Smoking on the Empire Builder

Shop deals on ebay
Advertise with us
shop deals on amazon
Amtrak Unlimited Discussion Forum

Help Support Amtrak Unlimited Discussion Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Status
Not open for further replies.
Meat Puppet

Meat Puppet

Lead Service Attendant
Joined
Apr 14, 2009
Messages
342
I was on the EB yesterday and there was a gentleman in the lower bedroom who used a hoveround/jazzy type wheelchair. He was allowed to smoke on the train during smoke stops near the exit doors. And when we had a unscheduled 60 minute delay he was allowed to smoke downstairs in the vestibule with the lower window open. Is this the norm for wheelchair passengers? You sould smell smoke in the whole car becuase of this.
 
Meat Puppet said:
I was on the EB yesterday and there was a gentleman in the lower bedroom who used a hoveround/jazzy type wheelchair. He was allowed to smoke on the train during smoke stops near the exit doors. And when we had a unscheduled 60 minute delay he was allowed to smoke downstairs in the vestibule with the lower window open. Is this the norm for wheelchair passengers? You sould smell smoke in the whole car becuase of this.
Click to expand...
The ADA has provisions for the disabled to receive "resonable accomodations", which are waivers or modifications of policies and/or procedures linked to the handicap at issue. I am guesing that the someone at Amtrak operations or the conductor concluded that this request for a waiver of smoking regulations met the criteria for a waiver because of mobility considerations. I don't know whether or not I agree with the decision. If they had declined they could have faced a legal complaint, justified or not. Anyone else seen this type of arrangement?
 
They could have used the wheelchair ramp at longer smoke stops so he could smoke without fouling the air inside the train. Some SCA's don't want to bother with the ramp, but it is there for them to use. They do have to use it to board and unboard PAX in wheelchairs though.
 
Being disabled shouldn't give him the right to contaminate the whole car with fumes from his obnoxious drug habit. There is no medical need or benefit to consuming and exhaling poisonous smoke and thus no expectation of being accommodated.
 
Texas Sunset said:
Being disabled shouldn't give him the right to contaminate the whole car with fumes from his obnoxious drug habit. There is no medical need or benefit to consuming and exhaling poisonous smoke and thus no expectation of being accommodated.
Click to expand...
I agree, however it is possible that the SCA just didn't want to have to deal with the man, especially if he was going to get obnoxious or rowdy and file a complaint (Not saying the complaint would go anywhere).
 
jdcnosse said:
I agree, however it is possible that the SCA just didn't want to have to deal with the man, especially if he was going to get obnoxious or rowdy and file a complaint (Not saying the complaint would go anywhere).
Click to expand...
I've never seen anything like this before so I'm assuming it's pretty rare. To the best of my knowledge it is not within the SCA's job description or abilities to allow passengers to smoke on-board the train. If I was on a train where this was allowed any and all staff members involved in placating the smoker would be the subject of verbal and written complaints to their supervisors and managers. There's just no excuse for it. But, again, I've never seen anything like this during my travels. In fact the only thing I have seen are staff members reminding passengers not to try it and threatening them with forced removal from the train if they do.
 
Texas Sunset said:
jdcnosse said:
I agree, however it is possible that the SCA just didn't want to have to deal with the man, especially if he was going to get obnoxious or rowdy and file a complaint (Not saying the complaint would go anywhere).
Click to expand...
I've never seen anything like this before so I'm assuming it's pretty rare. To the best of my knowledge it is not within the SCA's job description or abilities to allow passengers to smoke on-board the train. If I was on a train where this was allowed any and all staff members involved in placating the smoker would be the subject of verbal and written complaints to their supervisors and managers. There's just no excuse for it. But, again, I've never seen anything like this during my travels. In fact the only thing I have seen are staff members reminding passengers not to try it and threatening them with forced removal from the train if they do.
Click to expand...
Sorry, what I meant was that the disabled passenger could have tried to use the ADA in his/her efforts to get the SCA to allow them to smoke onboard. I know some people, they just don't feel like having to deal with problems like that.

That being said, I highly doubt that you could ever use smoking cigarettes as an "excuse" and that because you're disabled you're allowed to do it, and if it was anyone else, then yes I would have immediately made a complaint to their superivsors/managers.
 
I can see it now, if smoking cigarettes onboard under the guise of ADA is okay, the next will be pot. (Other than the fact that Amtrak falls under Federal and not state regulations)

"But I have a PRESCRIPTION to smoke a joint, as it eases my pain." :mellow:
 
I am sure glad that I was not on that train. I have heard stories that SCA's and coach attendants "look the other way" when passengers smoke downstairs on trains that are running late and smoking stops are missed. I was on a train last year and the conductor announced at the smoking stops that passengers should move far enough from the train so that the smoke does not come back inside. I very much appreciated that announcement.
 
The Davy Crockett said:
I can see it now, if smoking cigarettes onboard under the guise of ADA is okay, the next will be pot. (Other than the fact that Amtrak falls under Federal and not state regulations)

"But I have a PRESCRIPTION to smoke a joint, as it eases my pain." :mellow:
Click to expand...
since it falls under federal regulations, wouldn't it be illegal to have any kind on board?
 
jdcnosse said:
Texas Sunset said:
jdcnosse said:
I agree, however it is possible that the SCA just didn't want to have to deal with the man, especially if he was going to get obnoxious or rowdy and file a complaint (Not saying the complaint would go anywhere).
Click to expand...
I've never seen anything like this before so I'm assuming it's pretty rare. To the best of my knowledge it is not within the SCA's job description or abilities to allow passengers to smoke on-board the train. If I was on a train where this was allowed any and all staff members involved in placating the smoker would be the subject of verbal and written complaints to their supervisors and managers. There's just no excuse for it. But, again, I've never seen anything like this during my travels. In fact the only thing I have seen are staff members reminding passengers not to try it and threatening them with forced removal from the train if they do.
Click to expand...
Sorry, what I meant was that the disabled passenger could have tried to use the ADA in his/her efforts to get the SCA to allow them to smoke onboard. I know some people, they just don't feel like having to deal with problems like that.

That being said, I highly doubt that you could ever use smoking cigarettes as an "excuse" and that because you're disabled you're allowed to do it, and if it was anyone else, then yes I would have immediately made a complaint to their superivsors/managers.
Click to expand...
Wouldn't a genuinely reasonable accomodation be to provide the passenger nicotine gum instead of smoking out the car?
 
SMOKING AND THE AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT: I don't believe the Act requires accommodation of the smoking habit. When the policy is no smoking at all, and they will remove you from the train if you do, then no one should be allowed an exception. Sure, I have smoking friends, several relatives used to smoke, etc., and I am sympathetic to their addiction, but my wife has bad respiratory reactions to secondhand smoke....such that we never go out on the platform for "fresh" air during our train trips...and getting on or off the train at our origination/destination causes her problems due to the smoky air from the "smoke breaks."

How about this: if a disabled smoker is allowed to smoke on the train and it causes another passenger a serious problem such as a fatal asthma attack, Amtrak could be liable.

This situation needs to be called to the attention of customer relations.
 
jdcnosse said:
The Davy Crockett said:
I can see it now, if smoking cigarettes onboard under the guise of ADA is okay, the next will be pot. (Other than the fact that Amtrak falls under Federal and not state regulations)

"But I have a PRESCRIPTION to smoke a joint, as it eases my pain." :mellow:
Click to expand...
since it falls under federal regulations, wouldn't it be illegal to have any kind on board?
Click to expand...
That is true. Smoking marijuana would be illegal under Federal law, where I believe it is listed as a 'controlled and dangerous substance.' Meanwhile many states have legalized 'medical marijuana' and allow people to use it for certain prescribed reasons - including pain relief. Therefore someone who is disabled and has chronic pain may be entitled to 'smoke dope' under state law, even though it is still illegal under Federal law. Conversely, I don't believe tobacco has any standing as medically beneficial at either the Federal or state level.

Ever since the Constitution became the basis of law in the United States there has always been a certain amount of 'grey area' about where Federal law ends and state law begins. People being people, folks tend to decide where this line lies depending on what is in their own interests, even if the law is actually fairly clear about what is what.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Depending on various circumstances and conditions, I could perhaps see him being allowed to smoke from the open doorway since in part that could be considered part of the reasonable consideration that ADA would require for equal treatment.

However, the fact that the train was delayed by an hour in no way would allow for the total violation of allowing him to smoke at the window. I'm sure that no other passenger was given that consideration and therefore allowing him to do so cannot be considered equal treatment.
 
Amtrak George said:
SMOKING AND THE AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT: I don't believe the Act requires accommodation of the smoking habit. When the policy is no smoking at all, and they will remove you from the train if you do, then no one should be allowed an exception. Sure, I have smoking friends, several relatives used to smoke, etc., and I am sympathetic to their addiction, but my wife has bad respiratory reactions to secondhand smoke....such that we never go out on the platform for "fresh" air during our train trips...and getting on or off the train at our origination/destination causes her problems due to the smoky air from the "smoke breaks."

How about this: if a disabled smoker is allowed to smoke on the train and it causes another passenger a serious problem such as a fatal asthma attack, Amtrak could be liable.

This situation needs to be called to the attention of customer relations.
Click to expand...
Your are 100% right. There needs to be a definitive policy set by Amtrak at all levels as to whether a disability is a reason under ADA for place and distance of smoking regulations to be violated. I hope that the answer is no. If the answer is otherwise we need to live with it.
 
The idea that Amtrak would somehow be avoiding confrontation by putting the desires of a single disabled drug addict above the needs of everyone else in the car doesn't make sense to me, ADA or not. I don't see anyone claiming the ADA allows them to smoke on a plane or bus, so why would it allow them to smoke on a train? It's quite clear that smoking on board is against Amtrak's rules and that the rules are intended to be applied equally to everyone. Smoking tobacco is not a medically necessary process. It's a self-inflicted addiction that serves no other purpose. If this happened on a train (or plane or bus) I was on I'd take plenty of pictures and video of the smoker and the enabling staff member(s) and the company that allowed it would be hearing plenty from me.
 
The Davy Crockett said:
jdcnosse said:
The Davy Crockett said:
I can see it now, if smoking cigarettes onboard under the guise of ADA is okay, the next will be pot. (Other than the fact that Amtrak falls under Federal and not state regulations)

"But I have a PRESCRIPTION to smoke a joint, as it eases my pain." :mellow:
Click to expand...
since it falls under federal regulations, wouldn't it be illegal to have any kind on board?
Click to expand...
That is true. Smoking marijuana would be illegal under Federal law, where I believe it is listed as a 'controlled and dangerous substance.' Meanwhile many states have legalized 'medical marijuana' and allow people to use it for certain prescribed reasons - including pain relief. Therefore someone who is disabled and has chronic pain may be entitled to 'smoke dope' under state law, even though it is still illegal under Federal law. Conversely, I don't believe tobacco has any standing as medically beneficial at either the Federal or state level.

Ever since the Constitution became the basis of law in the United States there has always been a certain amount of 'grey area' about where Federal law ends and state law begins. People being people, folks tend to decide where this line lies depending on what is in their own interests, even if the law is actually fairly clear about what is what.
Click to expand...
I would think the easiest way to deal with that is that where ever they boarded from, if that state allows medical marijuana then the person should have all the necessary paperwork on themselves. Now I'd they boarded somewhere that doesn't have that, then it should be illegal right away (or I'd they don't have that paperwork). I believe here in Michigan there is a card that you have to carry with you at all times if you're eligible for such prescription.
 
There IS a definitive policy regarding this: Smoking is not allowed on board any train except the AutoTrain, in keeping with Federal law! And the ADA does NOT allow people to violate such laws, regardless of their disability. I know: I am both (a) a former municipal ADA compliance inspector for a very large California city and (b) I work in onboard services for Amtrak. PLEASE report any such events to Amtrak at 1-800-USA-RAIL. In fact, recently, a longtime conductor out of Albuquerque was fired because her A/C (not even herself!) allowed someone to smoke on the train because of a detour which meant the train would be going 15 hours without a stop.
 
MEDICAL MARIJUANA ON AMTRAK: Here is some free legal advice for all you Amtrak passengers: don't bring your marijuana (even if you have a prescription). Amtrak is involved in interstate commerce so the feds have jurisdiction, and believe me, there are federal drug laws. Also if you travel into a state that doesn't allow medical mary jane, they can prosecute you too!
 
Amtrak George said:
MEDICAL MARIJUANA ON AMTRAK: Here is some free legal advice for all you Amtrak passengers: don't bring your marijuana (even if you have a prescription). Amtrak is involved in interstate commerce so the feds have jurisdiction, and believe me, there are federal drug laws. Also if you travel into a state that doesn't allow medical mary jane, they can prosecute you too!
Click to expand...
Ya think?
 
In my travels, I've seen dogs & handlers board the train 3 different times & all 3 times they left with a Handcuffed passenger! Another time a dining car passenger was detrained in cuffs with his Mother still at the Dinning Car Table??????? :unsure:
 
Amtrak George said:
MEDICAL MARIJUANA ON AMTRAK: Here is some free legal advice for all you Amtrak passengers: don't bring your marijuana (even if you have a prescription). Amtrak is involved in interstate commerce so the feds have jurisdiction, and believe me, there are federal drug laws. Also if you travel into a state that doesn't allow medical mary jane, they can prosecute you too!
Click to expand...
I was on 14 once when a guy set off the smoke alarm in his sleeper, because he was smoking marijuana in the bathroom. The only reason he didn't get arrested and put off the train was because he was (suprise) traveling with his wife and two small children!! I didn't say anything like this to him, and not to give anyone any ideas, but he claimed he had a prescription because of pain: um, how about making cookies, or brownies, or some tea, where NO ONE ELSE will know??
 
The Davy Crockett said:
Amtrak George said:
MEDICAL MARIJUANA ON AMTRAK: Here is some free legal advice for all you Amtrak passengers: don't bring your marijuana (even if you have a prescription). Amtrak is involved in interstate commerce so the feds have jurisdiction, and believe me, there are federal drug laws. Also if you travel into a state that doesn't allow medical mary jane, they can prosecute you too!
Click to expand...
Ya think?
Click to expand...
+1

Oh wait. This isn't Google+ :p
 
How about this: if a disabled smoker is allowed to smoke on the train and it causes another passenger a serious problem such as a fatal asthma attack, Amtrak could be liable.
Click to expand...
It seems like we could have a conflict of disabilities. If a person has a mobility disability which makes it impossible for him to get off a train to indulge his tobacco (or even marijuana) habit, and lights up onboard, what happens if the smoke harms another person with a breathing disability?
 
DET63 said:
How about this: if a disabled smoker is allowed to smoke on the train and it causes another passenger a serious problem such as a fatal asthma attack, Amtrak could be liable.
Click to expand...
It seems like we could have a conflict of disabilities. If a person has a mobility disability which makes it impossible for him to get off a train to indulge his tobacco (or even marijuana) habit, and lights up onboard, what happens if the smoke harms another person with a breathing disability?
Click to expand...
No conflict here. People with mobility disabilities can get off the train, the accommodation should have been to set up the ramp, not to allow smoking onboard. If the stop is too short, then they don't get off, and neither does anyone else, because it isn't a smoke stop.

What the guy should have done is talk with the car attendant so he got alerts before smoke stops and be ready to get off (and back on) quickly, and tip the attendant for the alerting and timely ramp set-up.

Where there really is a conflict between two disabilities, they both have to be served, for instance by putting them in different cars.

As an aside, if I had asthma so bad that I might die, I'd carry medication with me. There is no way for Amtrak to guarantee that we won't travel through an area with pine trees, forest fire smoke, a smoky locomotive, or other allergens.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Latest posts

Back
Top