Cross Country Cafe on the City

[harl222000]

To Amtrak Managers, and others.

I was asked to give my thoughts and ideas on the new cross country cafe. So keep in mind that these are my personal views on this, But I'm sure if you talked with some of the other employee's, you will find most have the same concerns as I do. While I think the idea and menu changes are very good, I believe the actual planning and execution for the new diner/lounge car was not done properly and still is not to this day even after being redesigned, I will talk about this more later. So here are some of my concerns and a few ideas that will hopefully be considered and looked into are at the very least talked about.

First the positives of the new Cross Country Cafe.

-Nice menu selection.

I feel we have a very good selection of food items now, with some changes needed.

-Good food item pricing.

With the lower pricing more customers are eating from the coach cars, and that's good. After all, our goal is to sell more.

-Nice looking new diner/lounge car.

The new cars are nice looking, but they are not practical for what they are design to do.

This will be explained in the negatives.

Now the negatives of the new Cross Country Cafe.

-New Diner/lounge car not big enough.

With this diner/lounge car, we do not have enough room for the customers to come in and enjoy there dinner or appetizers and snacks, and no room for overflow passengers. Case in point- we've had customers come in from the coach car and order over $40 worth of food and did not have room for them to sit in the Cross country cafe. Now I ask you, who wants to pay that much or more for food and have to go back to their seat and eat? And this happens more often then you might think. Also our overflow passengers use to be able to sit in the sightseeing lounge car when no other seats were available, but now there is nowhere for them to go if the Cross country cafe is being used.

-Too many items downstairs for one person to handle safely by themselves, when the passenger counts are high.

The Chef has to run from the freezers back to the grill and ovens, over 25 feet, almost constantly in order to get the appetizer's and main dishes out. And then in the middle of the meal period while preparing entree's, the chef has to start running to the freezer to get ice cream for deserts. This takes a toll on the chef and to me is a safety issue. Sooner or later someone is going to hurt themselves running back and forth like this. I myself have been having trouble with my knee since this new diner started.

-Not enough help in diner/lounge car.

When we are busy, and with just one Lead service attendant (LSA) serving, I sometimes have food setting on the elevator for longer periods of time then it should, and this causes the food to cool down some. Because the dining car LSA is busy giving service to other customers, they cannot at times get to the food fast enough. I myself want to give the customers the best service and the hottest and freshest food possible, but we can't always do that with this setup. And customer service suffers because of having just one LSA trying to do everything in the diner during these busy meal periods.

-Too hard to get extra help when needed.

This should be a no brainier, even when the passenger counts call for it, it's like pulling hens teeth to get help on our trains when needed. There is always a shortage on the extra board, or at least that's what we hear. But in order for us to do our part in trying to make this new car work in a safe and efficiency manner, we sometimes need help. And it should not be so hard getting it. And not just an SA, as this does nothing for the Chef , it needs to be both, Waiter (SA) and Chef Assistant (formerly Food Specialist). Help is really needed.

To expand on this extra help point for a second. During the first month are so when these cars first started running, we had On board Managers riding with us to see how this would work. During this time every manager that rode with us had to help out either in the dining car, lounge or kitchen at some point of the trip. So it was clear from the very beginning that help was needed with this new car set up. Even the on board managers said that help was needed and that they would state that fact in their report at the end of the trip. But nothing happened, no help. What happened to the reports? Did they really report this? Something does not add up here. I think this needs to be looked into further.

I know there are slow trips and it's really not a problem at these times. But the thing is, the passenger count can change anytime. Like coming back from Chicago our passenger counts can go up to where we need help but no one is available. Also since there is only one elevator in the new diner car now, if it breaks, (and it happens frequently) we have to carry the trays of food up the steps. Having an extra person to help would be a blessing when something like this happens. Even if we had a permanent Memphis turn job put into service, this would help the crews out tremendously.

At this time I would like to talk about a few things that I think should have been done from the beginning. Not to hurt anyone’s feelings but to me the training class that we had for this new diner/lounge was nothing short of a glorified pep rally. I've been in the food service industrial for over 24 years and whenever you make a change as big as this, there should have been hands on training with everyone actually doing their jobs as to the new car procedure. This way everyone would have known what and how to do their part.

I get the feeling that this was not fully thought out and that the On board service crew (OBS) was put out here in order to find a way to make this new car work. Now the problem with this is you have all the crews doing something different. And because no one in management wants to be accountable for anything, as I see it. No one seems to have the backbone to make a decision, document that decision, and then stand by that decision. We get new rules and procedures all the time but nothing in writing. You know it's very easy to say, Oh I don't recall telling you that, but not so easy to do when it's documented.

So we have one crew doing things one way and another crew doing things another way. So later if it is said that we are doing something wrong, we have no recourse, no one we can hold accountable. We need procedures in writing. We need to know in writing what each of our jobs consists of with this new cross country cafe car. And no blanket statements such as just do the best you can. That's not enough. Because it seems these days the OBS crews are the only ones being held accountable for anything. We need accountable from management too, on what is being said to us about how to do our jobs. Give it to us in writing!

I always get the gut feeling that something under handed is being pulled on us (OBS) from talks I sometimes have with upper management. Especially with something new like this Cross country cafe. And I'm hearing things now that, if it's true, proves this point once again. Such as when this car started out it was said there would be no more debits, that Amtrak was going to run this like a restaurant would run. And this was a big selling point at the training meeting. But now I hear that the debits or coming back. So was this done under handed just to get the new car running and all the while knowing that the debits was coming back? Is this how Amtrak gain trust in their employee's?

This brings up another case in point about trust, back when the Food Specialist job was abolished. It was said that we would not be doing items on the grill, no steaks, and a lot of other things would be cut out because just one person was in the kitchen, to reduce the work load. Well guys guess what, we now do more items then before, the steaks are back and we have a larger menu than before, but still just one person in the Kitchen, no Food Specialist. Everything slowly worked it's way back, except the help. Do you think this was an underhanded deal? I feel it was! And it's things like this, that make the employee's have a natural distrust for what is say to us. I'm sure you can see why.

Now in our safety meetings, management talks about the Customer service index (CSI) scores. To be 100% truthful I do not worry myself with this number, and I know a lot of others who don't ether. I just do the best job I can while trying to work as safe as I can. How does Amtrak expect us (OBS) to raise our CSI scores when the company itself is making it harder for us (OBS) to give good service to our customers. By having us do more and more work with less help which directly affects the level of service that we can give to our customers. And the thing is most of us (OBS) want and tries to give excellent service but you guys are making it impossible for us to do.

I would like to talk a little here about staffing on our train. Ok, hypothetically for a moment, let’s say we have a derailment or other accident on the train. And let’s say the sleeping car attended has a lower level handicap person on board. How is he/she suppose to assist the passengers off the train if he/she has two sleepers to take care of? This goes for the Coach Attendant also, with two and sometimes three coach cars to attend too. There would be no way possible for our passengers to get the help needed in this hypothetical situation. And there in lies a huge safety issue to me. Has anyone even thought of this situation? And what would we do? At least with one attendant per car the passengers would have a better chance of getting help. Not to mention better service.

For a quick comparison, lets just look at the staffing crew from the time I was hired to now. Which is just over four (4) years? Then we had in the dinning car, an LSA, Chef, Food Specialist, SA #1, SA#2 and sometimes a second Food Specialist to help out when numbers were high. Now we have a Chef, and two LSA's and keep in mind that one of the LSA's in the dinning car now, use to be in the Lounge car. From a five man crew to three and the third person is from the other lounge car. And the only different is we don't use real china anymore. Now how can we be expected to give A+ customer service with a staff reduction like that?

Also, we had one coach attendant per coach car, now we have one attendant per two sometimes three coach cars. Same for the Sleeper attendant we used to have an attendant per sleeper now we have one sleeper attendant for two sleepers. As anyone can plainly see there is no way we can be expected to be able to give A+ service to our passengers under these conditions. Therefore the CSI scores are meaningless to many of the workers. All we can do as Amtrak employee's is give the best service that we possibly can in a safe manner and hope that the customers accept this and don't put in a bad report on us at the end of the trip.

I can't tell you how many times the OBS crew have left the station with a heavy train and management telling us they know it's hard on us but just do what you can as there is only so much each person can do. That sounds all fine and good but we are the ones out on the rail that has to deal with the passengers, they see US when they don't get the attention or service they need, they see US when they have no place to sit in the dinning car or we have to rush them out to make room for the next seating. We, the on board service crews are the face of Amtrak to them. We don't need blanket statements. We need solutions.

Our customers really miss the observation car. On just about every trip since this new diner/lounge car has be on, we get passengers telling us they want the observation car back and ask us why did Amtrak take it off. A lot don't like the layout of the new diner/lounge car. This sentiment can be confirmed just by asking the workers and Conductors of this train.

I really like my job as an on board chef with Amtrak and my work history and standards with Amtrak speaks for itself. I want Amtrak to be the best that it can be and my hope is that everyone that rides with us has a very enjoyable and memorable experience and that our customers receive the best service possible while doing so. This is my number one concern. I want the customer to want to use us (Amtrak) again and again.

Now I know a lot of times people complain, but never have any solutions or ideas. Well I would like to suggest a few things here.

• 1. Evaluate the new menu items to see what's selling and what's not, and make changes accordingly. Such as the shrimp, high dollar cost item that does not sell well.
  
• 2. Check dollar savings/cost to see if it would be feasible to put the Sightseeing observation car back on, no staff, just to have a place for overflow passengers, and others wishing to use computers, phones, eat snack foods etc, as this would take a lot of pressure off the seating situation in the diner/lounge.
  
• 3. Set standard procedures, (documented) as to what food items are serve out of the kitchen and what is served upstairs.
  
• 4. Look into setting up regular Memphis turn positions. Chef assistant and SA. This would enable us to handle high passenger counts and help in case of equipment failure. Plus enable us to give far better service to our customer.
  
• 5. Maybe putting help on the trains Thursday, Friday, Saturday and Sunday.
  

Well that's my thoughs and ideas, Thank you very much for your time .

Chef Dale LaFrance

City of New Orleans

 

[WhoozOn1st]

Thank you, Chef LaFrance, for sharing your experiences, views, and ideas for Amtrak food service improvements, with this forum. It's really too bad we don't hear more often from you good folks out there on the rails.

 

[had8ley]

Now we're hearing from the troops in the trenches. I think that the lounge cars, if Amtrak decides to put them back on, could be converted to half revenue parlor car seating and half observation (that way you can justify running the car by additional revenue.) Along with that sell the trans dorm rooms with no frills; that way you don't need an attendant except to pull down and put up the beds. I agree with a lot of what the chef is saying but if you walk to the freezer 50 times in a night (50X50) equals 2500 feet you won't be walking 1/3 the average length of a freight train. A freight brakeman/conductor has to walk the entire length of the train twice on uneven terrain~ once to the rear and then back to the head end. I see you down there, by yourself, as a serious safety hazard especially when you are cooking on hot grills. What you are saying is very true about the City crews but last month I rode the Crescent where the heaviest thing the LSA picked up was a pen for us to sign the meal ticket. He sat at the table next to the kitchen on his cell phone and made everyone sit on the north end (away from the kitchen) of the car. The lone SA had to walk the length of the car just to get a straw. I admire your willingness to speak up. The USRA was impressed also. I just want you to know that there are those who are abusing the system. The SA did not get any help until Atlanta. By then she was just about worn out due to her own LSA's negligence. I understand that they are going back to Birmingham turns for the extra SA soon.

I wish you only the best of luck in your career and commend you for showing Amtrak where it's at.

Hopefully someone in authority will act on your very valid concerns.

 

[AlanB]

Thank you, Chef LaFrance, for sharing your experiences, views, and ideas for Amtrak food service improvements, with this forum. It's really too bad we don't hear more often from you good folks out there on the rails.

Just for the record, Harl222000 is not Chef LaFrance, unless he's commuting from San Jose, CA to work on the City of NOL. He's just reposting something found elsewhere on the net, including on our forum in the last URPA update newsletter.

 

[harl222000]

Thank you, Chef LaFrance, for sharing your experiences, views, and ideas for Amtrak food service improvements, with this forum. It's really too bad we don't hear more often from you good folks out there on the rails.

Just for the record, Harl222000 is not Chef LaFrance, unless he's commuting from San Jose, CA to work on the City of NOL. He's just reposting something found elsewhere on the net, including on our forum in the last URPA update newsletter.

 

[AlanB]

Allan,

I've taken the liberty of editing out the @ in the email address and replacing it with "at", so that the spammers can't pick up that email address and bombard it with crap.

Regarding the San Jose thing, according to the internet address you're currently posting from, it claims that address is from San Jose. Interestingly it also claims that that address may be forged, so you may want to have a chat with your internet service provider.

And please, I'm not suggesting that I doubt you, just letting you know that something is amiss with things if you're posting from Hammond.

 

[OlympianHiawatha]

I recently experienced 2 trips on the Texas Eagle with the CCC (Diner side only-lounge not in use) and while at first thought the car was nice looking, found it to be awkward and uncomfortable. The booth type seating is cramped and the tables quickly get crowded when 4 people are in. The crews didn't seem to be the happiest and I noticed other passengers didn't seem at ease, at least not compared to my experiences with the "traditional" Superliner Diner. Now take away the Sighseer and I can see this car quickly becoming overcrowded and very uncomfortable.

And on both CCCs, the floor material was already coming loose around the central service area, and one of the vinyl booth seats had a tear in it (I hope that wasn't vandalism).

Foodwise, all was well, and I enjoyed the meals.

 

[Joel N. Weber II]

Are the various unions that represent Amtrak employees in a position to do anything to help get these issues addressed?

 

[AlanB]

-Not enough help in diner/lounge car.
When we are busy, and with just one Lead service attendant (LSA) serving, I sometimes have food setting on the elevator for longer periods of time then it should, and this causes the food to cool down some. Because the dining car LSA is busy giving service to other customers, they cannot at times get to the food fast enough. I myself want to give the customers the best service and the hottest and freshest food possible, but we can't always do that with this setup. And customer service suffers because of having just one LSA trying to do everything in the diner during these busy meal periods.

-Too hard to get extra help when needed.

This should be a no brainier, even when the passenger counts call for it, it's like pulling hens teeth to get help on our trains when needed. There is always a shortage on the extra board, or at least that's what we hear. But in order for us to do our part in trying to make this new car work in a safe and efficiency manner, we sometimes need help. And it should not be so hard getting it. And not just an SA, as this does nothing for the Chef , it needs to be both, Waiter (SA) and Chef Assistant (formerly Food Specialist). Help is really needed.

To expand on this extra help point for a second. During the first month are so when these cars first started running, we had On board Managers riding with us to see how this would work. During this time every manager that rode with us had to help out either in the dining car, lounge or kitchen at some point of the trip. So it was clear from the very beginning that help was needed with this new car set up. Even the on board managers said that help was needed and that they would state that fact in their report at the end of the trip. But nothing happened, no help. What happened to the reports? Did they really report this? Something does not add up here. I think this needs to be looked into further.

I know there are slow trips and it's really not a problem at these times. But the thing is, the passenger count can change anytime. Like coming back from Chicago our passenger counts can go up to where we need help but no one is available. Also since there is only one elevator in the new diner car now, if it breaks, (and it happens frequently) we have to carry the trays of food up the steps. Having an extra person to help would be a blessing when something like this happens. Even if we had a permanent Memphis turn job put into service, this would help the crews out tremendously.

This of course is a problem that pre-dates the CCC, and started with SDS. Witness the California Zephyr that I and many other members from OTOL, as well as a few from here, rode last July. We had one LSA, one SA for the full trip, and one short turning at Denver SA as a dining car crew, and AFAIK only a chef downstairs. In both directions, the CS was sold out. That's two full sleepers, plus the 8 roomettes in the trans/dorm sold out; as well as the coaches. Note: The sleepers were sold out some 2 weeks before departure, so this wasn't a surpise last minute thing. And I don't mean sold out from Chicago to Denver, I'm talking sold out for the entire run both ways.

In the eastbound direction the LSA wasn't even following the well documented and established SDS procedures, which made things worse. But even going westbound where the LSA was following procedures, the lack of staffing meant that not one coach passenger ever got into the diner for lunch or dinner, and sleeping car passengers were being presented with dining times for dinner where the last seating was 10:00 PM. Who wants to start eating dinner at 10:00 PM? Most people are already heading for bed by that time.

I fully understand the need to cut costs, especially with Congress and the White House breathing down Amtrak's neck, but the above isn't going win Amtrak any new passengers, much less repeat passengers.

 

[harl222000]

Are the various unions that represent Amtrak employees in a position to do anything to help get these issues addressed?

On Board Services employees are represented by three seperate unions, Unite HERE, TCU, and TWU, they come together as the Amtrak Service Workers Council, and reach agreements [we don't have contracts] for On Board Service.

Currenty they are in talks with labor relations.

 

[Larry H.]

I couldn't agree more. The decision to eliminate the lounge is the worst possible decision to make for a long distance train, or nearly any train for that matter. These planners just don't realize that traveling for days on end in one seat is not the reason people want to choose train travel. I have ridden that new diner and lounge and it was obvious it wasn't going to work. Actually I can hardly believe that anyone at all interested in rail travel is putting these layouts in place. I agree that a combination passenger car and lounge would be a way to achieve some revenue balance on lines that have no other option. Why couldn't the lounge be either the upstairs or the downstairs with either coach or business class on the other? I will not be talking long distance trips on lines not offering the lounge. I want to enjoy the scenery as well as mingle with fellow travelers which makes the trip worth while. I recall in the old days of amtrak the sad train they called the National Limited, which offered pullman service with poor food service and no lounge. Yet other long distance trains were being furnished great looking equipment left over from the pre amtrak days. It has always seemed that trains from certain points were considered more important than others. That appears to still be true. If it is a government funded agency paid for with tax dollars all points should receive the same grade of long distance service.

 

[TVRM610]

Well so far Amtrak has not put these cars into service on heavily travelled trains that run for multiple days. The City and the Texas Eagle are not stellar performers in passenger loads, and they both only go for one overnight. I feel like some trains, like CNO, Eagle, Cardinal, etc. can do fine with this car. However, if trains like the Coast Starlight, Empire Builder, Zephyr, and Chief were to ever loose their lounge, that would be a very bad decision on many counts.

Am I for this? Absolutely not, I would like to see full diner, full lounge on every train possible and practical. But if Amtrak is forced to cut costs and they choose to do so by eliminating one service car on these lower performing trains, I say good for them.

Now to the chef, very well written letter and I certainly hope that the proper management hears you. I feel like one chef, and one LSA is simply not enough for this type of service. I feel like what Amtrak should do is put on a full server and make the LSA aid in preparing certain dishes. For instance perhaps all salads and desserts can come from an upstairs prep area, leaving the chef with entrees only. (or does this car even serve salads with meals?). The LSA would also be responsible for stair runs if the elevator was not working. Just my thoughts as an outsider (I really doubt there is much hope to get a SA, and a second chef, but if everything was set-up correctly you may not need both).

 

[Larry H.]

The only problem I have with the "Its fine for some trains" theory is that all passengers are paying the same kinds of fares and in many cases such as the Cardinal the run is way longer by nearly a day than the Capitol Limited which runs a sightseer lounge. And everyone says the Cardinal has the finest scenery. So the choice of sightseer lounge to me would seem to be the Cardinal. In this day of ever increasing ridership every opportunity to provide a memorable trip should be a natural to increase the repeat business.

As to the City in the "Day" so to speak the trip took nearly 8 hours less and yet carried a full lounge as well as diner. If I am going to have to spend the entire night as well as the better part of the next day on a trip I think I deserve the opportunity to have a lounge option. Besides as the "Chef" also pointed out, the lounge was often full from overflow to the diner and even as a extra cushion for oversold seats. The Conductor on the last trip complained that now they had no where to put those who may have ended up without a seat. It may well be that on some trips during slow times the lounge would get less use, but anyone leaving chicago with a full train as often happens can appreciate the need for that car as well as full diner service.

The problem may not be Amtrak but the Congress who has made these unilateral decisions based on there flawed idea that rail travel is just another way to get there and no one wants it anyway..

 

[PRR 60]

If Amtrak is not "just another way to travel", then why wouldn't people be willing to pay what it costs to operate a full diner with a full staff and a lounge car? The government's responsibility is to subsidize essential transportation. Does that include rolling restaurants and cafes? The government responsibility is transportation, not land cruises.

Food service over and above that which is necessary for pure transportation should pay for itself. If passengers want a full service diner and Amtrak can't make ends meet charging over $20 for an average meal and $24 for an average bottle of wine, then raise prices. If then no one wants to use the service, I guess it is not that important after all. The argument that Amtrak is essential transportation that deserves federal subsidy begins to ring hollow when it is then claimed that fancy dining is needed to make it work. It plays right into the hand of Amtrak critics who scoff at the notion that the California Zephyr is actually transportation.

I've had two occasions to ride Amtrak LD since SDS and the meals on both trips, food and service, were just fine. I see no problems with the service as is.

 

[Joel N. Weber II]

Why do we have a national park system, then?

 

[PRR 60]

Why do we have a national park system, then?

We have an national park system to preserve our natural and historic herritage. The essential work of maintaining the parks is funded by the government partially offset by entrance fees. However, to continue the analagy, food service within the national parks is provided by private firms under contract from the National Park Service. The NPS is paid by the catering firms and those firms make a profit from the operation. The federal government does not subsidize the hot dogs at Yellowstone. And if someone wants a four star restaurant at Yosemite, the NPS will not subsidize that either.

 

[Larry H.]

You should be a politician, they seem to think the same way. Rail travel as a way to get places has always included certain things that made the time and trip worth while. All you need do is look at the ads for the late 40's and 50's at all the luxurious cars the rail roads were putting into service on all long distance trains in order to attract a traveling public. If the government didn't want to maintain it then they shouldn't have said they would. If there just going to be glorified commuter trains to get you from one place to the other then they should just give it up. Even greyhound stops at restaurants so its passengers can have lunch or meals. Have you missed all the information that the Empire Builder once at least in theory was claiming increased service and food and room levels that they achieved the best ridership increases. Obviously not many agree with the Spartan train concept as the correct one. If amtrak had the money and guts to run the amount of cars that the demand is calling for who knows how much traffic it could handle. All one needs to do is try and book a room on almost any train to realize the the cars in operation are way inadequate for the demand. The actual total of persons that could be paying for trips would be interesting if they were only known. Unfortunately many are just unable to book a trip when they need to.

 

[D.P. Roberts]

Why do we have a national park system, then?

We have an national park system to preserve our natural and historic herritage. The essential work of maintaining the parks is funded by the government partially offset by entrance fees. However, to continue the analagy, food service within the national parks is provided by private firms under contract from the National Park Service. The NPS is paid by the catering firms and those firms make a profit from the operation. The federal government does not subsidize the hot dogs at Yellowstone. And if someone wants a four star restaurant at Yosemite, the NPS will not subsidize that either.

I think I agree with you, at least in theory. I think your analogy of the National Parks system is a good one. I'm really beginning to wonder if that same system should hold true with rail service - Amtrak would own the locomotives, maintain safety, work out relationships with host railroads, and all the basic services of operating the national rail network. However, the coaches, sleepers, and other passenger cars would be run by a concessioner. On the other hand, if the concessioner could not make it work - and history has shown that passenger rail has probably never paid for itself - then there would be no point to maintaining the network to begin with.

The problem with Amtrak is that it's both transportation AND accommodation, all in one. Some people obviously think that "cafe" car food is rather basic, and others think dinner must be served on real plates.

Food is always the sticking point, how about the other aspects of accommodating people overnight? Roomettes and bedrooms seem like a luxury, but I'd say the average American sleeps on a bed at night - not in a chair. Thus, having bedrooms seems more like basic transportation rather than luxury. But how big should those bedrooms be? Should they have separate bathrooms (after all, the average American shares bathrooms with the public during the day, but not at night - one rarely showers in a public restroom). So, shouldn't basic transportation allow passengers to sleep horizontally, and take a shower daily? Perhaps Amtrak's first class accommodations are truly necessities, and are justified. Others might say in order to truly qualify as "basic transportation", Amtrak should cram more people into coach, just like an airplane - 6 seats per row, 18" seat widths, 32" pitch. I don't know how many people would fit in a coach car then, but it would be a lot more. And by then, Amtrak would probably lose all of its customers to the airlines. Again, you're back to maintaining a network that no one would use.

So, the definition of "basic" food and "basic" accommodations can vary greatly from person to person. As a very wise man once said, "Luke, you will find that many of the truths we cling to depend greatly on one's point of view."

 

[harl222000]

The only problem I have with the "Its fine for some trains" theory is that all passengers are paying the same kinds of fares and in many cases such as the Cardinal the run is way longer by nearly a day than the Capitol Limited which runs a sightseer lounge. And everyone says the Cardinal has the finest scenery. So the choice of sightseer lounge to me would seem to be the Cardinal. In this day of ever increasing ridership every opportunity to provide a memorable trip should be a natural to increase the repeat business. As to the City in the "Day" so to speak the trip took nearly 8 hours less and yet carried a full lounge as well as diner. If I am going to have to spend the entire night as well as the better part of the next day on a trip I think I deserve the opportunity to have a lounge option. Besides as the "Chef" also pointed out, the lounge was often full from overflow to the diner and even as a extra cushion for oversold seats. The Conductor on the last trip complained that now they had no where to put those who may have ended up without a seat. It may well be that on some trips during slow times the lounge would get less use, but anyone leaving chicago with a full train as often happens can appreciate the need for that car as well as full diner service.

The problem may not be Amtrak but the Congress who has made these unilateral decisions based on there flawed idea that rail travel is just another way to get there and no one wants it anyway..

Micromanaging by Congress is the main part of the problem, your absolutely correct. Amtrak is trying to respond to that mandate.

 

[TVRM610]

The only problem I have with the "Its fine for some trains" theory is that all passengers are paying the same kinds of fares and in many cases such as the Cardinal the run is way longer by nearly a day than the Capitol Limited which runs a sightseer lounge. And everyone says the Cardinal has the finest scenery. So the choice of sightseer lounge to me would seem to be the Cardinal. In this day of ever increasing ridership every opportunity to provide a memorable trip should be a natural to increase the repeat business. As to the City in the "Day" so to speak the trip took nearly 8 hours less and yet carried a full lounge as well as diner. If I am going to have to spend the entire night as well as the better part of the next day on a trip I think I deserve the opportunity to have a lounge option. Besides as the "Chef" also pointed out, the lounge was often full from overflow to the diner and even as a extra cushion for oversold seats. The Conductor on the last trip complained that now they had no where to put those who may have ended up without a seat. It may well be that on some trips during slow times the lounge would get less use, but anyone leaving chicago with a full train as often happens can appreciate the need for that car as well as full diner service.

The problem may not be Amtrak but the Congress who has made these unilateral decisions based on there flawed idea that rail travel is just another way to get there and no one wants it anyway..

Well look at the ridership on the Capitol compared to the Cardinal. And while yes the Cardinal is a longer ride, I'm sure that more people ride the Capitol from start to finish (or close to it).

The same could also be said for some Regional trains. I pay the same ticket price to ride the Texas Eagle from Chicago to St. Louis as the State House. One has full diner (or CCC possibly now) one has only cafe. I don't think the cost has to directly reflect the level of service. Rather the level of service should reflect the particular train, and its riders. You can't make all trains have the same level of service, there has to be some room for change. I don't think its completely unreasonable to think that certain routes need more service cars and crew than others.

 

[TVRM610]

If Amtrak is not "just another way to travel", then why wouldn't people be willing to pay what it costs to operate a full diner with a full staff and a lounge car? The government's responsibility is to subsidize essential transportation. Does that include rolling restaurants and cafes? The government responsibility is transportation, not land cruises.
Food service over and above that which is necessary for pure transportation should pay for itself. If passengers want a full service diner and Amtrak can't make ends meet charging over $20 for an average meal and $24 for an average bottle of wine, then raise prices. If then no one wants to use the service, I guess it is not that important after all. The argument that Amtrak is essential transportation that deserves federal subsidy begins to ring hollow when it is then claimed that fancy dining is needed to make it work. It plays right into the hand of Amtrak critics who scoff at the notion that the California Zephyr is actually transportation.

I've had two occasions to ride Amtrak LD since SDS and the meals on both trips, food and service, were just fine. I see no problems with the service as is.

I think you make great points PRR. In truth, would the Zephyr, with no lounge, no diner (presumably a food service section on the lower level of a coach car, even if it was just a leased subway, or something like that) sell? I think so honestly. Would they be able to sell it for the same amount of money? Surely not. But I think the basic mode of transportation would still be used. I see lots of people who never go to the lounge or diner on trains. They wouldnt even miss it!

BUT... without the extra food service you couldnt charge the insane amounts for sleepers. As Alan has pointed out the sleepers technically pay for themselves (he explains it better but you know what I'm referring too, the sleepers pay for the extras, meaning that its not costing amtrak more to run sleepers).

And you would probably have less overall passengers riding. Now the question would be, would the loss in revenue from decreased sleeper fares and existing food money (they are selling meals for high $$ they must be cutting SOME losses!) be more than the money saved? I am sure there is a clearer way to word this but not sure how to.

 

[rtabern]

Thanks for sharing your thoughts -- I've rode the City of New Orleans a couple of times just from Homewood to Chicago since they put the CCC car and I agree with almost everything you said. The "cool" thing was that I was able to get on in Homewood at 7:40am and actually have a FULL breakfast before pulling into Chicago at 9:00am. The other nice thing is they serve dinner before pulling out of Chicago. I took 59 to New Orleans in 2005 and eating dinner at 9 or 9:30pm isn't good because then you have to go to bed right after on a full stomach.

BUT, if they pull the Sightseer lounges off the trains where you'd potentially be on board for 2 nights... that will SERIOUSLY deter me from riding.

A couple of months ago I took 50 (Cardinal) from CHI-NYP. I chose the Cardinal because it's one of the few LD trains that I haven't had the chance to ride yet. I had a great trip, nice sleeping car attendant, and the food was actually pretty good. The biggest problem was the lack of a traiditional "lounge" car. I know it's single-level equipment, but they could have used a full seperate car for a lounge. The "lounge" on this car was 6 booths I believe. 2 of the tables were taken up by conductors and crews. The other 4 tables seemed to have the same passengers at it for 18 hours straight drinking and playing cards.

You have a train with 200+ people on it... and only 4 booths to use as a "lounge"... C'mon.

My proposal would be to keep the Sightseer lounges on the LD trains that go for 2 nights (TX Eagle, etc.)... and if you have to... just keep them unstaffed. The downstairs could be used for storage or something then (the area where the snack bar is now).

People need a place to sit other than their seat if they're going to be on the train for 24.. or up to 70 hours if you're talking about 421/422.

Part of the train experience is to mingle with other passengers. On the Cardinal, I met some nice people at lunch and wanted to chat with them further. We were being rushed out of the diner and the lounge tables were full... so you're put in the awkward position of saying "Hey, want to hang out in my sleeping car room?"... or "Ok, I paid for a sleeper, but I'll go back and hang out with you in coach for awhile so we can keep talking here".

I guess it costs more fuel, but let's look at keeping the Sightseer lounges on... even unstaffed.

If they start pulling the SS lounges... I probably won't take those routes anymore. I don't want to be confined to my sleeping car room unless I am eating. Blah!

 

[Larry H.]

The same could also be said for some Regional trains. I pay the same ticket price to ride the Texas Eagle from Chicago to St. Louis as the State House. One has full diner (or CCC possibly now) one has only cafe. I don't think the cost has to directly reflect the level of service. Rather the level of service should reflect the particular train, and its riders. You can't make all trains have the same level of service, there has to be some room for change. I don't think its completely unreasonable to think that certain routes need more service cars and crew than others.

For some reason that does not apply in Illinois. A trip to Chicago on the short distance trains such as you mention are about half or less the fare of the City. Thus your paying a premium fare and getting coach amenities on some trains. Well for now, at least no Lounge. I still have problems with the idea that those who go from certain points are considered not as "worthy" of the same long distance equipment line ups as those who are lucky to live in cities where that is common. If it were a "Private" company I could rationalize easier that some routes don't demand the same level of equipment, but when your tax dollars are at work then the field should be level for all in my humble opinion. But beyond that my real premise is that long distance service is not the same as local coach type runs, your a captive customer for a reasonably long length of time and the idea that some should have access to a lounge or real diner and others not, just isn't right in my mind.

 

[AlanB]

The same could also be said for some Regional trains. I pay the same ticket price to ride the Texas Eagle from Chicago to St. Louis as the State House. One has full diner (or CCC possibly now) one has only cafe. I don't think the cost has to directly reflect the level of service. Rather the level of service should reflect the particular train, and its riders. You can't make all trains have the same level of service, there has to be some room for change. I don't think its completely unreasonable to think that certain routes need more service cars and crew than others.

For some reason that does not apply in Illinois. A trip to Chicago on the short distance trains such as you mention are about half or less the fare of the City. Thus your paying a premium fare and getting coach amenities on some trains. Well for now, at least no Lounge. I still have problems with the idea that those who go from certain points are considered not as "worthy" of the same long distance equipment line ups as those who are lucky to live in cities where that is common. If it were a "Private" company I could rationalize easier that some routes don't demand the same level of equipment, but when your tax dollars are at work then the field should be level for all in my humble opinion. But beyond that my real premise is that long distance service is not the same as local coach type runs, your a captive customer for a reasonably long length of time and the idea that some should have access to a lounge or real diner and others not, just isn't right in my mind.

Well had those inside the Capital Beltway properly funded Amtrak from day 1 properly, there might be a better argument for a more level playing field in services, although even then I'm still not sure that a train making a six hour run really needs a full dining car.

However, since Amtrak wasn't properly funded and individual states have now taken to providing Amtrak with additional funding on certain routes, you remove any chance of a level playing field since those states now get a say in what services Amtrak provides.

 

[TVRM610]

I understand your point Larry, but if your saying that every train should get the same thing, then every LD train should get a full dining car like on the Empire Builder, and a Pacific Parlor Car like the Starlight. (Now of course I would love to see that!)

Every train can not have the same service, it's just not practical. Some trains have a full diner, some have SDS, and some have the CCC. Some trains have an additional lounge, some do not. Some trains (shorter runs) have no lounge whatsoever.

And just to be clear, I wasnt suggesting that the State House from CHI-St. Louis should have a full diner. I was just saying that the coach ticket is the same price for that route wether you are on a train with a diner, or a train with just a lounge.