Are new sleepers better than the old sleepers?

[railiner]

Burlington timetable 1964
Chicago to Denver one person

coach 31

sleeper base 39

add to sleeper

upper berth 9

lower berth 12

duplex roomette 13

roomette 17

duplex single room 20

bedroom 24

cmpartment 25

drawing room 34

master room (not availalbe on this line)

slumbercoach

add to 31 coach fare, 9 single 16 double

Good list. In addition, you could buy a complete section (upper and lower berth). And of course you could buy a bedroom suite or a bedroom/compartment suite.

Not mentioned in your price list was the fact that back then, for larger accommodations and/or suites you had to purchase the equivalent of additional rail fares or fractions thereof in addition to the room charge(s).

 

[railiner]

Burlington timetable 1964
Chicago to Denver one person

coach 31

sleeper base 39

add to sleeper

upper berth 9

lower berth 12

duplex roomette 13

roomette 17

duplex single room 20

bedroom 24

cmpartment 25

drawing room 34

master room (not availalbe on this line)

slumbercoach

add to 31 coach fare, 9 single 16 double

Wow! Am I reading this right that a slumbercoach cost $40 ($31 coach fare + $9 single), but an upper berth cost $48 ($39 sleeper base + $9 upper berth)?

The reason for this could be because traveling in a berth was considered 'first class' even though not private, while a single slumbercoach room was considered travelling 'coach class'.

 

[Bill Haithcoat]

Burlington timetable 1964
Chicago to Denver one person

coach 31

sleeper base 39

add to sleeper

upper berth 9

lower berth 12

duplex roomette 13

roomette 17

duplex single room 20

bedroom 24

cmpartment 25

drawing room 34

master room (not availalbe on this line)

slumbercoach

add to 31 coach fare, 9 single 16 double

Wow! Am I reading this right that a slumbercoach cost $40 ($31 coach fare + $9 single), but an upper berth cost $48 ($39 sleeper base + $9 upper berth)?

yes.

 

[Bill Haithcoat]

Burlington timetable 1964
Chicago to Denver one person

coach 31

sleeper base 39

add to sleeper

upper berth 9

lower berth 12

duplex roomette 13

roomette 17

duplex single room 20

bedroom 24

cmpartment 25

drawing room 34

master room (not availalbe on this line)

slumbercoach

add to 31 coach fare, 9 single 16 double

Good list. In addition, you could buy a complete section (upper and lower berth). And of course you could buy a bedroom suite or a bedroom/compartment suite.

Not mentioned in your price list was the fact that back then, for larger accommodations and/or suites you had to purchase the equivalent of additional rail fares or fractions thereof in addition to the room charge(s).

That is true. But I am no math expert,I wanted to keep it simple for all concerned, myself included. Also doing my best to explain that a sumberoach really differs from standard sleepers. If a person would look at old consists, they would see slumbercoaches listed as separate item, not mixed in with sleepers

 

[Guest]

1964, the year my daughter was born, I was in the US Navy, my average monthly pay was $150 a month,(we were paid in cash then!!), plus an allotment with quarters/food allowance of $152 a month x 12= $3,624 Annual . When I was stationed @ the Sub Base in New London,Conn. service men could ride the train on the New Haven RR to NYC for $5 each way, and they had a lounge car with beer that cost the outrageous price of $1 and cigarettes were $1 a pack! WOW!!And I got to see the Beautiful Old Penn Station before they tore it down, and spent man y a night on the benches in GCT under the watchful eye of New Yorks finest!

 

[AlanB]

Bill,
I think the party was somewhat correct about the price ratio. I have brought that up in some earlier post always to be trounced by many on this site. But the fact was that you could often upgrade to a sleeper for about half more than what the coach seat cost. I have seen the schedules, (one was posted here not long ago) and my memory is not so bad that I don't definitely recall how the pricing of coach and pullman were done in the 50's. I too pointed out that a sleeper is now 8 to 10 time the cost of a coach fair where it was only 1/2 in the heyday of rail. If they could do it I am somewhat at a loss as to why the ratio now is so different. Of course the usual answer is that the government is forcing them to try and break even and if they can collect the fare, then thats fine with many. I tend to agree with those who believe we already are subsidizing rail travel and when the government said they would save it by taking it over and creating Amtrak, I doubt that passengers thought it meant huge increases in sleeper fare or that lounges or diners would be considered as something to be cut till there were no cost involved. To me that was failure of the government to provide the kind of service that was considered standard rail procedures.

Larry

Larry,

One thing to keep in mind however, in addition to the reasons you've stated above, those old prices did not include meals in the dining car. For better or worse, today's fares do include meals. So that does help to narrow the gap between prices of yore and today.

 

[Bill Haithcoat]

provide low prices

Do you ever actually read my posts?

I do but I also read Classsic Trains magazines and see that even back in the 1950's a sleeper was only a few dollars more than coach fare. It didn''t add four to six times what the cost of the coach fare was.

As for the Duplex roomette debate; there was also a Duplex Single Room which was based on the same principle of partially overlapping rooms. It was slightly more spacious. They were wider and were located on only one side of the corridor. They had a sofa the back of which came down to make up a bed and you slept crosswize. Could this be the slumbercoach that everyone is referencing?

According to a Classic Trains article ( Summer 2008 Pullman Issue) the complete list of sleepers used on trains was: Section, Roomette, Duplex Roomette, Duplex Single Room, Double Bedrooms, (types A B and D), Compartment and Drawing room.

The reason slumbercoaches are not listed, there are two posibilities. One, it is not really considered a sleeping car even though that is what one does in it, and two,possibily it had not been invented yet. I think the slumbercoach was invented about 1956.

 

[Devil's Advocate]

Ran these through the CPI Inflation Calculator from the BLS.

coach 31 ($218.18)

sleeper base 39 ($274.48)

add to sleeper

upper berth 9 ($63.34)

lower berth 12 ($84.46)

duplex roomette 13 ($91.49)

roomette 17 ($119.65)

duplex single room 20 ($140.76)

bedroom 24 ($168.91)

compartment 25 ($175.95)

drawing room 34 ($239.29)

slumbercoach

add to 31 ($218.18) coach fare, 9 ($63.34) single 16 ($112.61) double

 

[Larry H.]

Bill,
I think the party was somewhat correct about the price ratio. I have brought that up in some earlier post always to be trounced by many on this site. But the fact was that you could often upgrade to a sleeper for about half more than what the coach seat cost. I have seen the schedules, (one was posted here not long ago) and my memory is not so bad that I don't definitely recall how the pricing of coach and pullman were done in the 50's. I too pointed out that a sleeper is now 8 to 10 time the cost of a coach fair where it was only 1/2 in the heyday of rail. If they could do it I am somewhat at a loss as to why the ratio now is so different. Of course the usual answer is that the government is forcing them to try and break even and if they can collect the fare, then thats fine with many. I tend to agree with those who believe we already are subsidizing rail travel and when the government said they would save it by taking it over and creating Amtrak, I doubt that passengers thought it meant huge increases in sleeper fare or that lounges or diners would be considered as something to be cut till there were no cost involved. To me that was failure of the government to provide the kind of service that was considered standard rail procedures.

Larry

Larry,

One thing to keep in mind however, in addition to the reasons you've stated above, those old prices did not include meals in the dining car. For better or worse, today's fares do include meals. So that does help to narrow the gap between prices of yore and today.

Wow Alan,

You could buy a lot of food for the difference in price especially since in those days the food was pretty cheap in comparison as well. Somehow the cost structure has changed radically between the two services. Partly due to the crazy idea that traveling sleeper is a luxury instead of a more comfortable accommodation. What really changes it too is what used to be standard, your family members often were charged half price and a round trip fare would be discounted from a regular one way. It used to seem like a reasonable upgrade to sleeper, or pullman as it was. Now if your not rolling in money its nearly a hardship to afford the cost.

Larry

 

[Larry H.]

I just thought of something else that is ironic. The government used to regulate and approve the fares always keeping in mind the needs of the traveling public. A good example of what happens when government runs something, the prices increase as the quality is reduced.. Were in for a lot of fun in the near future.

Larry

 

[Devil's Advocate]

I just thought of something else that is ironic. The government used to regulate and approve the fares always keeping in mind the needs of the traveling public. A good example of what happens when government runs something, the prices increase as the quality is reduced.. Were in for a lot of fun in the near future. Larry

America has been the biggest privatization experiement ever attempted. We privatized profits while susidizing risk and just watched as the tinkle-down economics dribbled over us waiting for everything to get better and better and better. That was the big rallying call ever since Reagan. What I don't understand is now that privatizing everything has left our country completely broke how are folks supposed to get their middle-class jobs back? Do we even make enough stuff to fully support three hundred million people anymore? Might be some rough times ahead indeed.

 

[Ispolkom]

Sure, AlanB is right that now the price includes meals, but that isn't the reason prices are so high. The reason is that demand for them is so high, and Amtrak doesn't have more sleepers. Given that reality, I what is the alternative is to sky-high sleeper prices?

Is it sleepers sold out months ahead of time?

Is it a black market in sleeper tickets, where those with connections buy them cheap and resell them?

What's the alternative?

 

[Bill Haithcoat]

This is very unscientfic, but it seemed to me that dining car prices were quite expensive. Of course I was very young and did not "get out much". And my poor dear parents, God bless them, had survived the Great Depression. To them, everything was expensive.

I should not admit this but if I recall correctly when mother and I would take our little trips from Chattanooga to Atlanta and back on the Georgian I ate half the kitchen and mother sat there, like a martyr,and just had coffee or something, because it was so expensive.

I never rode sleeper until I was working and thus paid for it myself.

 

[dlagrua]

We must also consider that Amtrak has a very high cost in employee salaries and benefits. People are being paid $40-$80,000 for positions that the private sector would consider simple unskilled labor. When Pullman was around they kept the Porters salaries low as they earned tips for providing good service. Today not only do unskilled uneducated people get paid big money, many of them are lazy,disinterested and rude. In Pullmans day he would not have put up with this type of behavior. IMO all of the onboard staff is way overpaid and that keeps the sleeper prices elevated.

 

[ALC Rail Writer]

Find me a Train Attendant who is pulling in $80,000 on salary from Amtrak and I will eat my phone.

 

[Larry H.]

I just thought of something else that is ironic. The government used to regulate and approve the fares always keeping in mind the needs of the traveling public. A good example of what happens when government runs something, the prices increase as the quality is reduced.. Were in for a lot of fun in the near future. Larry

America has been the biggest privatization experiement ever attempted. We privatized profits while susidizing risk and just watched as the tinkle-down economics dribbled over us waiting for everything to get better and better and better. That was the big rallying call ever since Reagan. What I don't understand is now that privatizing everything has left our country completely broke how are folks supposed to get their middle-class jobs back? Do we even make enough stuff to fully support three hundred million people anymore? Might be some rough times ahead indeed.

Trickle down hasn't worked all that well I somewhat agree. However what is the choice? All the now unionized government jobs being paid for by guess who? You and me. It takes about five workers at non government jobs to cover the cost of one government worker according to a study I just heard on the radio. Why do you think Greece is going bankrupt and all the other countries are looking at ways to cut back on their welfare to grave socialistic programs. The bill has come due and as we know there is no money.. this is one reason I personally brought up making an buying things from our selves. The money goes to the worker here and stays here to produce more jobs and security for our country. When we got lots of stimulus money for cars, the money in large part went to foreign workers. We can't just keep sending all our wealth out of the country only to borrow it back in deficit spending.

I think its very complicated. Yes some greed is at play, but its at play from all directions. The companies want more, the citizens want it cheaper, banks want more and then we have the government making some pretty lousy laws which made things even worse, and its not just one side that has done that. I don't know how you get it back, its probably too late, but the day when a CEO made a nice living and took pride in the town he lived in and provided a living wage for his workers has come to a screeching halt for various reasons. One is the ideal that companies should be able to buy up every thing in site and then dispose of the workers and plants leaving towns destitute. That is a government problem and a moral problem, turning it around isn't likely it seems. But the whole concept of every expanding business has ruined too many jobs and cities. For that business I would agree is at fault. But the opposite side of it is what were getting now, unbridled government who thinks they know all and can control all. That end is as bad or worse than the first mess.

 

[Sue in KY]

Thanks, Bill. Now, would anyone care to share their wages they made in 1964???? I was still in elementary school!According to this website, the average for 1964 was $4,576.32

My husband and I married in 1965, graduated from college, and both went to work -- he, as a "management trainee" for a large business machines corporation, began at $4500 a year; I, as a lowly woman, started as the entire PR department in a bank at just under $3600 a year.

Our rent was $85 a month for a two-bedroom duplex and we bought our first (brand-new!) car, a '66 Chevy Chevelle Malibu SuperSport, and the payments, spread over a three-year period, were $82.17 monthly.

We wuz RICH! :lol:

 

[Green Maned Lion]

provide low prices

Do you ever actually read my posts?

I do but I also read Classsic Trains magazines and see that even back in the 1950's a sleeper was only a few dollars more than coach fare. It didn''t add four to six times what the cost of the coach fare was.

First off, coach, as my other topic indicated, was way more expensive than today. But secondarily, the pricing structure is different. For instance, the price in coach in 1971 from NYP to CHI was $51.25 ($268). Comparatively, while the Bedroom had a specific charge of $28.25 ($147.99), it also had a required fare increase of $30.25 ($158.47), thus bringing the actual upcharge between travelling in Coach and traveling in sleeper to $58.50 ($306.46). Or 114% of coach price.

Now, let us take an example of two people travelling together (which is much cheaper on Amtrak, trust me). Let us assume a theoretical price in between low and high buckets, ok? Railfare is $88 per person, ok? $176 for two people. $616 for the room. $792, room accounting for 78% of the price.

1971, the "coach" fare is 102.50 ($536.96) for the two people. The rail-fare upcharge for traveling in sleeper is $60.50 for the two people ($316.94). And the specific fare for the Bedroom is $56.50 ($295.98), or a total sleeper upcharge of $117. That means that of the total cost of $219.50, the sleeper is 53% of the price.

Now, consider that even the highest bucket coach price is half what it was then, and you can see the actual trend. It isn't that sleepers have gotten more expensive... it is just that coach has gotten cheaper!

We must also consider that Amtrak has a very high cost in employee salaries and benefits. People are being paid $40-$80,000 for positions that the private sector would consider simple unskilled labor. When Pullman was around they kept the Porters salaries low as they earned tips for providing good service. Today not only do unskilled uneducated people get paid big money, many of them are lazy,disinterested and rude. In Pullmans day he would not have put up with this type of behavior. IMO all of the onboard staff is way overpaid and that keeps the sleeper prices elevated.

As someone who actually works with their hands for a living, I find people like you to be disgusting. Like you, I too have a pointless piece of paper that proves that I have spent 4 years in college doing things I could have done the day I graduated high school. However, unlike you I don't believe it does, or should, entitle me to being paid well.

Most white-collar workers aren't worth half of what they are paid, and that is a fact. It is those people who are supposedly "unskilled" labor who work their asses off supporting your way of life. And then when they get paid well you complain.

The only place where blue-collar career workers make less than the lazy, arrogant, stuck up, and generally selfish white collar types are in the places that exploit us because they illegally prevent unions from forming. Such as Wal-Mart. Who has been taking our economy for a ride for more years than I care to think about.

 

[dlagrua]

provide low prices

Do you ever actually read my posts?

I do but I also read Classsic Trains magazines and see that even back in the 1950's a sleeper was only a few dollars more than coach fare. It didn''t add four to six times what the cost of the coach fare was.

First off, coach, as my other topic indicated, was way more expensive than today. But secondarily, the pricing structure is different. For instance, the price in coach in 1971 from NYP to CHI was $51.25 ($268). Comparatively, while the Bedroom had a specific charge of $28.25 ($147.99), it also had a required fare increase of $30.25 ($158.47), thus bringing the actual upcharge between travelling in Coach and traveling in sleeper to $58.50 ($306.46). Or 114% of coach price.

Now, let us take an example of two people travelling together (which is much cheaper on Amtrak, trust me). Let us assume a theoretical price in between low and high buckets, ok? Railfare is $88 per person, ok? $176 for two people. $616 for the room. $792, room accounting for 78% of the price.

1971, the "coach" fare is 102.50 ($536.96) for the two people. The rail-fare upcharge for traveling in sleeper is $60.50 for the two people ($316.94). And the specific fare for the Bedroom is $56.50 ($295.98), or a total sleeper upcharge of $117. That means that of the total cost of $219.50, the sleeper is 53% of the price.

Now, consider that even the highest bucket coach price is half what it was then, and you can see the actual trend. It isn't that sleepers have gotten more expensive... it is just that coach has gotten cheaper!

We must also consider that Amtrak has a very high cost in employee salaries and benefits. People are being paid $40-$80,000 for positions that the private sector would consider simple unskilled labor. When Pullman was around they kept the Porters salaries low as they earned tips for providing good service. Today not only do unskilled uneducated people get paid big money, many of them are lazy,disinterested and rude. In Pullmans day he would not have put up with this type of behavior. IMO all of the onboard staff is way overpaid and that keeps the sleeper prices elevated.

As someone who actually works with their hands for a living, I find people like you to be disgusting. Like you, I too have a pointless piece of paper that proves that I have spent 4 years in college doing things I could have done the day I graduated high school. However, unlike you I don't believe it does, or should, entitle me to being paid well.

Most white-collar workers aren't worth half of what they are paid, and that is a fact. It is those people who are supposedly "unskilled" labor who work their asses off supporting your way of life. And then when they get paid well you complain.

The only place where blue-collar career workers make less than the lazy, arrogant, stuck up, and generally selfish white collar types are in the places that exploit us because they illegally prevent unions from forming. Such as Wal-Mart. Who has been taking our economy for a ride for more years than I care to think about.

Yes we both earned college degrees but its doesn't sound like we achieved affluence does it? FYI, I've also had jobs in construction where I in fact worked with my hands and still get them dirty around the home and garden.

Getting back to what I was saying. Point is that government employees with far less education and skills are being paid enomous salaries, benefits and pensions. Far better than anything comparable in the private sector. Compare a waiter in the private sector to one working on an Amtrak train. The waiter in the private sector is paid $4.00 per hour (below min wage by law) plus tips (and w. no benefits) and the Amtrak waiter is paid $17.00 per hour, with termendous benefits, full healthcare, pension and still earns tips. If there is any wonder why Amtrak loses money it is because they spend it like the supply is infinitesimal. The federal government is now broke and everything that they touch loses money, not just Amtrak. It is the same government that you love who gave license to US corporations to close their factories and move millions of middle class jobs to China. It is the same government that caused the demise of the private sector Unions and the same government that will drive us all into a debt that we will never climb out of and its not a one party problem.

 

[AlanB]

Getting back to what I was saying. Point is that government employees with far less education and skills are being paid enomous salaries, benefits and pensions. Far better than anything comparable in the private sector. Compare a waiter in the private sector to one working on an Amtrak train. The waiter in the private sector is paid $4.00 per hour (below min wage by law) plus tips (and w. no benefits) and the Amtrak waiter is paid $17.00 per hour, with termendous benefits, full healthcare, pension and still earns tips. If there is any wonder why Amtrak loses money it is because they spend it like the supply is infinitesimal. The federal government is now broke and everything that they touch loses money, not just Amtrak. It is the same government that you love who gave license to US corporations to close their factories and move millions of middle class jobs to China. It is the same government that caused the demise of the private sector Unions and the same government that will drive us all into a debt that we will never climb out of and its not a one party problem.

First, in most cases even waiters on the ground still have access to some benefits. Perhaps they aren't as nice as those enjoyed by Amtrak's waiters, but again most still have the ability to join work health plans and get vacation time.

And then we come to the real differences between Amtrak's waiters and those in a regular resturant. Most regular waiters work one, maybe two meals per day. Amtrak's work 3 meals per day in many cases. Most regular's don't have to work on a moving floor in cramped spaces. Most regular's go home and sleep in their own beds at night, not on a moving train and in a hotel. Most regular's go home to their family's each night, Amtrak's don't. Most regular's have bus boys, Amtrak's don't.

Bottom line is that the only thing that they have in common is that they both wait on tables; beyond that any further comparisons are useless.

 

[Green Maned Lion]

Yes we both earned college degrees but its doesn't sound like we achieved affluence does it? FYI, I've also had jobs in construction where I in fact worked with my hands and still get them dirty around the home and garden. Getting back to what I was saying. Point is that government employees with far less education and skills are being paid enomous salaries, benefits and pensions. Far better than anything comparable in the private sector. Compare a waiter in the private sector to one working on an Amtrak train. The waiter in the private sector is paid $4.00 per hour (below min wage by law) plus tips (and w. no benefits) and the Amtrak waiter is paid $17.00 per hour, with termendous benefits, full healthcare, pension and still earns tips. If there is any wonder why Amtrak loses money it is because they spend it like the supply is infinitesimal. The federal government is now broke and everything that they touch loses money, not just Amtrak. It is the same government that you love who gave license to US corporations to close their factories and move millions of middle class jobs to China. It is the same government that caused the demise of the private sector Unions and the same government that will drive us all into a debt that we will never climb out of and its not a one party problem.

First off, many waitresses are underpaid. That Amtrak pays its waiters what they are worth and you complain about it says more about the nasty nature of arrogant middle class americans than it does about Amtrak's salary practices.

Secondarily, if you think waiting on an Amtrak train is "unskilled labor", I know there are many heritage rail operators who offer dining cars. Why don't you get onto one of them and try your hand on waiting tables on a train? Unskilled labor is working at McDonald as a cashier, or pumping gas at a gas station.

Craftsman, electricians, trainmen, engineers, mechanics, and yes, train on-board service staff are NOT unskilled labor. They do jobs that require skill, deft execution, and considerable ability. The definition of skilled labor is not "having gone to an overblown college or university". They work hard for their money, and in my experience, about 8 out of 10 Amtrak employees more than earn it.

My only argument against unions are those 2 out of 10, which should be much easier to hand a pink slip to.