Jump to content

Help Support AmtrakTrains.com by donating using the link above or becoming a Supporting Member.


Any real effort to "restore" passenger train priority?

  • Please log in to reply
45 replies to this topic

#41 Devil's Advocate

Devil's Advocate


  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,003 posts
  • Gender:Male

Posted 19 June 2018 - 02:23 PM



Its time for Amtrak to up the payment to the railroads. Then Amtrak can dictate penalties for nonconforming performance… You get what you pay for, if Amtrak wants to be treated premium, they have to pay for it.[

How much is Amtrak paying now? How much more should they be forced to pay in the future? 


And please stop bringing up, "the government gave the railroads land grants two hundred years ago, the railroads owe the government" argument. Its embarrassing. Or, " the government did the railroads a favor taking over passenger service, so the railroads owe to the government to run trains on time", no.........no the freight railroads do not owe any favors to the government.

Part of the agreement of taking over passenger services was that host railroads were expected to give Amtrak priority over their own freight movements. This makes sense since passenger trains are generally permitted faster speeds and are expected to run tighter schedules than freight.  You can call that a "favor" if you want but that doesn't change the fundamental premise or expectation.  Which leaves me wondering, why should Amtrak be forced to pay a premium just to maintain the schedules upon which they and their freight hosts have already agreed?
This has nothing to with scheduling and everything to do with compensation. You get what you pay for and treated as such.

That doesn't actually answer any of my questions. How can you expect to win people over with vague deflections and tired cliches?  For someone who works in logistics this seems like some really low effort reasoning.

Edited by Devil's Advocate, 20 June 2018 - 02:53 AM.


#42 lordsigma


    Lead Service Attendant

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 159 posts

Posted 24 July 2018 - 10:15 AM


#43 jis



  • Gathering Team Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 22,526 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Space Coast, Florida, Area code 3-2-1
  • Interests:Trains, Planes and Travel

Posted 24 July 2018 - 10:33 AM

Report from Trains about the court ruling:



#44 railiner



  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 6,537 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Queens, NY
  • Interests:All public transportation....land, sea, and air

Posted 24 July 2018 - 12:09 PM

But it mentions that more appeals process is open to the railroads...this can drag on for who knows how long.... :rolleyes:

  • Thirdrail7 likes this

okay on the blue!

#45 Just-Thinking-51



  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,499 posts
  • Gender:Not Telling
  • Location:USA

Posted 24 July 2018 - 04:12 PM

I work in Logistics and UPS moves a lot of time sensitive ground and Three Day Air packages via container trains in the US. One example is a container train that goes from the UPS hub outside of Dallas to Chicago. An Amtrak train will sit in the hole for that UPS train to pass. BNSF will not delay that train. You get what you pay for, if Amtrak wants to be treated premium, they have to pay for it.

One wonders if UPS is paying correctly for there trains. It seem if a train is force in a sliding for another train. There is limited capacity on said rail line.

Of course UPS has more business available, multiple routes available, and multiple modes of transportation available. So they can bully the provider to give them solid service. If you dont run our train between Dallas to Chicago in this time frame, we will take away your LAX to Chicago business.

Dont forget the attacks on the US Postal Service. If they raise rates on Amazon then so can FedEx and UPS.

I do recall one railroad officer claim he made more money on one UPS container then he made from an Amtrak train.

This statement is completely bunk. Profit are available in moving freight but efficient is key. First and Last mile is not cheap. Leaves little for a intermodal provider. Was talk to a random BNSF guy about how to be more efficient with technology in trucks. My story is we already have automatic trucks it call intermodal. He complained on the cost of terminals. I explained the intermodal trucks work on a 250 mile range, out and back. Lack of terminal was holding it back. I work out of Liberal or Dodge City Kansas. No intermodal yard within 250 miles. Therefore no intermodal transportation.

So in recap I dont think UPS is paying for the capacity they are using. Its just them bullying themselves onto the railroad.

#46 Thirdrail7



  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,173 posts

Posted 25 July 2018 - 06:51 PM

But it mentions that more appeals process is open to the railroads...this can drag on for who knows how long.... :rolleyes:


Until the lawyers bankrupt one side or the other?

They say laughter is the best medicine. Obviously they never posted on AU.

0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users