Amtrak Numbers Improving

[Amfleet]

From National Corridors Initiative

Amtrak’s numbers continue improving
Amtrak’s number for the current fiscal year through March 2004 show ridership totaled 12,140,180. The carrier expected 11,742,565 passengers. That translated to earning $933,978,000 instead of the expected $909,745,000. Total Operating Expenses came to $1,494,219,000 instead of the expected $1,552,326,000.

Source: Amtrak

So I guess the harsh winter, loss/change of service, and long delays aren't affecting Amtrak so badly.

 

[Bill Haithcoat]

Thanks for sharing that with us, Amfleet.

Guess it would have been significantly even better without the harsh winter, loss/change of service and horrendous delays which would not be tolerated by any other transportation company, no matter how excusable.

Bet it would have been a lot better. If only we could get certain folks in Washington, a city so well served by Amtrak, to understand this.

 

[railman]

Mr Haithcoat,

Please clarify what the folks in Washington are in need of understanding. Your post implies that Amtrak's corporate employees are either totally clueless or else don't give a sh*t what goes on outside the Beltway.

Many of the folks who post here think David Gunn is doing a fantastic job. Well I contend that he can't do that "fantastic job" all by his lonesome!

The sorry truth is that the management employees in DC - and that includes David Gunn himself - are nearly powerless to bring down any wrath on the likes of CSX or UP for hosing Amtrak's non-NEC passenger train operations.

The Amtrak managers in the field are either spread too thin, disliked and resented too intensely by the rank and file or feel powerless to effect any improvements in the status quo.

If you're post was meant to refer to the state of the trains themselves, well those scarce FedBucks only go so far to rebuild, overhaul and renovate equipment and infrastructure.

So let's be fair in our critism of Amtrak's corporate employees and keep things in their proper perspective.

 

[Amfleet]

Railman,

By folks in Washington, Bill means Congress and the government. Not Amtrak management.

 

[jccollins]

railman - It sounds like Bill was referring more to the government (Congress and the President) and their lack of adequate Amtrak funding more so than a poor state of Amtrak corporate management.

 

[railman]

Thanks for the clarification. I humbly ask for Mr Haithcoat's forgiveness for my misunderstanding.

 

[battalion51]

For the record, a lot of Amtrak employees do resent their bosses, mostly because their bosses have no clue how to run a train. Until I see a Manager out there personally busting their butt to load 175 passengers in 10 minutes, I think the barrier will exsist.

 

[Bill Haithcoat]

Yes-

By all means---

I was referring to the politicians, not David Gunn (God bless him!)

Thanks to those of you who did know what I meant.

I do not have a computer at home, can only respond from work, so that is why I did not respond to this anymore quickly than this morning.

 

[haolerider]

Battalion, I don't know where you hang your hat, but there are plenty of managers (and above), who bust their butt every day, loading trains, helping passengers and generally keeping the trains running, in spite of the problems with under-staffed locations, under-funded budgets and an unfortunate lack of awareness of Amtrak.

You seem to have access to "inside information" from Amtrak employees, but it would appear that your scope is a bit narrow. Remember, there are two sides to every story.

 

[battalion51]

Granted there are some bossmen who are active in loading trains, interacting with employees, but there are a bunch who don't do jack. Many of the bossmen in these parts are out to get their employees for stupid things, like not carrying their service standards with them every trip. Granted spot checks for things like bathrooms that aren't clean, fudging the books, etc. should be checked, but stupid stuff like that is pointless.

 

[engine999]

Granted there are some bossmen who are active in loading trains, interacting with employees, but there are a bunch who don't do jack. Many of the bossmen in these parts are out to get their employees for stupid things, like not carrying their service standards with them every trip. Granted spot checks for things like bathrooms that aren't clean, fudging the books, etc. should be checked, but stupid stuff like that is pointless.

Considering that some thing are more ridiculous then others, some customer satisfaction elements should be checked up on. The bathrooms should be clean and the cars should not be totally disheveled. I have more leniency towards some issues when the train is coming from an overnight run but when you board 3 hours after it left its terminal it is ridiculous. But then you don't blame the crew much as it is more of the yards fault.

 

[battalion51]

Bathrooms that aren't clean generally are the crews fault. There are a couple of attendants out of Miami that ALWAYS have clean bathrroms, no matter what, and it's not just a fluke because they keep them clean. It can be done, and should be done.

 

[haolerider]

Battalion, I agree that going after crew members for petty things is a petty way to manage, but having the Rules book and Service Standards up to date and in your possession is not petty. Rules are rules.

If there is an accident and the OBS staff does not have their Rules books up to date and are not following the correct protocol, there are major problems for the company. If there are over zealous managers out there, there are just as many "under-zealous" crew members.