STATION REFUSED TO CHECK LUGGAGE

One thing occurs to me about those people who do come to this forum to complain about a problem with Amtrak…I phrase the question in this way:

How do they find the Amtrak Unlimited Discussion Forum?

Why is that important? For a couple of reasons, if you type in Amtrak in the Google search engine, the Discussion Forum does not come up until page 4. These means you have to work your way through 60 some odd records to find a quick description of the forum, and then, one would have to click on the link to see what the forum offers. Strangely enough, when you type in Amtrak complaints into the Google search engine, the Discussion Forum comes up on the very first page (offhand question: I wonder what that says about us?). Again the person would have to click on the link and then read the rules to post and then finally post.

What’s my point? By the time you fire up the PC or Laptop or your web-enabled phone, start using Google, find a place you think you can post to, and then post to it…jeepers creepers if that were me, my outrage would have been long gone! I still believe that people think we are somehow allied to Amtrak (despite the tag at the top of the page).

In the long run, does **** happen? You bet it does! Does **** happen at Amtrak? Sometimes in spades! But in the give and take of a forum there are going to be emotions sticking out all over, and some will seem insensitive and jerk-like, and others will bend over backward to be sensitive and helpful! That’s just the way of a forum.

I too get frustrated when Amtrak’s (or other companies as well) people service goes down in flames! I often wonder if anyone, anywhere ever makes contingency plans? I think that’s where the big problem lies! :blink:

Neil_M said:

had8ley said:

Just who do you think is running each and every Amtrak train 365 days a year?~ a union member who does a darn good job!!!

Click to expand...

You can do just a good a job even if you are not in a union.

Click to expand...

That is not my point. I was trying to show that not every union member is a "jerk."

had8ley said:

Guest said:

As they say, you never get a chance to make a second first impression, and from that moment on, my first and forever impression is that IBEW are all jerks.

Click to expand...

Although I've been a union member for over 40 years your post almost makes me think that everyone who doesn't brush his/her teeth first thing in the morning are jerks. This is exactly what management wants you to think. Just who do you think is running each and every Amtrak train 365 days a year?~ a union member who does a darn good job!!!

Click to expand...

See, there's the perfect example of what I mentioned earlier: union members tend to think in an us-vs.-them context.

Maybe I'm just lucky, but I work for an employer who is extremely generous because he realizes that paying employees well (better than the competition) attracts quality employees, increases productivity and morale, reduces turnover, and generally results in a smoother operation. In turn, the employees all love working here and respect the management very much, and everyone feels like a member of the family and that we're all working to make this company succeed together (because, realistically, if everyone isn't pulling their weight, we are not far from extinction not only due to the bad economy but also because of new challenges in our industry drastically increasing costs). In fact, you could argue that my employer is being a bit too generous, and the short-term health of the company would probably increase markedly if we laid off probably a third to a half of our staff and cut pay, but we believe that the good operation we have now will serve us better in the long term if we can just make it through to the next break in a couple of months.

You don't get that kind of "we're all in this boat together" feeling in an us-vs.-them union-vs.-management setting.

And if our employees, for whatever reason, formed a union and forced even higher wages out of my employer, you can bet not only would morale go in the toilet, the company would, too. We simply can't afford any more. Would I like more vacation time (the one thing I feel they're stingy on)? Sure, but I understand how tight margins are.

And I know not everyone is as lucky as I am to work for such a generous employer. But if we suddenly cut wages/bonuses and ticked our employees off, they'd not hesitate to jump right back to our competitors we stole them from. So you can see that there is also market pressure (not just generosity) keeping our compensation package sufficiently attractive, lest we lose our best assets. I think it's that way in many more workplaces than union idealists think and wages wouldn't drop beyond reason, and if they do, I think in many cases it's just because the union was artificially causing wages to be higher than the position was originally worth (good for employees but not fair for employers).

Perhaps it's just my perspective as a member of the younger generation, which doesn't see the need to invest in a single job and need assurance that job is going to last them for their entire life. That kind of thinking does require a union to ensure the job remains able to provide for the employee's lifestyle and standard of living. Today's generation changes jobs often and doesn't have an objection to leaving one employer for another if they feel it provides a better opportunity, and employers are having to rethink their strategies to keep their employees happy and employed, and that includes paying better attention to working conditions, compensation, and employee satisfaction. I think this means that the job market is moving beyond the need for unions, because the "employee class" doesn't need those kinds of protections and is nowadays choosing to vote with their feet.

Ruth B. Boulware said:

On March 13, 2009, I was awaiting the Crescent Northbound at the Birmingham, Alabama Station. I arrived an hour early to check my luggage. When I arrived, a note was on the window saying, "BE BACK SOON." At approximately 2:10, the agent arrived, and began selling tickets. We were lined up to get our luggage checked. The agent came on the intercom to inform everyone that no bags would be checked, and we would be responsible for getting our luggage on the train. It was a very pitiful scene-seeing the elderly people trying to get their luggage up two flights of steps where the train was awaiting.

Click to expand...

It occurs to me that a station like Birmingham only has two personnel on duty at train time. Personally, I don't think you can expect an agent to handle baggage, and if there was some sort of mechanical or personal delay, it isn't unreasonable to carry your own baggage. I wouldn't expect the same level of service in Birmingham that I expect in New York Penn Station. There are no redcaps in Alabama, for instance.

It is only common sense to pack no more than you can carry, regardless of the duration and medium of travel. This is true whether you are traveling by common carrier or by personal automobile.

Ruth B. Boulware said:

The conductor wanted to know why we had all of the luggage? We informed him that the agent would not check the luggage. I was in tears! When we got to the train, NO ONE would help us with the luggage.

Click to expand...

Who were you expecting to help you with the luggage? Other coach passengers?

When I board a train or airplane with luggage, I do so with the expectation that I will place it in the overhead rack or bin myself, unassisted.

I frequently do assist other passengers, but I do so voluntarily.

Ruth B. Boulware said:

I did contact Amtrak's Customer Service of this incident, and would you believe, Amtrak sent me a measly voucher for $25.00 which was an insult and a slap in the fact for the trauma that I went through at the Birmingham Amtrak Station. I am sending the voucher back to Amtrak. Please, before you board any AMTRAK TRAIN, make sure you know whether or not you will be able to check your luggage. This was an experience that I will never forget.

Click to expand...

It seems to me that $25.00 was a fairly generous reward for a minimal inconvenience.

Sorry for not reading every reply to every post here first, but I did want to comment on one post regarding the fact that this is not checked luggage if you take it up to the train yourself.

Frankly, the ripple effect caused by refusing to check luggage can be far more inconvenient than simply having to take your own luggage up to the train. Tags are printed. Connections are made. Destinations are recorded. Bags are destroyed by sliding back and forth on the baggage car floor (oops, I digress...)

Point is, if someone has an expectation to check luggage a point A through point B to destination C, then that luggage is no longer the concern of the passenger, but rather Amtrak's. To arbitrarily refuse to provide that service now creates a superheadache for all. Passengers now have to carry their large, oversize bags onboard the train and take up all the in-car rack space. Not only that, but those who transfer must now carry their bags from Train A to Train B.

When one selects a departure station and an arrival station, both of which provide checked baggage service, it's not incomprehensible to be irate when that service is being temporarily suspended.

Amtrak should have at least three (two on duty plus one on call) at EVERY station that supports checked baggage. No exceptions.

One thing occurs to me about those people who do come to this forum to complain about a problem with Amtrak…I phrase the question in this way:
How do they find the Amtrak Unlimited Discussion Forum?

Click to expand...

Google I suspect.

If you Google "Amtrak Forum" we're #1 on the list.

Everydaymatters said:

tp49 said:

I don't think the number of people boarding the two trains a day that call in Birmingham is anywhere near the magnitude of the number of folks boarding in Chicago. I'd figure the number boarding at BHM to be near 15-20 tops and the procedure is probably more relaxed.

Click to expand...

I know you're right. I guess I was having a mental picture of the announcement being made that there would be no baggage service and everyone who had been waiting with their baggage making a mad dash up the stairs so they wouldn't miss the train. I can see how it would be hard to ask someone to help you when you're struggling with your suitcase and every able bodied person is rushing up the stairs.

Click to expand...

There would have been no need of a mad dash--baggage must be checked by 30 minutes prior to scheduled departure, so any announcement that checked baggage service was cancelled would have been made well prior to that time. Anybody in the station with baggage they were hoping to check would have had at least half an hour to get it up the stairs to the platform.

I'm floored at how many people here think it's just simply OK to pay for an advertised service and being told to shut up and sit in a corner if that service doesn't materialize.

Amtrak will never succeed if their customers continued to be simply satisfied with the status quo. Either lower the expections and strive to exceed them, or just shut down.

wayman said:

There would have been no need of a mad dash--baggage must be checked by 30 minutes prior to scheduled departure, so any announcement that checked baggage service was cancelled would have been made well prior to that time. Anybody in the station with baggage they were hoping to check would have had at least half an hour to get it up the stairs to the platform.

Click to expand...

This is a good point. Looking at the photo that was posted, there are about 30 steps up to the platform... 30 steps in 30 minutes. If somebody cannot lug their own luggage up stairs at the rate of one step PER MINUTE, they are clearly carrying too much.

For those who don't do stairs, 30 minutes should be sufficient time to locate any alternative routes, ramps, or back-ways up. If none exist, then Amtrak is in legal violation of accessibility standards. (Which still doesn't get you onto the Train.)

VentureForth said:

I'm floored at how many people here think it's just simply OK to pay for an advertised service and being told to shut up and sit in a corner if that service doesn't materialize.

Click to expand...

No, it is certainly NOT OK for Amtrak to fail to deliver on promised and contracted service. But it does happen.

VentureForth said:

Amtrak will never succeed if their customers continued to be simply satisfied with the status quo. Either lower the expectations and strive to exceed them, or just shut down.

Click to expand...

No, we should NOT be "satisfied with the status quo". The issue, however, is what to DO when things somehow do not measure up.

One approach is to complain, which the original poster did.

How do we then respond? Some respond with sympathy and condolences. Some respond with shared outrage.

My own preference would be to share an adaptive response, what could somebody do to minimize the harm after the fact, or to minimize the risk on future trips, ASSUMING (NOT Recommending!) that Amtrak does NOT improve their act.

This is not at all about "sitting in a corner if things don't materialize", rather about how to GET OUT of your corner and Take Charge of things yourself.

Step One for me in all of this is to Travel Light, never check any luggage, and never carry more than I can comfortably jog with for a mile.

Others choose a different style. That's fine. Some styles work, some don't. Take your own pick.

ALC_Rail_Writer said:

One thing occurs to me about those people who do come to this forum to complain about a problem with Amtrak…I phrase the question in this way:
How do they find the Amtrak Unlimited Discussion Forum?

Click to expand...

Google I suspect.

If you Google "Amtrak Forum" we're #1 on the list.

Click to expand...

That's true,

However the OP probably had no conception that there was an Amtrak Forum!

You'd be surprised - I use web forums as the primary way of gathering info about a product or service where available. I think that there's no better way to get a feel for a product than to visit a discussion site to read what real people are saying about it (and read the responses, unlike just reading product reviews at Amazon.com for example).

VentureForth said:

Amtrak should have at least three (two on duty plus one on call) at EVERY station that supports checked baggage. No exceptions.

Click to expand...

What you're proposing is a huge expense that Amtrak cannot afford. People don't just sit at home waiting for a phone call in the off chance that they'll get to go to work today. You have to pay them to sit by the phone.

Amtrak offers checked baggage at 143 stations. If we back out 20 of the largest stations where there are always extra employees around anyhow, that leaves potentially 123 stations that would need a standby position. Figuring an 8 hour shift, even though some stations might need more than that, and a rather low-ball figure of $15 an hour, that would cost Amtrak $5.3 Million dollars a year. And that's before factoring in benefits and other costs associated with hiring employees.

And all of that would be largely wasted monies, since most of those workers would be getting paid to spend the bulk of their time just sitting around waiting for a phone call.

jackal said:

had8ley said:

Guest said:

As they say, you never get a chance to make a second first impression, and from that moment on, my first and forever impression is that IBEW are all jerks.

Click to expand...

Although I've been a union member for over 40 years your post almost makes me think that everyone who doesn't brush his/her teeth first thing in the morning are jerks. This is exactly what management wants you to think. Just who do you think is running each and every Amtrak train 365 days a year?~ a union member who does a darn good job!!!

Click to expand...

See, there's the perfect example of what I mentioned earlier: union members tend to think in an us-vs.-them context.

Maybe I'm just lucky,

And I know not everyone is as lucky as I am to work for such a generous employer.

Perhaps it's just my perspective as a member of the younger generation, which doesn't see the need to invest in a single job and need assurance that job is going to last them for their entire life. I think this means that the job market is moving beyond the need for unions, because the "employee class" doesn't need those kinds of protections and is nowadays choosing to vote with their feet.

Click to expand...

Well, I'll make it short and sweet...you have my head spinning in circles. Perhaps its my ties to the dinosaur age when a job was worth keeping for 30 or more years. Firstly, you praise your employer but want more vacation but don't want a union to get it for you. You call yourself "lucky" but would leave your present employ at the drop of a hat. It almost sounds like you're using your employers time and computers to send out resumes. You don't sound like a very happy camper from this angle but please don't blame the unions for your plight~ YOU are the one who determines your own destiny!!!

jackal said:

And I know not everyone is as lucky as I am to work for such a generous employer. But if we suddenly cut wages/bonuses and ticked our employees off, they'd not hesitate to jump right back to our competitors we stole them from.

Click to expand...

Sorry, but it sounds like your employer is having to walk on eggshells.

Maybe things are better in Alaska, but here in the lower 48 off the top of my head I can think of 5 people I know who have had wages cut, hours cut, vacation time cut, benefits cut. And they're happy to have a job!

Your employees wouldn't hesitate to jump back to the competitors! Does the competitor still have all the wages and bonuses?

Maybe we should all move to Alaska.

AlanB said:

VentureForth said:

Amtrak should have at least three (two on duty plus one on call) at EVERY station that supports checked baggage. No exceptions.

Click to expand...

What you're proposing is a huge expense that Amtrak cannot afford. People don't just sit at home waiting for a phone call in the off chance that they'll get to go to work today. You have to pay them to sit by the phone.

Amtrak offers checked baggage at 143 stations. If we back out 20 of the largest stations where there are always extra employees around anyhow, that leaves potentially 123 stations that would need a standby position. Figuring an 8 hour shift, even though some stations might need more than that, and a rather low-ball figure of $15 an hour, that would cost Amtrak $5.3 Million dollars a year. And that's before factoring in benefits and other costs associated with hiring employees.

And all of that would be largely wasted monies, since most of those workers would be getting paid to spend the bulk of their time just sitting around waiting for a phone call.

Click to expand...

Not necessarily. Some of these stations have very few hours - most of the agents qualify for part time duty. But I doubt that most of them work 7 days a week and no holidays. The extra people are there - it's a matter of scheduling. It's not too big of a deal (unless you're unionized ... oops ...) to ask a willing employee to be on call for one of their two days off. You don't pay them unless called, and if they are, double pay.

Maybe this happens more often than I'm aware, but they typically don't cancel a flight for a sick pilot or flight attendant. The spare labor is available. Substitute teachers, as well. Better yet - utilize part time labor as a substitute. $10/hr only when called, no benefits. Of course the Unions would again have a fit, but that seems to be a common barrier to superior customer service, doesn't it?

Am I out of line to request we let this topic die for my sanity?

Awww, gee. 6 pages is nothing in this forum....

ALC_Rail_Writer said:

Am I out of line to request we let this topic die for my sanity?

Click to expand...

Well, you could quit reading it.

PetalumaLoco said:

ALC_Rail_Writer said:

Am I out of line to request we let this topic die for my sanity?

Click to expand...

Well, you could quit reading it.

Click to expand...

I just don't like the idea of us keeping this thread up here given that the original post was made by a flamer and clearly did not intend to come back to hear our advice-- only rant about how bad Amtrak treated her.

That's not what we're about, is it?

sunchaser said:

PaulM said:

I've have over 110,000 Amtrak under my belt; and fortunately I can't remember too many experiences like this. But they seem to get reported here quite often. There seems to be a common thread:
1. OP complains about problem (baggage service, elevator out of order)

2. The complainer is criticized (exaggerates , too emotional, not enough facts to perform an in depth investigation)

3. The reason for the problem is explained (computer down)

4. The reason could not be foreseen, i.e., is treated as an act of God (computers never go down and companies are not supposed to have contingency plans for when they do)

5. All suggestions as to how the situation could be rectified (extra board) are criticized as naive.

6. When all else fails someone will point out that the OP got from point A to point B.

With friends like this, who need enemies. No wonder Amtrak has a political problem, which is how I describe being staved for funds for so long.

Click to expand...

Great points all. I was going to post some ideas this morning but had other things to do.

I do have one question as a newbie, though..

To those are frequent train travelers, has anyone seen this behavior before- from the train staff not assisting the pax? I thought that was part of their job?

Click to expand...

To be more accurate, I should say I've never seen this type of thing. The only " trauma" from worst situation I experienced - dead engine, bad-ordered lounge car, mechanical failure in the diner preventing coach passengers from eating, no AC in the bedroom section of a sleeper, missed connection, all on the same train, and the EB at that - was not being able to get a cup of coffee in the morning (which I rectified by swiping one from the sleeper). I definitely blame Amtrak for the mechanical problems; but I can't complain about the staffs response to it.

The point of my post was not to suggest these events are common, but AU's response to them.

Amtrak OBS Gone Freight said:

I can see an exception in a case such as a baggage car having been set out, or the train leaving without a baggage car for reasons beyond Amtrak's control. But OTOH about a week ago #98 passed through DLD with a lounge car in place of the baggage car which had been cut out of the train in MIA, so that tells me Amtrak did what it could to preserve that service in that case.

Click to expand...

Am I a prophet or what? See # 4 above. Normally a missing baggage car would not be considered an act of God, unless it was struck by lightening or maybe a vandal squirted super glue into the hot box just before departure.

Interesting enough, Amtrak did the right, if not orthodox, thing in this case by substituting the lounge. So there was no chance to test item # 5 above.

ALC_Rail_Writer said:

PetalumaLoco said:

ALC_Rail_Writer said:

Am I out of line to request we let this topic die for my sanity?

Click to expand...

Well, you could quit reading it.

Click to expand...

I just don't like the idea of us keeping this thread up here given that the original post was made by a flamer and clearly did not intend to come back to hear our advice-- only rant about how bad Amtrak treated her.

That's not what we're about, is it?

Click to expand...

I agree that this thread probably should have been closed down, but the flaming didn't begin until POST #13 (NOT POST #1) and it probably should have been closed down shortly after it was continued when post #15 was made! <_<

On Edit: I take it back that the flaming didn't start with post #1. By definition, what was posted could be classified as flaming! However, IMO fuel was added to the fire at post #13 and incited some really serious flaming thereafter!

PaulM said:

sunchaser said:

PaulM said:

I've have over 110,000 Amtrak under my belt; and fortunately I can't remember too many experiences like this. But they seem to get reported here quite often. There seems to be a common thread:
1. OP complains about problem (baggage service, elevator out of order)

2. The complainer is criticized (exaggerates , too emotional, not enough facts to perform an in depth investigation)

3. The reason for the problem is explained (computer down)

4. The reason could not be foreseen, i.e., is treated as an act of God (computers never go down and companies are not supposed to have contingency plans for when they do)

5. All suggestions as to how the situation could be rectified (extra board) are criticized as naive.

6. When all else fails someone will point out that the OP got from point A to point B.

With friends like this, who need enemies. No wonder Amtrak has a political problem, which is how I describe being staved for funds for so long.

Click to expand...

Great points all. I was going to post some ideas this morning but had other things to do.

I do have one question as a newbie, though..

To those are frequent train travelers, has anyone seen this behavior before- from the train staff not assisting the pax? I thought that was part of their job?

Click to expand...

To be more accurate, I should say I've never seen this type of thing. The only " trauma" from worst situation I experienced - dead engine, bad-ordered lounge car, mechanical failure in the diner preventing coach passengers from eating, no AC in the bedroom section of a sleeper, missed connection, all on the same train, and the EB at that - was not being able to get a cup of coffee in the morning (which I rectified by swiping one from the sleeper). I definitely blame Amtrak for the mechanical problems; but I can't complain about the staffs response to it.

The point of my post was not to suggest these events are common, but AU's response to them.

Amtrak OBS Gone Freight said:

I can see an exception in a case such as a baggage car having been set out, or the train leaving without a baggage car for reasons beyond Amtrak's control. But OTOH about a week ago #98 passed through DLD with a lounge car in place of the baggage car which had been cut out of the train in MIA, so that tells me Amtrak did what it could to preserve that service in that case.

Click to expand...

Am I a prophet or what? See # 4 above. Normally a missing baggage car would not be considered an act of God, unless it was struck by lightening or maybe a vandal squirted super glue into the hot box just before departure.

Interesting enough, Amtrak did the right, if not orthodox, thing in this case by substituting the lounge. So there was no chance to test item # 5 above.

Click to expand...

I should clarify my prev post. After I read #5, I chickened out on adding suggestions when I got back on the board to post.

The reason I asked about the staff, was that I thought SCAs and other staff would have started to assist her & others.

She states no one was assisted. But she may have been distracted because she was so upset, and may not have seen others being helped. She said she told the Conductor, my thought is at that point, he/she could have had the train staff assist. But I am not an expert on what the staff can or cannot do. Again, not trying to pick a side, but I remember at one job I had a guy called in for medical benefits for his mom, & I told him she wouldn't be covered the way he wanted to do it. He called back a month later, all mad because he said the woman he talked to said his mom would be covered. I had to explain to him that I was that woman! Of course we always put notes on the calls, but I remembered him arguing with me the first time he called. That being said, she is speaking from her perspective, & we have no input from anywhere else except the computer problem on that day. I must say if I was there, I would have been surprised if there was no help given. However, that being said, my husband & I will have to use carry on for our trip in June (4 bags), but I don't expect we will need too much help. Hubby can't lift too much, so that means I may end up making two trips to the trains or strap them together. Or ask a RedCap. But at our destination there is no checked luggage or RedCap.

ALC_Rail_Writer said:

One thing occurs to me about those people who do come to this forum to complain about a problem with Amtrak…I phrase the question in this way:
How do they find the Amtrak Unlimited Discussion Forum?

Click to expand...

Google I suspect.

If you Google "Amtrak Forum" we're #1 on the list.

Click to expand...

If you Google "Amtrak complaints," we're #3 on the list!

had8ley said:

Well, I'll make it short and sweet...you have my head spinning in circles. Perhaps its my ties to the dinosaur age when a job was worth keeping for 30 or more years. Firstly, you praise your employer but want more vacation but don't want a union to get it for you. You call yourself "lucky" but would leave your present employ at the drop of a hat. It almost sounds like you're using your employers time and computers to send out resumes. You don't sound like a very happy camper from this angle but please don't blame the unions for your plight~ YOU are the one who determines your own destiny!!!

Click to expand...

I don't see what's so confusing.

I'd love more vacation (wouldn't we all?), but what I get now is fair for both the level of job I'm in and the industry I work in. I know that giving people more vacation than they currently get wouldn't work well, because I know how crazy it gets when someone goes on vacation (scrambling to cover their shifts by calling in people on overtime and begging people to work on their days off). If our 40 or so employees formed a union and demanded more vacation, well, I think we'd just all be out of jobs because the company could quite possibly go under. Not to mention all of the goodwill my employer has towards us would evaporate, and I think that's worth more than forcing him to give us more vacation. (Instead, we need to work to get the company on better financial footing and then come to him and suggest that he consider rewarding us with more vacation time if we can make it work. I can definitely see that happening.)

And the part about "being willing to drop them at the drop of a hat" isn't just me--it's my entire generation, and there's been tons of writing and discussion on this, so you can't fault just me. And yes, I am lucky to have the position I have now (they've been very flexible with my needs and rewarding for the level of work I do), but what's wrong with in the event I come across something even better and find myself even luckier from jumping on that opportunity? (And it's not just at the drop of a hat--there is serious consideration involved, at least for me.)

And I wasn't blaming the unions for my plight, since I'm not in a plight--I was simply pointing out that conditions are sometimes better for both parties involved without them!

Now, if I seriously saw myself at this company for the next 30 years and was faced being stuck with my current pay and vacation indefinitely, then perhaps I'd be more interested in screwing my employer for his every last dime at my benefit, but I, like most people in my generation, know that many far better things will come along my way.

Everydaymatters said:

jackal said:

And I know not everyone is as lucky as I am to work for such a generous employer. But if we suddenly cut wages/bonuses and ticked our employees off, they'd not hesitate to jump right back to our competitors we stole them from.

Click to expand...

Sorry, but it sounds like your employer is having to walk on eggshells.

Maybe things are better in Alaska, but here in the lower 48 off the top of my head I can think of 5 people I know who have had wages cut, hours cut, vacation time cut, benefits cut. And they're happy to have a job!

Your employees wouldn't hesitate to jump back to the competitors! Does the competitor still have all the wages and bonuses?

Maybe we should all move to Alaska.

Click to expand...

Actually, our economy is quite stable. None of our local banks participated in the sub-prime lending, and our resource-based economy isn't as easily hit as other economic bases. A few people are being hurt, but for the most part, it's life as normal up here. The only industry that I foresee being hurt is the leisure-market tourism industry, which is heavily affected by economic times, and which is also unfortunately the industry that I work in. We've scaled back costs for our busy tourist season (not staffing up and increasing our available inventory as much as we normally do) and hope we can make it through until the economy picks back up. So far, we haven't had to cut staff (though we have frozen wages until revenue starts coming in during our tourist season)--we're just not going to up-staff with as many summer temps as we normally do.

My point about the employer having to remain competitive with his wages was to illustrate that we do fine without a union because my employer realizes it's valuable to pay his good people enough to stay with him rather than have them be attracted to the competition. We used to be about even with most of our competitors (slightly below), but we revamped our bonus system and now we're by far the most attractive employer in our market...and wouldn't you know, with the sales bonus system we have, our sales numbers have shot up dramatically and we're doing better (from a sales perspective) than we've ever done before (unfortunately, our customer base to sell to is down because of the economy, so we'll see what happens). If in an effort to reduce costs we drop our wages back down to what they were before, given that our employees are members of a generation that doesn't hesitate to hop to whatever they think serves them best at any given time, some will probably gravitate toward the competition, given that some of them have begun to increase their wages and sales bonuses to compete with ours. So market competition can and does sometimes work in the employees' favor!

sky12065 said:

ALC_Rail_Writer said:

PetalumaLoco said:

ALC_Rail_Writer said:

Am I out of line to request we let this topic die for my sanity?

Click to expand...

Well, you could quit reading it.

Click to expand...

I just don't like the idea of us keeping this thread up here given that the original post was made by a flamer and clearly did not intend to come back to hear our advice-- only rant about how bad Amtrak treated her.

That's not what we're about, is it?

Click to expand...

I agree that this thread probably should have been closed down, but the flaming didn't begin until POST #13 (NOT POST #1) and it probably should have been closed down shortly after it was continued when post #15 was made! <_<

On Edit: I take it back that the flaming didn't start with post #1. By definition, what was posted could be classified as flaming! However, IMO fuel was added to the fire at post #13 and incited some really serious flaming thereafter!

Click to expand...

Post 17 was as dastardly as 15!

Who cares anyway? The OP isn't coming back. She doesn't really care about the advice we have to offer. She wanted to speak her piece and leave us-- which is harmful to the community here because it polarizes us.