Amtrak Priority Law Goes to Supreme Court (Decided 3/9/15)

Amtrak Unlimited Discussion Forum

Help Support Amtrak Unlimited Discussion Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
Status
Not open for further replies.
A very interesting multi-faceted look at the issues involved. Looks like no matter what they decide, things will be different for Amtrak, and being considered a government agency or private company have both their pluses and minuses. As usual the situation is not all black and white.

Then again the SCOTUS may bounce the whole thing back to the Apellate Circuit Court and ask them to rule on the Common Carrier responsibility issue, though I would be surprised enough to fall off a chair if they do that.

At the end of the day though, even without those metrics if STB so chooses it can act on egregious divergence from reasonable operational delays caused by mishandling of Amtrak trains by host railroads. OTOH, even with the metrics in place, the STB could simply not do much. AFAICT in both cases it is upto Amtrak to petition the STB to do something and for the STB to actually do something. So the existence of the metrics or lack thereof is possibly a bit of a storm in a teacup. It just defines what would be considered egregious, thus saving some argument at STB on whether a deviation was egregious enough to act upon or not.

But as mentioned by our friend Malcolm, a clear ruling on government agency vs. private corporation could have far reaching and unpredictable consequences for Amtrak either way. Malcolm gives a more considered broader picture than the likes of NARP have done in their pronouncements IMHO.
 
The justices travelling the Northeast corridor may find their Amtrak routes running late more often if the company is forced to give freight competitors a fair shake.
I suppose the Economist did not do its homework on who owns the Northeast Corridor. Oh well. All this is likely hard to keep track of from London. :)
It was corrected.
 
At the end of the day though, even without those metrics if STB so chooses it can act on egregious divergence from reasonable operational delays caused by mishandling of Amtrak trains by host railroads. OTOH, even with the metrics in place, the STB could simply not do much. AFAICT in both cases it is upto Amtrak to petition the STB to do something and for the STB to actually do something.
Yeah, government is always about the people implementing the rules, not about the actual rules. Such is life.
 
Let's say that somehow Amtrak comes out on top. Could Amtrak then reduce padding on some routes, since the freight railroads can only delay the trains 900 minutes per 10,000 miles? The Sunset Limited, Texas Eagle, and Coast Starlight are routes that come to mind that are heavily padded compared to 20 years ago.
 
If anything I would expect the reverse. As jis indicated, the "delay" standards are, if I'm not mistaken, vs. the timetable...so other railroads would probably be more willing to cut padding if they know that a problem arising won't get them in hot water.
 
A private rail road in hot water over Amtrak schedule keeping? Anybody have dates and railroads punished for abusing Amtrak in recent memory or is this just another unsubstantiated boogieman we're helpfully creating out of thin air?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
It is my understanding that the public timetables and the agreed upon running times with the host railroad are unique in and of themselves. There is padding for the host railroad's recovery over a route section, just as there is in the printed schedule. Not the same thing by any means. For example (and this is just for entertainment purposes) the BNSF might get 30 mins padding on the SEA-PDX segment of the Starlight. Whereas the Amtrak.com schedule has 45 extra mins over the same segment. So, a 40 minute delay over this section would count against the BNSF for exceeding their 30 minute threshold. But Amtrak's OTP (on time performance) record considers this an "on time" arrival based on THEIR schedule.

Over the years, the schedules have been lengthened due to changing conditions over the route (more train traffic, slower speeds, method of operation etc...) and Amtrak's desire to maintain "reliable" service.
 
A private rail road in hot water over Amtrak schedule keeping? Anybody have dates and railroads punished for abusing Amtrak in recent memory or is this just another unsubstantiated boogieman we're helpfully creating out of thin air?

Off the top of my head I believe that CSX and NS were taking some heat from DOT for the delays in Ohio around October.
 
A private rail road in hot water over Amtrak schedule keeping? Anybody have dates and railroads punished for abusing Amtrak in recent memory or is this just another unsubstantiated boogieman we're helpfully creating out of thin air?
:blink:
 
A private rail road in hot water over Amtrak schedule keeping? Anybody have dates and railroads punished for abusing Amtrak in recent memory or is this just another unsubstantiated boogieman we're helpfully creating out of thin air?

Off the top of my head I believe that CSX and NS were taking some heat from DOT for the delays in Ohio around October.
I'll be a lot more cynical if the STB complaint that Amtrak filed against NS in the fall gets killed off. The complaint has been filed and is before the STB, so we'll see what happens.

By the way, I believe that the complaint would still be valid even if the lawsuit gets struck down considering how bad the delays have been. As I've noted before, Amtrak has generally been gun-shy about filing formal complaints and lawsuits (the most well-known being when Amtrak used eminent domain to take over a section of railroad for the Montrealer due to the owner not keeping it up...and Amtrak suing SP over mishandling the Sunset Limited).

The simple fact is that it doesn't usually get bad enough for Amtrak to do this (since such a claim is expensive to pursue, not to mention that a long history of such complaints would probably result in freights being even more hesitant to take on new passenger service than they already are). Moreover, it isn't always clear who to blame...if UP regularly delays a train before it gets to BNSF territory by, say, 60 minutes and the train then loses four hours by being out of slot does Amtrak go after UP for a relatively mild delay (by LD train standards, at least) or BNSF (where most of the delay happened)? UP will respond that the delay isn't that bad (900 minutes of delay per 10k train miles would probably cover this much of a delay and then some on a 1000-mile run) and there should be enough padding in the BNSF section, while BNSF will blame UP for getting them the train late. So not only do the delays have to be big, they also have to be someone's fault (and not transitional, such as construction-related delays).
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Also worth noting that, based on my analysis of Amtrak's financials, BNSF appears to have fully compensated Amtrak financially for the Empire Builder delays of the past few years. CSX and NS do *not* appear to have compensated Amtrak for the Capitol Limited and Lake Shore Limited delays.

So I'd expect that it also has to be *financially worth it* to file a complaint. What would happen if Amtrak won against BNSF, and got no money out of it? Kind of pointless...
 
The Supreme court isn't there to award damages, per se. It's to set presidence for legal compliances. Sure, damages may be awarded, but it's the priciple of the thing that truly matters. If Amtrak loses against CN, NS, CSX, then you think BNSF will continue those penalties?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Moreover, it isn't always clear who to blame...if UP regularly delays a train before it gets to BNSF territory by, say, 60 minutes and the train then loses four hours by being out of slot ...
I ask again whether slots actually exits or are a myth. Back in November I rode #5 from MTP to DEN. As we were arriving in Denver, the conductor apologized for the almost 3 hour late arrival, saying that engine problems caused a 1/2 hour late departure from CHI which causes us to be out of slot.

I later asked him if he believed that slot story, telling him that I bet we would have lost just as much time if we had departed on time. He chuckled said: I hear what you are saying.

Incidentally, the UP has be doing very well in the last few years delivering #6 to Denver.
 
If Amtrak loses this case, could it mean that it would be easier to add service, like daily Sunset, Desert Wind, etc., as the freight railroads could potentially demand fewer infrastructure enhancements because they no longer need to meet the 80% OTP threshold for LD trains? Perhaps losing the case would actually be a good thing :)
 
The reason that it is impossible to start new LD trains is because (a) there is no additional equipment available, and (b) adding any LD train - specially out west, cannot really be done without adding to the deficit in the operating budget. So no matter what happens to this case, there is a very low likelihood that any new LD train will get added until the budget setting dynamics changes in Congress.
 
If Amtrak loses this case, could it mean that it would be easier to add service, like daily Sunset, Desert Wind, etc., as the freight railroads could potentially demand fewer infrastructure enhancements because they no longer need to meet the 80% OTP threshold for LD trains? Perhaps losing the case would actually be a good thing :)
Why would less than 80% OTP, with an hour of "It was totally on time" in addition to the hours of padding that it already receives, ever be considered an acceptable service for Amtrak to initiate?
 
I am glad Amtrak is fighting CSX and NS in the STB. We should all support it, not try to pick it apart for our own self-aggrandizement.
 
I believe the complaint that Amtrak filed with STB is only about NS. CSX is not involved in that. The complaint is about NS's handling of the Capitol Limited between Chicago and Pittsburgh, which is entirely NS. Amtrak has not filed any complaints about the handling of the Lake Shore limited between Schenectady and Cleveland, which would be CSX, yet. Some folks think, that is partly because Amtrak's own problems on LSL are too significant for Amtrak to complain about those delays. Better to keep the sleeping dog lie.
 
I believe the complaint that Amtrak filed with STB is only about NS. CSX is not involved in that. The complaint is about NS's handling of the Capitol Limited between Chicago and Pittsburgh, which is entirely NS. Amtrak has not filed any complaints about the handling of the Lake Shore limited between Schenectady and Cleveland, which would be CSX, yet. Some folks think, that is partly because Amtrak's own problems on LSL are too significant for Amtrak to complain about those delays. Better to keep the sleeping dog lie.
Amtrak's STB filing was against both NS and CSX.

Press Release
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top