. Congress. And the downstream decision makers that report to him or her will see their decisions fall into the same pit. After 40 years of racking up billions in losses, the long distance trains, which don't come close to covering their operating costs, let alone their fully allocated costs, are not likely to turn profitable. Or stop bleeding Amtrak dry!
"The new route directors who are responsible for profit and loss, business planning, and decision-making for specific long-distance trains will report to him."
Amtrak should reword this sentence. The new route directors, who are responsible for controlling the long distance train losses, will have any plans to make significant changes in the long distance trains thwarted by the 535 egotistical, independent contractors in the U.S. Congress. And the downstream decision makers that report to him or her will see their decisions fall into the same pit.
After 40 years of racking up billions in losses, the long distance trains, which don't come close to covering their operating costs, let alone their fully allocated costs, are not likely to turn profitable. Or stop bleeding Amtrak dry!
I would expect the P&L responsibility is relative to expectations set by historical norms. The goal would be "better".
-Don (Random stuff, mostly about trains - what else? http://blerfblog.blogspot.com/)
schlimm Dixie Flyer I think my observations of how the California Z was operated would bear some relavance to this discussion. The train runs with a baggage car that like it had twenty suitcases and one pallet of express in it. It had a transition car which served as the dorm (it had tables I guess for the crew to lounge in downstairs). While I have observed sleeper space sold in the dorm on the Southwest Limited I don't think this was the case on the CZ. It had a coach-baggage car. I have never observed the baggage section utilized on route and the door is too small to fit a pallet through. It had a full diner with a galley area in which probally half the space is not needed anymore since the meal are pre cooked anyway. Then it had the full lounge. My experience has been the tables downstairs is rarely used. On the revenue side the train operates with 2-3 coaches and two sleepers What I see is alot of wasted space being hauled back and forth accross the country. It seems this particular train could operate with 6 cars instead of 8 and provide the same services. This is not just a food issue but a baggage, express, dorm, diner,and lounge issue all interelated. You could have dorm space in the bottom of lounge or in unused kitchen space. Put the baggage in the coach-baggage car charge $1.50 to $2.00 a mile to anyone running an express car. As a long distance sleeper passenger I would be content to eat a mircrowave breakfast and lunch from a cafe sale if I would get a full meal for dinner. Riding trains in the east and south prior to Amtrak I was not used to coach attendants. I see no reason why part of their duties should be to help serve dinner. Therefore on the CZ if you were using a diner as a cafe-diner and dropped the lounge you would have a cafe attendant, a cook/assistant cafe attendant and three coach attendants help serve dinner. The cafe attendant would swipe the credit cards. Your eloquent description of the CZ is a fine example of what is wrong with how Amtrak is managed. To run the CZ with as many non-revenue cars (and such a large staff) as it had 50 years ago when it had more coaches and sleepers (4.5 sleepers and 3 coaches) seems typical. it is as Oltmann says. To run trains the way they do because "that's the way we always did" is the height of stagnant, inept management..
Dixie Flyer I think my observations of how the California Z was operated would bear some relavance to this discussion. The train runs with a baggage car that like it had twenty suitcases and one pallet of express in it. It had a transition car which served as the dorm (it had tables I guess for the crew to lounge in downstairs). While I have observed sleeper space sold in the dorm on the Southwest Limited I don't think this was the case on the CZ. It had a coach-baggage car. I have never observed the baggage section utilized on route and the door is too small to fit a pallet through. It had a full diner with a galley area in which probally half the space is not needed anymore since the meal are pre cooked anyway. Then it had the full lounge. My experience has been the tables downstairs is rarely used. On the revenue side the train operates with 2-3 coaches and two sleepers What I see is alot of wasted space being hauled back and forth accross the country. It seems this particular train could operate with 6 cars instead of 8 and provide the same services. This is not just a food issue but a baggage, express, dorm, diner,and lounge issue all interelated. You could have dorm space in the bottom of lounge or in unused kitchen space. Put the baggage in the coach-baggage car charge $1.50 to $2.00 a mile to anyone running an express car. As a long distance sleeper passenger I would be content to eat a mircrowave breakfast and lunch from a cafe sale if I would get a full meal for dinner. Riding trains in the east and south prior to Amtrak I was not used to coach attendants. I see no reason why part of their duties should be to help serve dinner. Therefore on the CZ if you were using a diner as a cafe-diner and dropped the lounge you would have a cafe attendant, a cook/assistant cafe attendant and three coach attendants help serve dinner. The cafe attendant would swipe the credit cards.
I think my observations of how the California Z was operated would bear some relavance to this discussion.
The train runs with a baggage car that like it had twenty suitcases and one pallet of express in it. It had a transition car which served as the dorm (it had tables I guess for the crew to lounge in downstairs). While I have observed sleeper space sold in the dorm on the Southwest Limited I don't think this was the case on the CZ. It had a coach-baggage car. I have never observed the baggage section utilized on route and the door is too small to fit a pallet through. It had a full diner with a galley area in which probally half the space is not needed anymore since the meal are pre cooked anyway. Then it had the full lounge. My experience has been the tables downstairs is rarely used. On the revenue side the train operates with 2-3 coaches and two sleepers
What I see is alot of wasted space being hauled back and forth accross the country. It seems this particular train could operate with 6 cars instead of 8 and provide the same services. This is not just a food issue but a baggage, express, dorm, diner,and lounge issue all interelated. You could have dorm space in the bottom of lounge or in unused kitchen space. Put the baggage in the coach-baggage car charge $1.50 to $2.00 a mile to anyone running an express car.
As a long distance sleeper passenger I would be content to eat a mircrowave breakfast and lunch from a cafe sale if I would get a full meal for dinner. Riding trains in the east and south prior to Amtrak I was not used to coach attendants. I see no reason why part of their duties should be to help serve dinner. Therefore on the CZ if you were using a diner as a cafe-diner and dropped the lounge you would have a cafe attendant, a cook/assistant cafe attendant and three coach attendants help serve dinner. The cafe attendant would swipe the credit cards.
Your eloquent description of the CZ is a fine example of what is wrong with how Amtrak is managed. To run the CZ with as many non-revenue cars (and such a large staff) as it had 50 years ago when it had more coaches and sleepers (4.5 sleepers and 3 coaches) seems typical. it is as Oltmann says. To run trains the way they do because "that's the way we always did" is the height of stagnant, inept management..
It'll be interesting to see if the new mgt structure for LD trains will have any impact on the status-quo. The guy in charge certainly has the responsibility and authority. What will he do with it?
From a recent news-blurb, the position will "...have accountability for safety, customer satisfaction, ridership, on-time performance, and financial results for the long-distance business line....will oversee the functions of the Transportation, Mechanical, and Engineering departments within a common business line for the 15 long-distance services. The new route directors who are responsible for profit and loss, business planning, and decision-making for specific long-distance trains will report to him."
CMStPnPActually, your incorrect here. It's Amtrak management responding/reacting to heavy criticism by Congress and a complete threatened subsidy reduction if Amtrak does not respond. This is the third threat in a series from Congress. Amtrak ignored the previous two because there was not any bite behind them. Then Amtrak comes back with this totally unacceptable schedule of a multi-year reduction in cost vs multi-month to satisfy the critics. I don't think it is Amtrak Management being responsible.
While I agree that it might be just another example of Amtrak responding only when poked in the ribs with a stick, this time seems different, as if Amtrak might actually be awake. They didn't try to explain away anything during the Mica circus - they pretty much just took the beating. Their response might just head off some of the micromanagement through legislation they've faced in the past. I hope so. I also hope they can move faster than they've promised and do more in other areas. Time will tell.
The turning point to me hinges on two occurrences. One is when Amtrak lost commuter contracts that Boardman really, really wanted to keep. That seems to have woken him up. The other is the attempt at looking forward and developing a plan for the NEC, without being asked to do it.
C&NW, CA&E, MILW, CGW and IC fan
LION, raising beef is an expensive proposition. Animals have to be fed. Crops require rain. Nah, not a good idea.
I just returned from a Kentucky to Denver round trip so I am a late one to get in on all these postings about food service and Long Distance trains.
My trains were largely on time and the food was good. I think the diner-cafe on the Cardinal is a good model of a much more efficient way to offer food service.
Again the Cardinal diner-cafe is a good starting point. The food preparation area in the center of the car allows the cafe and diner portions to share common space. I see no reason why the diner portion would not be available for lounge space except between 5PM and 9PM.
LION says: They can grow their own crops right there on the train, perhaps raise some beef too, that ought to keep the costs down, eh?
ROAR
The Route of the Broadway Lion The Largest Subway Layout in North Dakota.
Here there be cats. LIONS with CAMERAS
I agree, again, regarding efficiency
To a large extent, if you are looking the efficiency or productivity of labor for a dining service, what matters is how much staff serves how many patrons over what time period. It's the same as a stationary restaurant.
And if you are looking at efficiency or productivity of labor overall on a train, you should look at labor (number of workers or costs) for the total number of passengers riding over the time elapsed.
PASSENGER MILES IS AN EXCELLENT MEASURE FOR EFFICIENCY. IT IS NOT A PARTICULARLY JUST MEASURE IN MY OPINION FOR FAIRNESS FOR DISTRIBUTION OF SUBSIDIES. IN SOME CASES PER TRAVELER OR PER CITIZEN THAT USE THE SERVICE MIGHT JUST BE MORE JUST.
I THINK COUNTING NEEDED INVESTMENT COSTS, THE NE CORRIDOR IS JUST ABOUT AS SUBSIDIZED AS LONG DISTANCE TRAINS ARE SUBSIDIZED. EVEN MORE SUBSIDIZED THAN SAY THE CHI-MLW CORRIDOR!!! BUT BOTH SEEM ESSENTIAL TO MAKE THE ONLINE CITIIES WORK WELL.
PLEASE EXCUSE THE CAPS, TECHHICAL REASON
NKP guy So at long last this is what is all about. It's not about good food in LD dining cars or the alleged costs. It's about union-busting. "(U)nions to see the need to change." "(S)ee the world in a different light." The clear implication is that unions are the cause of dining car deficits, and that without the unions things would be fine (and those pesky dining cars would make a profit!). So let's be clear that dining car costs is simply a code term for union-busting. Ask yourself, what would they have to pay you to be a dining car attendant and really live that life for a career? And even if McDonald's got the franchise to operate a dining car or do food service, remember, they are close to having a union to contend with themselves. I like unions. They made it possible for me and my family to live a middle-class life for two generations. Do you know what I do with some of that money? I buy Amtrak tickets and enjoy eating in the diner.
So at long last this is what is all about. It's not about good food in LD dining cars or the alleged costs. It's about union-busting. "(U)nions to see the need to change." "(S)ee the world in a different light." The clear implication is that unions are the cause of dining car deficits, and that without the unions things would be fine (and those pesky dining cars would make a profit!).
So let's be clear that dining car costs is simply a code term for union-busting.
Ask yourself, what would they have to pay you to be a dining car attendant and really live that life for a career? And even if McDonald's got the franchise to operate a dining car or do food service, remember, they are close to having a union to contend with themselves.
I like unions. They made it possible for me and my family to live a middle-class life for two generations. Do you know what I do with some of that money? I buy Amtrak tickets and enjoy eating in the diner.
Good , so your volunteering to pay the taxpayer related costs letting the rest of us off the hook. Thank you. I'll tell you though, Union or non-Union the largest cost behind any food service operation is the labor. How flexible that labor is to change is the key to the issue is it worth the trouble to change or should we just get rid of it decision. When Amtrak split it's diner in two on the Capitol Limited between a Cafe car and a Dining Car................there was no correpsonding shift in staffing of the Dining car. In essence Amtrak kept it's costs the same but cut it's potential revenue source in half. How this increases effieciency or reduces costs is anyones guess.
Paul Milenkovic Don, this is what I find absolutely amazing. You come along, and you didn't propose some kind of dodgy "Amtrak reform", you merely linked to Amtrak drafting a plan to improve the management of onboard food service. This is something that Amtrak wants to do, apply modern management methods to their dining and cafe cars. And the kind folks who are participating in this forum have run this thread up to, what is it, 5 or 6 pages, arguing the merits of this? This isn't Congress mandating something, this isn't the Heritage Foundation with a crazy idea, this is Amtrak's management, out of their dedication to their jobs, wanting to make food service work better according to some metric, and this is controversial? People are arguing about this?
Don, this is what I find absolutely amazing.
You come along, and you didn't propose some kind of dodgy "Amtrak reform", you merely linked to Amtrak drafting a plan to improve the management of onboard food service. This is something that Amtrak wants to do, apply modern management methods to their dining and cafe cars.
And the kind folks who are participating in this forum have run this thread up to, what is it, 5 or 6 pages, arguing the merits of this?
This isn't Congress mandating something, this isn't the Heritage Foundation with a crazy idea, this is Amtrak's management, out of their dedication to their jobs, wanting to make food service work better according to some metric, and this is controversial? People are arguing about this?
Actually, your incorrect here. It's Amtrak management responding/reacting to heavy criticism by Congress and a complete threatened subsidy reduction if Amtrak does not respond. This is the third threat in a series from Congress. Amtrak ignored the previous two because there was not any bite behind them. Then Amtrak comes back with this totally unacceptable schedule of a multi-year reduction in cost vs multi-month to satisfy the critics. I don't think it is Amtrak Management being responsible.
Schlimm,
I am not a supporter of passenger trains except in NEC where they provide a reasonably competitive service and keep some people off the highways and out of airports.
Passenger miles is an appropriate metric for the comparison you are trying to make since taking 500 people 1300 miles is far more service than taking 117 each 50 miles. Of course I have skewed the mileage numbers to clarify the point. The truly important economic metric is revenue per employee day, but that is another story.
Mac
The trains lose money like a leaky barrel. These incomplete numbers along with sam1's show how unproductive the workers on the Texas Eagle are.....
Why miles? Has nothing to do with service except LD fans like to use it to obscure the losses per passenger served.
The figures you cite tell us nothing. Much better would be passenger miles per employee or even better revenue per employee.
So that works out to 28 to 35 crew for a train taking 32 hours for a 1305 mile run (40.8 mph average). It carries on average ~504 passengers per train run (August 2013). The Heartland Flyer, by contrast, has a crew of 4 per run and carries 117 per train run (Aug 2013). The figures tell the story.
Amtrak does not break out its labor costs by route, or if it does I have not been able to find them. However, a look at the staffing on the long distance trains provides a pretty good insight into the labor intensity of the long distance trains vs. corridor trains.
The Texas Eagle, which I ride within Texas 8 to 10 times per year, has a transition sleeper, three coaches, a dining car, a lounge car, and a sleeper.
The operating crew consists of an engineer, conductor, and trainman (person). The on-board service personnel consist of a coach attendant, who works the transition sleeper when necessary, a sleeping car attendant, a lounge car attendant, and three people in the dining car.
The Eagle operating crews change at least four times, perhaps five, between San Antonio and Chicago. In addition, the engineers change at Austin for the Austin to San Antonio portion of the trip.
Comparatively the Heartland Flyer, which consists of three coaches, one of which has a snack bar in the lower level, runs with an engineer, a conductor, a trainman, and a snack bar attendant.
The TRE trains, which are operated by Herzog, have an engineer and a conductor. Raises a question in my mind why the Texas Eagle needs a trainman in addition to the conductor.
NKP guy So at long last this is what is all about. It's not about good food in LD dining cars or the alleged costs. It's about union-busting. "(U)nions to see the need to change." "(S)ee the world in a different light." The clear implication is that unions are the cause of dining car deficits, and that without the unions things would be fine (and those pesky dining cars would make a profit!). So let's be clear that dining car costs is simply a code term for union-busting.
Nonsense. Amtrak is the least likely union-buster on the planet! The problem is, if you don't improve the bottom line of the LD trains to make them more palatable, there might be no LD train union jobs for anyone. Sure, the union employees will get their 5 year protection - or whatever, but then what? McDonalds? Wal-mart? Pep-Boys?
daveklepper Over a five year period it should be possible for Amtrak to adopt a Sky-Chefs (plus Wilton Caterers for pork-free and Kosher food) approach with redundant Union members relocated within the Amtrak organization, shifted to the caterers, or retired as a natural consequence of their age. The result should be food service on LD's equal to what is now provided on Acela. The time to start putting the program into operation should be NOW.
Over a five year period it should be possible for Amtrak to adopt a Sky-Chefs (plus Wilton Caterers for pork-free and Kosher food) approach with redundant Union members relocated within the Amtrak organization, shifted to the caterers, or retired as a natural consequence of their age. The result should be food service on LD's equal to what is now provided on Acela. The time to start putting the program into operation should be NOW.
Just do it! The sooner you start, the sooner you get done, no matter how long and drawn out the process. Something...anything!
Sam1In FY12 salaries, wages, and benefits accounted for 50.4 per cent of Amtrak's operating expenses and 70.7 per cent of its revenues.
I would love to see the numbers broken out for LD services and even better, route by route. My strong hunch is that the LD trains are far more labor-intensive than shorter day trains, state corridors, and the NEC, because of sleepers and diners, and thus have even worse numbers.
Contrary to NKP guy's rant, I for one am not anti-union. I am a union man myself, but I am strongly for greater productivity, which is a much broader concept than mere wages and unions. I also favor train services where people live to use them and trains running short enough distances fast enough to be competitive. 1000-2000 miles trains taking 24 to 50 hours just don't cut it in 2013 and frankly haven't since about 1960.
In FY12 salaries, wages, and benefits accounted for 50.4 per cent of Amtrak's operating expenses and 70.7 per cent of its revenues. No viable business can sustain these ratios.
Amtrak's unions are part of the problem. They need to be part of the solution. Their members need to be more productive and effective. They need to agree to changes. Almost everyone else in society has had to change. Unions should not be given a free pass.
Being more productive does not mean slashing wages and benefits. But it does mean changing work rules and, in some instances, eliminating marginally productive and unnecessary employees.
If Amtrak were privatized, labor would have to accept new conditions or be out of the game. It is that simple. And rants are not likely to change the outcomes. One of the reasons labor unions have declined is because they failed to grasp the need to change. They dug in their heels. We ain't going to cave into management was a long sung mantra. Bye! Intransigence is a strong motive for management to automate the jobs (may have happened anyway) and move activities to right to work states or overseas.
oltmannd samfp1943 If AMTRAK canniot make money providing food service to their'Captive Crowd" why not contract food service out to a company that has expertise in either an airline food service environment or to some company that has expertise in institutional food service environment? But then I would guess the 'Mountain to climb' there is various Union agreement and their comitment to the employees compensation fund ( retirements, etc) . It's also hard to admit to yourself you're not good at something you've been doing for a long time. Amtrak has all sorts of labor protection baked into their contracts (mgt had zero incentive not to do so), so I'd bet you're right that it's not a simple thing to contract out food service.
samfp1943 If AMTRAK canniot make money providing food service to their'Captive Crowd" why not contract food service out to a company that has expertise in either an airline food service environment or to some company that has expertise in institutional food service environment? But then I would guess the 'Mountain to climb' there is various Union agreement and their comitment to the employees compensation fund ( retirements, etc) .
It's also hard to admit to yourself you're not good at something you've been doing for a long time.
Amtrak has all sorts of labor protection baked into their contracts (mgt had zero incentive not to do so), so I'd bet you're right that it's not a simple thing to contract out food service.
If I remember correctly President Reagan stood down the air traffic controllers union. And got them to see the world in a different light. Perhaps if Amtrak's management had the same intestinal fortitude, they could get Amtrak's unions to see the need to change.
samfp1943At one point some time back there was a kerfuffle over some apparent employee theft from their food service revenues(?). NOw that seems NOT to be the problem.(?).
I think that is still part of the problem. They talk about automating the inventory and reporting system. That was the area that was allowing the cheating and stealing. But, they only talk about the positives such as freeing up employee time to be actively selling instead of counting and making sure that all items are properly stocked. It's probably good for morale to accentuate the positive rather than saying "it will make it hard for our employees to steal from us" in public.
dakotafred Go ahead, you East Coasters, Illini, Californians, Washingtonians, Oregonians, et al.: Scuttle the LD trains the rest of us ride, then see how much help our congressional reps give you with your systems, which also lose money. Most of your states are broke, as opposed to our states in flyover country; let's see how eager, or able, you are to steam your trains all by yourselves.
Go ahead, you East Coasters, Illini, Californians, Washingtonians, Oregonians, et al.:
Scuttle the LD trains the rest of us ride, then see how much help our congressional reps give you with your systems, which also lose money. Most of your states are broke, as opposed to our states in flyover country; let's see how eager, or able, you are to steam your trains all by yourselves.
How is trying to improve the performance of food service on the LD trains a ploy to discontinue them? I'm not connecting those dots. Help me out.
Dakguy201 dakotafred Go ahead, you East Coasters, Illini, Californians, Washingtonians, Oregonians, et al.: Scuttle the LD trains the rest of us ride, then see how much help our congressional reps give you with your systems, which also lose money. Most of your states are broke, as opposed to our states in flyover country; let's see how eager, or able, you are to steam your trains all by yourselves. Exactly -- there are 19 states between the Mississippi River and the West Coast tier. Discontinue the LD trains and you risk losing votes in the Senate. Combine those with the seven mid South and southern states that would lose service, and you are at more than half of the Senate. At that point who supplies the funds for new rail equipment, bridges and tunnels? It's more than just Amtrak as your rail transit systems by and large also do not generate sufficient funds to meet their capital needs. By our standards, you already are taxed heavily; are you prepared to raise income, sales and property taxes sufficiently to make up the shortfall? I suspect the folks at Amtrak can also count votes.
Exactly -- there are 19 states between the Mississippi River and the West Coast tier. Discontinue the LD trains and you risk losing votes in the Senate. Combine those with the seven mid South and southern states that would lose service, and you are at more than half of the Senate.
At that point who supplies the funds for new rail equipment, bridges and tunnels? It's more than just Amtrak as your rail transit systems by and large also do not generate sufficient funds to meet their capital needs. By our standards, you already are taxed heavily; are you prepared to raise income, sales and property taxes sufficiently to make up the shortfall?
I suspect the folks at Amtrak can also count votes.
Sure, the political reality of the LD trains and the economic reality of the LD trains are two entirely different animals - which is why they survive.
They are pork - which is the primary food group for Congress.
Their bottom line is awful.
They don't serve much economic purpose.
They don't serve much social purpose.
They aren't much of an engine of social justice.
Their capacity as transportation is tiny.
I would miss them if they go, so I'd really like Amtrak to make the most of the LD routes instead of just propagating the past as if they are some sort of rolling museum or homage to the "good old days".
I suspect counting votes is one thing Amtrak is good at. I don't blame them for their poor stewardship of their enterprise - it's not their fault - it's how they were raised.
But, sometimes you have to rise up from your poor upbringing!
Our community is FREE to join. To participate you must either login or register for an account.