Amtrak Food Service Lost $834 Million in 10 Years

[Ryan]

NNEPRA monitors the financial performance of the Downeaster Café very closely. In addition to receiving daily reports regarding sales, the monthly P&L statement provided by Epicurean [the food service contractor] details every transaction made for the Downeaster Café. We track labor cost, food purchases, spoilage, Business Class comps and many other line items. On a quarterly basis, we meet formally with Epicurean management to review operations, menus, and financial performance and have even established an incentive program if the financial and service goals of the Café are met.

While it would not work for all, the Downeaster Café model is one which I think other states could consider, particularly in light of the pending implementation of PRIIA 209 [the federal law that requires states to cover all the costs of state-supported service]. It is an opportunity for states to have input or even take responsibility for an element of the passenger rail business which has both financial and service related impacts.

NNEPRA considers the Downeaster Café to be a critical component of the Downeaster service and a success story. CSI [customer service index] scores for the Downeaster are consistently higher than the Amtrak overall average in categories of food quality, café personnel, and overall café experience. In FY12, Downeaster passengers rated their overall café experience 5% higher than other Amtrak services. I believe this is directly related to NNEPRA’s involvement in the service, Epicurean’s dedication to helping us achieve our goals, and Amtrak’s ongoing partnership and support. Together, we constantly strive to find ways to increase revenues, reduce expenses, and improve customer service. It’s our standard of excellence.

At least in Maine, public and private mix very well.

There still isn't any magic there. There's no reason that Amtrak management couldn't do this on their own.

Public/Private is a distraction. The distinction of importance is between organizations that do their job well and organizations that do their jobs poorly, and there are government and private concerns that fall into both categories.

 

[cirdan]

So what exactly would it mean to privatize the food service? That the staff serving it would also be on the payroll of a private company? If it's just that, I don't see what the fuss is about. But if they're going to be wearing the uniforms of a private company, that's a development I don't like. I also doubt a change like that would massively impact the balance sheet

The fuss would be about being on a different payroll which has its effects on individual pays and also on issues related to Unions retirement etc. Of course any cost savings is not going to magically materialize from nowhere. Someone will get paid less than they do now. One could argue that that is the way it should be, but those that stand the risk of getting paid less may tend to disagree. That is what the fuss usually is all about, regardless of whether what each is getting paid legitimately or otherwise, and the work environment that they enjoy or not, is right or not.

The problem is that there is no free lunch. If you pay people less, you hire a different quality of people. So service won't be as good. It is a bit optimistic to think nothing will change only it will cost less. Employees will also change more as they'll look for better opportunities, so you'll spend more time training newbies (which also costs money and time). The question thus is, (a) at what point are savings cancelled out by this inefficiency, and (b) in terms of lower quality service for a lower price, how good is good enough.

The thing is, you cannot split food and Amtrak totally. If people were unhappy with the food, that may put them off going by train again. On LD service the food is an important part of the overall service offering. Is it worth sacrificing that?

I know for one, given the choice, I'd rather pay more for my sleeper than see food service depreciate. Before Amtrak goes and does something stupid, I hope they try and understand their customers. How would they react?

 

[haolerider]

NNEPRA monitors the financial performance of the Downeaster Café very closely. In addition to receiving daily reports regarding sales, the monthly P&L statement provided by Epicurean [the food service contractor] details every transaction made for the Downeaster Café. We track labor cost, food purchases, spoilage, Business Class comps and many other line items. On a quarterly basis, we meet formally with Epicurean management to review operations, menus, and financial performance and have even established an incentive program if the financial and service goals of the Café are met.

While it would not work for all, the Downeaster Café model is one which I think other states could consider, particularly in light of the pending implementation of PRIIA 209 [the federal law that requires states to cover all the costs of state-supported service]. It is an opportunity for states to have input or even take responsibility for an element of the passenger rail business which has both financial and service related impacts.

NNEPRA considers the Downeaster Café to be a critical component of the Downeaster service and a success story. CSI [customer service index] scores for the Downeaster are consistently higher than the Amtrak overall average in categories of food quality, café personnel, and overall café experience. In FY12, Downeaster passengers rated their overall café experience 5% higher than other Amtrak services. I believe this is directly related to NNEPRA’s involvement in the service, Epicurean’s dedication to helping us achieve our goals, and Amtrak’s ongoing partnership and support. Together, we constantly strive to find ways to increase revenues, reduce expenses, and improve customer service. It’s our standard of excellence.

At least in Maine, public and private mix very well.

There still isn't any magic there. There's no reason that Amtrak management couldn't do this on their own.

Public/Private is a distraction. The distinction of importance is between organizations that do their job well and organizations that do their jobs poorly, and there are government and private concerns that fall into both categories.

I think there is a great deal of difference between a non-overnight train and long distance train food service. Do the employees go home after their shift or do they go back to a roomette and then reappear for the next days three meals? All the difference in the world, but this is really all about unions and that was clearly shown when Subway was introduced a few years ago. That certainly did not last long. If Congress demands a major change, the union will be in the center of the decision and if they are interested in their members well being a comprise may be possible, but I am not holding my breath!

 

[amtrakwolverine]

Before Amtrak goes and does something stupid, I hope they try and understand their customers. How would they react?

This is amtrak we are talking about. I think Amtrak needs to bring back david gunn.

 

[jis]

Before Amtrak goes and does something stupid, I hope they try and understand their customers. How would they react?

This is amtrak we are talking about. I think Amtrak needs to bring back david gunn.

Really? You like trains that keep shrinking in size over the years?, with Regionals down to 5 and 4 cars? OK.....

 

[cirdan]

At the end of the day it is the responsibility of your company's management to get the service they believe they need and are willing to pay for. I am sure the company outsourced to would be happy to provide additional service for additional money, which your management is unwilling to pay, and use the contract as just an excuse to try to deflect responsibility elsewhere. Afterall why should the service provider provide a service for free that was not part of the original contract, one that was entered into by the same management at your company to save money? Having been on both sides of such relationships, this appears to be a case of normal games that people play. Your company's management would appear to be the primary party at fault in this case, manifested in their inability to manage contracts to get the services that they actually need.

My argument exactly. Outsourcing, when too much emphasis is on saving costs and other aspects are ignored, is a catastrophe waiting to happen. And seeing the present debate is very much centered on costs (and not much else) that's where this seems to be heading.

 

[Ryan]

I think there is a great deal of difference between a non-overnight train and long distance train food service. Do the employees go home after their shift or do they go back to a roomette and then reappear for the next days three meals? All the difference in the world, but this is really all about unions and that was clearly shown when Subway was introduced a few years ago. That certainly did not last long. If Congress demands a major change, the union will be in the center of the decision and if they are interested in their members well being a comprise may be possible, but I am not holding my breath!

Excellent point, that was actually going to be my follow up to this question that has gone unanswered:

It goes back to my Waffle House analogy. There are plenty of people willing to work at Waffle House for $2.30/hr plus tips. If they paid a FAIR wage in the diner, they could reduce a tremendous amount of cost, AND hire more people, and fill 24 tables with REVENUE producing guests from Coach.

Could they? Does the kitchen and chef have the capacity to turn out that number of meals? Sure, you can bring back the assistant cook/dishwasher, but there are physical constraints that you run up against in a kitchen that fits in a railcar.

You might be able to find someone to work an 8 hour shift at the waffle house for that price, but good luck trying to find someone to work 0530-2200 in a moving train while spending a week at a time away from home.

 

[Anderson]

I know this has come up in my mind before, but is there some way that Amtrak could work things whereby on some of the eastern routes the diner staff wouldn't ride through? For example, with the Crescent you could detrain "Team A" at LYH or thereabouts and have "team B" cycle to/from somewhere north of Atlanta (perhaps CLT?). On the Silvers, doing so with RVR and perhaps SAV on the Meteor also comes to mind; Cleveland and Pittsburgh come to mind for the Cap as well.

 

[Trogdor]

I know this has come up in my mind before, but is there some way that Amtrak could work things whereby on some of the eastern routes the diner staff wouldn't ride through? For example, with the Crescent you could detrain "Team A" at LYH or thereabouts and have "team B" cycle to/from somewhere north of Atlanta (perhaps CLT?). On the Silvers, doing so with RVR and perhaps SAV on the Meteor also comes to mind; Cleveland and Pittsburgh come to mind for the Cap as well.

For one, I don't think that would actually save any staff, and might actually increase crewing costs.

Secondly, if a train is running late, then you might not have a dining car staff available to serve breakfast. Then what?

To add to that, the crews really wouldn't get much sleep, and they'd be groggy/cranky in the morning (some think that customer service is bad now, but wait until you have your Capitol Limited dining car crew wake up at 2 in the morning to transfer from the eastbound to the westbound; or have the crew on the other end get off at midnight in Pittsburgh and have to be back to the station by 5 am for the subsequent departure).

 

[Nathanael]

The purpose of this hearing was not to force Amtrak into profitable food and beverage operation. It was to determine the steps Amtrak has taken to implement recommendations made last year by the Amtrak office of the Inspector General (AOIG) to reduce waste and fraud in the food and beverage operation, and also to assess the impact of Amtrak food and beverage costs on state-supported services.

Well, in that case,

(1) Amtrak is implementing electronic point-of-sale tracking to prevent theft and fraud;

(2) the costs in state-supported services are none of Congress's business.

This hearing was the usual sham -- an excuse for a small group of Republicans to attack Amtrak.

 

[Nathanael]

Just curious - what did happen when they put in the vending machines?

(on the Sunset Limited, replacing the diner)

Massive ridership drop, bad reviews, vandalism...

PS This is only as a replacement for the AmCafe - the diner would stay as is.

Well, that might actually work....

This gets back to my basic principle of food service on trains:

The longer the trip takes, the better the food service people demand.

On long (measured in hours) routes, people start demanding food; the longer the route, the higher the quality of the food service they demand. So, the Downeaster is easy, people will tolerate minimal food. On the Texas Eagle, people will demand a well-stocked full service diner.

Food service on trains, just as it is on planes, has always been a loss leader. If you want to cut food service costs, make the trains faster and people will demand less food.

So the entire food service cost thing is a sideshow. Make the trains faster!

 

[cirdan]

Maybe this is a bit of a red herring, but ...

I've noticed when I've travelled on Greyhound that there is never any form of food on the actual bus. But on longer journeys the bus will stop by some place where people can get off and get food.

I understand that in the early days, before dining cars were invented, that trains did that too.

It would of course wreck schedules. There would be a risk of people getting lost or wandering off and missing the train. If a train was running late, people would just have to wait as there would be no means of stopping elsewhere. Service-wise it would be a big step backwards, and thus I don't recommend trying it.

But on the other hand it would relieve Amtrak of having to stock and run the restaurant car. More different types of menus could be available. The train would contribute to the local economy and that could actually translate into more support for Amtrak. What do you think?

 

[VentureForth]

So many issues here...

- If you pay people less, then you get a lower quality worker? I'll tell you, I would much rather spend my money on service provided by some Waffle House staff than Amtrak staff that gets paid WAY more. You pay someone TOO much, and they feel entitled to their job, they'll NEVER leave, and they will never be incentivized to provide excellent service. It's why some of those International flight attendants, who, back in the Pan-Am days were fresh, polished, and extraordinarily helpful, are now replaced with flight attendants who have 30 years of seniority and want to kick you're behind if you ask for an extra milk.

- I'm sure a Waffle House server would be HAPPY to work 0530 - 2200 with at least 6 hours of break in between and a night or two of hotel stay at the end of their journey, meals paid. And they'd keep their $2.30 plus tip wage.

- Republicans have every right in the world to challenge waste.

- Trains used to stop. Those were the Harvey Houses of fame out in the West. They are no longer because they proved to be less efficient.

- You can increase service AND increase revenue, but it deals with messing with "The Formula". No one messes with "The Formula".

 

[amamba]

It's appalling to me that people are advocating paying train servers $2.30/ hr plus tips. That is not a living wage, folks. Taking good jobs and replacing them with low paying jobs is not the answer.

 

[jis]

- Trains used to stop. Those were the Harvey Houses of fame out in the West. They are no longer because they proved to be less efficient.

Meanwhile the airlines have quite successfully transition to said "inefficient" model.

The problem with LD trains in the US is that they are too few per day and too far between to sustain a chain of food establishment set up only to serve trains. Places where there is sufficient traffic the model works just fine. For example most LD passengers in India actually do eat at stations and trains do have timed stops at station, except for only the most elite prestigious ones which have on board food at your seat service, which itself is many cases served from en route stops by ordering ahead.

 

[Ryan]

- If you pay people less, then you get a lower quality worker? I'll tell you, I would much rather spend my money on service provided by some Waffle House staff than Amtrak staff that gets paid WAY more. You pay someone TOO much, and they feel entitled to their job, they'll NEVER leave, and they will never be incentivized to provide excellent service. It's why some of those International flight attendants, who, back in the Pan-Am days were fresh, polished, and extraordinarily helpful, are now replaced with flight attendants who have 30 years of seniority and want to kick you're behind if you ask for an extra milk.

You might be able to prove correlation on that one (although I doubt it), but good luck proving causation.

 

[Ispolkom]

- Trains used to stop. Those were the Harvey Houses of fame out in the West. They are no longer because they proved to be less efficient.

No. Dining cars were introduced because travelers preferred them. Railroads generally preferred meal stops because they made use of the network of beaneries every western railroad had already built for the use of their shift workers. "Dining Car to the Pacific" is a good source for understanding the nuances of this issue.

Amtrak could certainly cut back on its dining cars and use premade meals loaded at intermediate destinations. This could be a great innovation (example: the dinner on #28) or a terrible idea (example: the breakfast on #27). It might be difficult, though, to find appropriate vendors for some meals on some of the western trains, given the tiny size and remoteness of the communities they got through.

 

[rrdude]

One way to fit more people in the diner is to add a extra cook and server but we know amtrak can't do that thanks to congress and rep mica. Those 2 are the reason the dining car is the way it is but they are too stupid to see that then they whine cause amtrak looses money on food. But one thing they can do is crack down on lazy LSA who turn people away cause they rather text their BF or GF while on the job.

I've noticed that on the LD Superliners there are actually tables on both sides of the central service area/stairs, but they only seat people on one side, and then call them to the meal in shifts. Why don't they seat both sides? I guess because that would require more serving staff so its more efficient to serve in shifts. No issue with that. But why then do they have these extra tables? That space could be put to a different use, maybe one generating more revenue?

Amtrak's official policy for seating is a "staggered seating" for meals where reservations are taken, such as dinner and lunch on some trains. Each server is supposed to work no more than 4 tables or 16 people, however on busy trains most servers will work 5 tables with 20 people.

Now imagine you call in 15 tables or 60 people all at once for dinner. For dinner the server starts at table number one and gets salads and bread and takes beverage orders, delivers that to the table and then proceeds to take the rest of that tables order. If on average that takes five minutes then by the time that server is done with the fourth table and ready to move on to the fifth table, those people have now been sitting there for twenty or twenty-five minutes and they are usually not very happy about it.

It makes absolutely no sense at all to fill up the every table in the diner all at once for dinner. Yet, passengers walk in all the time and ask why is only 1/2 the tables being used. They don't understand and sometimes they even think the dining car crew is just being lazy and not seating as many people as they could. If they came back in 15 or 30 minutes, depending upon the interval used, they would then see every table in use.

As a dining car LSA I always used a 15 minute seating interval for dinner and would seat only two tables per server per reservation time. This gives each server two tables and eight passengers and then fifteen minutes later they get two more tables and eight more passengers to serve. It's extremely efficient. Generally for dinner my seating times would be 5:00, 5:15, 6:45 & 7:00 and 8:30 & 8:45. That gives each seating 1:30 to be done and gives the servers 15 minutes to clean up and re-set for the next seating. Every LSA does it a little bit different. Most use a 30 minutes seating interval but I always thought that was too much time and your servers are then just standing around waiting for the next seating. I think 15 minutes is perfect.

While stating the obvious, I believe it deserves repeating: The diners were designed to handle seating on both ends, without the staggered-seating scenario. HOWEVER, funding cuts eliminated STAFF in the diners, both upstairs and in the kitchen down below. Now, unfortunately, the best solution IS staggered-seating, for the reasons outlined above.

It's not right, it's seems to many pax the staff is "taking the easy route", but in essence, unless-and-until Amtrak can get more staff in the diners, it's the best option.........which kinda sux.

 

[rrdude]

It's way past time to consider private vendors for food and sleeping car service.

If doing so would allow continued offerings of these areas and supply Amtrak with a little operational revenue while minimizing the exposure..I'm all for it.

I'm a believer in passenger rail, but not the way the last 10 years or even 30 years have been done.

Of course, in this forum, one generally gets slammed for proposing anything that involves private enterprise or reduction in the government subsidy....There is no doubt that passenger rail requires some form of subsidy...BUT, if you want it to thrive....we need the ageing yuppies/generation X'rs to embrace the concept. They are not going to do so at the current level of relatively poor service and almost inedible cuisine. You can blame it on "cutbacks" all you want. That isn't going to change.

Time to push for a change on how the business is run. Hybridize the system...let Amtrak be in charge of pulling the train and basic transportation (coaches, and maybe a 1/2 slumbercoach arrangement) and let private enterprise take over the remainder....food/sleepers.

I vote for the Coast Starlight to be the first to be changed over.

Flame away...

Not flaming, just some hard facts, and opinions. "All things being equal" (and they never are) privatizing only the food service and sleeper portions of rail operations probably wouldn't result in any savings at all. No matter WHO is employing the staff on board, Railroad Retirement and Railroad Union work rules (in some cases) are going to trump any staff savings. No private firm in the world is going to go into a contract without Amtrak (or the states, like Maine has done) subsidizing the loss or difference between F/S profits, and losses.

You want private competition? Then the INFRASTRUCTURE has to be public, and let the carriers bid on service. But, that's just not the way the rail industry is set up in the USA.........

 

[EB_OBS]

One way to fit more people in the diner is to add a extra cook and server but we know amtrak can't do that thanks to congress and rep mica. Those 2 are the reason the dining car is the way it is but they are too stupid to see that then they whine cause amtrak looses money on food. But one thing they can do is crack down on lazy LSA who turn people away cause they rather text their BF or GF while on the job.

I've noticed that on the LD Superliners there are actually tables on both sides of the central service area/stairs, but they only seat people on one side, and then call them to the meal in shifts. Why don't they seat both sides? I guess because that would require more serving staff so its more efficient to serve in shifts. No issue with that. But why then do they have these extra tables? That space could be put to a different use, maybe one generating more revenue?

Amtrak's official policy for seating is a "staggered seating" for meals where reservations are taken, such as dinner and lunch on some trains. Each server is supposed to work no more than 4 tables or 16 people, however on busy trains most servers will work 5 tables with 20 people.

Now imagine you call in 15 tables or 60 people all at once for dinner. For dinner the server starts at table number one and gets salads and bread and takes beverage orders, delivers that to the table and then proceeds to take the rest of that tables order. If on average that takes five minutes then by the time that server is done with the fourth table and ready to move on to the fifth table, those people have now been sitting there for twenty or twenty-five minutes and they are usually not very happy about it.

It makes absolutely no sense at all to fill up the every table in the diner all at once for dinner. Yet, passengers walk in all the time and ask why is only 1/2 the tables being used. They don't understand and sometimes they even think the dining car crew is just being lazy and not seating as many people as they could. If they came back in 15 or 30 minutes, depending upon the interval used, they would then see every table in use.

As a dining car LSA I always used a 15 minute seating interval for dinner and would seat only two tables per server per reservation time. This gives each server two tables and eight passengers and then fifteen minutes later they get two more tables and eight more passengers to serve. It's extremely efficient. Generally for dinner my seating times would be 5:00, 5:15, 6:45 & 7:00 and 8:30 & 8:45. That gives each seating 1:30 to be done and gives the servers 15 minutes to clean up and re-set for the next seating. Every LSA does it a little bit different. Most use a 30 minutes seating interval but I always thought that was too much time and your servers are then just standing around waiting for the next seating. I think 15 minutes is perfect.

While stating the obvious, I believe it deserves repeating: The diners were designed to handle seating on both ends, without the staggered-seating scenario. HOWEVER, funding cuts eliminated STAFF in the diners, both upstairs and in the kitchen down below. Now, unfortunately, the best solution IS staggered-seating, for the reasons outlined above.

It's not right, it's seems to many pax the staff is "taking the easy route", but in essence, unless-and-until Amtrak can get more staff in the diners, it's the best option.........which kinda sux.

Yeah, I've worked with a few people, who were around when the superliners were introduced. Originally there were six or seven waiters in the diners and they each only worked two tables. Obviously I wasn't there. I'm just repeating what some of my co-workers have told me.

 

[sldispatcher]

Not flaming, just some hard facts, and opinions. "All things being equal" (and they never are) privatizing only the food service and sleeper portions of rail operations probably wouldn't result in any savings at all. No matter WHO is employing the staff on board, Railroad Retirement and Railroad Union work rules (in some cases) are going to trump any staff savings. No private firm in the world is going to go into a contract without Amtrak (or the states, like Maine has done) subsidizing the loss or difference between F/S profits, and losses.

You want private competition? Then the INFRASTRUCTURE has to be public, and let the carriers bid on service. But, that's just not the way the rail industry is set up in the USA.........

Now you are hitting the sweet spot....and I've been waiting for multiple posts for someone to get to some of these points...

One part of privatizing part of the business is to allow a work around from the Railroad Retirement and Union work rules....

Someone has mentioned that Amtrak needs to fix it internally....I laugh..they've had decades to do it...

They are not set up to put the right fixes in place.

Look, let me give you an upper middle class perspective. You want Amtrak/Passenger Rail service more widely supported? Give the people who have disposable income something worth spending it on. People drop $500/night for a nice meal, B&B type service with great amenities. They drop $3000 grand per person to sit in a seat that lies flat..get convection oven meals..and only lasts a few hours...and isn't all that comfortable anyway (international business class).

Amtrak, in no way, shape or form is able to deliver that service. The Superliner Sleeping cars have too few bedrooms and they are simply not big enough. I get tired of the retread arguments over people saying this is not supposed to be a land cruise. They are EXACTLY right. BUT, if you don't provide something that people feel is worth the perceived value....and make no mistake....AMTRAK is just not there from an upper end standpoint....they will not purchase it or pursue it as an option.

I'm traveling through the UK right now and have been on the Transpeninne Express in first (forgettable) and ScotRail in first (that's more like it). Have the Eurostar, Thallys and East Coast Rail to go...and have paid for First/Premium in all..because I am going to get what I pay for...and paid for Business class over here...because I wanted to. That's not for bragging purposes....that's for backup to make my point...again.

AMTRAK, until it sheds responsibility for the dining/sleeping car arrangements and lets a private company..that knows hospitality/sleeping and handles food service to the level that people expect who are paying $600 or more a night for that privilege...then we will be STUCK in this quagmire of the last several decades.

Again, just my 2 cents.

 

[Trogdor]

AMTRAK, until it sheds responsibility for the dining/sleeping car arrangements and lets a private company..that knows hospitality/sleeping and handles food service to the level that people expect who are paying $600 or more a night for that privilege...then we will be STUCK in this quagmire of the last several decades.

There have actually been a couple of attempts at attaching private cars to the back of Amtrak trains and running a scheduled luxury service, using Amtrak as a means of transportation. They didn't make any money and had to shut down.

There's another company planning to give it a go, so we'll see how that works out.

That is, more or less, what you're suggesting here. Someone (not Amtrak) handles the service, while Amtrak handles the transportation. Maybe some day it will work, but it hasn't thus far.

 

[rrdude]

Yeah, I've worked with a few people, who were around when the superliners were introduced. Originally there were six or seven waiters in the diners and they each only worked two tables. Obviously I wasn't there. I'm just repeating what some of my co-workers have told me.

I was there, and worked those new cars, and let me tell you, we made a helluva a lot of money in tips, AND filled the diners and cranked out meals.

 

[Ryan]

Pretty sure you messed that quote up.

 

[pebbleworm]

One privatized option is the New Pullman service that will start in the fall. Definitely not cheap, but more affordable tha the late American Orient Express. There is a thread here:

http://discuss.amtraktrains.com/index.php?/topic/47684-the-new-pullman-sleeper-prices-are-now-posted/

A price list here:

http://www.travelpullman.com/media_files/IPH-005_SalesSheet1_FINAL_SR.pdf

And just for fun, here is an interesting take on the American Orient Express:

http://www.snagfilms.com/films/title/johnny_berlin

We'll see what happens.