Bad Image on Coast Starlight

[Rafi]

I'm definitely in the "headphones-on-when-not-in-a-sleeper" camp. I just consider it common courtesy, and make it a rule not just for a scanner, but for my laptop, too. There's nothing more annoying to me than someone in the seat in front of or next to me who's watching an action movie DVD at full volume without headphones. The only time I've ever really broken my rule was on the Adirondack last year in the Great Dome where just about everyone in the car was a railfan and asked me to unplug my headphones so they could listen in stereo with the other scanners in the car.

NERDS!

Then again... I was the only guy with three different GPS units.

Rafi

 

[Joel N. Weber II]

It is illegal to use a scanner in furtherance of a crime in California. And that gives law enforcement, again, an excuse to be suspicious.
Also, interfering with a train crew *is* illegal in California, and in this case, the police were called. So this guy's scanner use was arguably illegal in this case, as he was potentially using it in furtherance of that crime - it would be up to the police if they wanted to try to prosecute that (provided that initial call had not been canceled). Might not be very easy to make that charge stick, as it's not really the spirit of the California scanner law, but they could try depending on whether or not they wanted to be jerks about it. I wouldn't rely on the warm-heartedness of a cop, though.

Do California laws apply while on an Amtrak train that happens to be in California, though? I thought something had been said about railroads being federal territory.

 

[PetalumaLoco]

I doubt this is true.see here for laws regulating scanners. In any case it's not illegal in California.

It is illegal to use a scanner in furtherance of a crime in California. And that gives law enforcement, again, an excuse to be suspicious.

Also, interfering with a train crew *is* illegal in California, and in this case, the police were called. So this guy's scanner use was arguably illegal in this case, as he was potentially using it in furtherance of that crime - it would be up to the police if they wanted to try to prosecute that (provided that initial call had not been canceled). Might not be very easy to make that charge stick, as it's not really the spirit of the California scanner law, but they could try depending on whether or not they wanted to be jerks about it. I wouldn't rely on the warm-heartedness of a cop, though.

The point is not that you shouldn't use a scanner because it's illegal - that's not what I said. The point is, and this is what I said up there, that it's in your own interests to be discrete about it, and not give anyone a reason to want you to stop using your scanner.

Also, the guy was traveling, and just generally when traveling, it's also in your interests to know that scanner laws in some states can be more restrictive than others. For example, in New York it's arguably illegal to own a scanner without a permit (hasn't really been tested in court; the law itself is vague on what this applies to). It's definitely illegal to use a scanner while in a car; that's explicit. So it's best to use something of a "lowest common denominator" mentality when using a scanner while traveling, which means not drawing attention to yourself.

I see your point, with exception to "It is illegal to use a scanner in furtherance of a crime in California. And that gives law enforcement, again, an excuse to be suspicious." Lot's of things are illegal to use in committing a crime. I wouldn't think using a scanner on a train in any way can be construed as suspicious. Unless you're remaking The Great Train Robbery.

 

[PetalumaLoco]

It is illegal to use a scanner in furtherance of a crime in California. And that gives law enforcement, again, an excuse to be suspicious.
Also, interfering with a train crew *is* illegal in California, and in this case, the police were called. So this guy's scanner use was arguably illegal in this case, as he was potentially using it in furtherance of that crime - it would be up to the police if they wanted to try to prosecute that (provided that initial call had not been canceled). Might not be very easy to make that charge stick, as it's not really the spirit of the California scanner law, but they could try depending on whether or not they wanted to be jerks about it. I wouldn't rely on the warm-heartedness of a cop, though.

Do California laws apply while on an Amtrak train that happens to be in California, though? I thought something had been said about railroads being federal territory.

Hmm, then why turn troublemakers over to the local police? If Amtrak prosecutes, which courts to they use?

 

[Ispolkom]

Do California laws apply while on an Amtrak train that happens to be in California, though? I thought something had been said about railroads being federal territory.

I don't think Amtrak is federal jurisdiction (though it might depend on crime and circumstances). Here's a recent news story about an Amtrak engineer who was assaulted. The trial is in a state court. http://www.sacbee.com/crime/story/1314866.html

 

[Steve4031]

I think its local jursdiction on some issues, and federal on others. I remember riding trains in the 80's and noticing that at some points drinks were not served on Sunday because it was too early in the day. The crew noted that drinks could be served once the train left that area. I don't know what they do now. Since I am not a drinker, I don't now.

I know that Amtrak's national timetable clearly states that one should use headphones when listening to music players, DVD's etc, no matte where you are in the train. I use a scanner in the sleeper with the door closed so as not to disturb other passengers. Even so, by the wording in the timetable, I would be in violation of the rule. My assumption is that if I choose not to follow these guidelines, I could be confronted by a crew member, and if I were to get into a disagreement with them, I could be asked to leave the train.

Now I have experienced some Amtrak employees that do not have a clue as to how to talk to people. These sorts main concern is to control passengers so that the crews' routines are not disrupted. This seems to be the type that you met on the Coast Starlight. These types only know how to escalate a situation, rather than to deescalate it. It is best to recognize what you are dealing with and walk away.

I think Amtrak should rethink the policy of having the wine tasting during the most scenic part of the trip. This is the time that sleeping car passengers are going to want to most enjoy the ambience of the Pacific Parlor Car. Having a room on the opposite side of the train from the ocean, and being asked to leave the PPC would irritate me too. By this time the sightseer would be full, and I would not have an opportunity to enjoy the view in a comfortable manner.

I always thought that Amtrak put its best crews on the starlight, but it looks like on this trip they had some rejects from the Lake Shore Limited.

 

[sky12065]

I think Amtrak should rethink the policy of having the wine tasting during the most scenic part of the trip. This is the time that sleeping car passengers are going to want to most enjoy the ambience of the Pacific Parlor Car.

I don't know what the policy is, but it would seem to make sense that any wine tasting should not take place until at least one half hour after sunset!

 

[MattW]

If you don't want any trouble with the scanner police, get a Technician class ham radio license. Just make sure to get a radio that can receive a good range, mine covers 108-170Mhz and 400-480Mhz receive. I guess technically you don't need your license to listen on a ham radio, but if you have a license, then that IS federal territory no matter what geographical territory you happen to be in.

 

[Joel N. Weber II]

If you don't want any trouble with the scanner police, get a Technician class ham radio license. Just make sure to get a radio that can receive a good range, mine covers 108-170Mhz and 400-480Mhz receive. I guess technically you don't need your license to listen on a ham radio, but if you have a license, then that IS federal territory no matter what geographical territory you happen to be in.

I'm not sure ``federal territory'' is exactly the right phrase, but yes, if you have both a ham radio license and a ham radio transciever, the FCC has said that it is absolutely OK to possess that radio, even if it just so happens to be able to recieve various things outside the ham bands where someone who has no ham license would be prohibited by state law from having a reciever. However, I think a ham radio license does not give permission to possess a recieve-only scanner if such scanners are prohibitied by state law.

But, in spite of this very good reason to have a radio that's capable of transmitting on the train, it turns out that you basically aren't allowed to actually transmit on the train: I'm pretty sure the FCC rules for ham radio operators say that if you're in a train, on a boat, on an airplane, or on an automobile, you need the permission of the conductor / captain / pilot / driver to transmit on the ham bands. (It is possible that one or two of those actually aren't in the rules; it's been a while since I've looked.)

Due to the typical limitations of typical recievers, it's possible that a ham transmitter on the train could interfere with the train crew's reception. (So could a transmitter on a public street 50 feet away from the train cause such interference, but the conductor has no authority to tell a ham on that public street to not transmit, and if Amtrak complained to the FCC about such a ham who wasn't on the train, Amtrak would get zero sympathy from the FCC if the problem was just that Amtrak's radios fail to reject signals outside the frequencies assigned to Amtrak.)

I did find at the OTOL mini-fest last week that my particular ham transciever did not seem to be as good at picking up the crew members' handheld radios as some of the radios that other members of the OTOL group had, but I was using the stock antenna, and I certainly have a longer antenna with an SMA connector somewhere that I could try (or I have an SMA to BNC adaptor, and some old 10base2 ethernet cables that can be adapted into even longer wires; but at some point that starts to be less subtle).

 

[Joel N. Weber II]

I think Amtrak should rethink the policy of having the wine tasting during the most scenic part of the trip. This is the time that sleeping car passengers are going to want to most enjoy the ambience of the Pacific Parlor Car.

I tend to drink very little, but it wouldn't surprise me if there are some passengers who figure the wine tasting would be best when combined with the best scenery.

 

[AAARGH!]

I think Amtrak should rethink the policy of having the wine tasting during the most scenic part of the trip. This is the time that sleeping car passengers are going to want to most enjoy the ambience of the Pacific Parlor Car.

I tend to drink very little, but it wouldn't surprise me if there are some passengers who figure the wine tasting would be best when combined with the best scenery.

For those of us who do not drink, being kicked out of the PPC (as I was on my southound CS leg) is downright rude. I paid for the right to be there for the whole trip. My roomette was on the land side so I wanted to be in the PPC for the scenic part. I had to go to the SSL (crowded and loud) for that hour.

On the northbound leg, I chose to pay the $5 but not drink. The attendant gave me twice the cheese and crackers though. As the wine tasting was not fully attended, he did let some non-whino's stay in the car free and sat them at the dining tables. I was mildly miffed that I paid the $5, but it was my choice and the cheese was good.

I understand why they clear the car out (to get the car full of people paying money), but if they know ahead of time that the tasting is not sold out, they should let people come back. If he told me, 'just check back before we start and if there is still room, you can stay', I would have prefered that.

 

[Alice]

I think Amtrak should rethink the policy of having the wine tasting during the most scenic part of the trip. This is the time that sleeping car passengers are going to want to most enjoy the ambience of the Pacific Parlor Car.

I don't know what the policy is, but it would seem to make sense that any wine tasting should not take place until at least one half hour after sunset!

The PPC is also used for meals so wine tasting is squeezed between lunch and dinner. Now, they use the tables for meals and lounge chairs for tasting, but the crew is the same. Sometimes they borrow sleeper or coach crew, too, for tasting.

I've paid for tasting and just eaten cheese. They say they need the money anyway to justify keeping the cars.

 

[Steve4031]

The big issue here is how the different crews handled the issue. In some cases, passengers were allowed to stay, others not. Each crew does its own thing in its own way. The crew in original situation would never had created this mess if they handled it like the other crews did. Now if the scanner was the issue, all that has to be said is that if you are going to be in here with the scanner, than use headphones or turn it off. But it does not have to be a situation that leads to people getting put off the train.

 

[amtrakwolverine]

you were asked to leave the PPC cause you didn't want to pay the fee for the wine tasting. then you became and raving lunitic by demanding you get free wine and cheese and having your scanner on FULL BLAST for the rest of the train to hear.

 

[RTOlson]

Just to get this out of the way -- I do not condone poor customer service and grant that there is more than one perspective in this story. Some posters allege that many of us are too quick to defend Amtrak in situations such as this.

On that note -- What was going on downstairs in the Parlour Car? It is, after all, a bi-level car. If it is somehow necessary to close off the upper level for a wine tasting, why can't non-wine tasting sleeper passengers go down to the lower level until it is over? Based on photos, it's not the most comfortable option for sightseeing (and perhaps there was a movie being shown which would eliminate sightseeing). However, if it were open, it would enable passengers to remain in the car and avoid having to mingle with the "common rabble" in the Sightseer Lounge.

 

[Steve4031]

I think the downstairs area is set up as a small movie theater with a tv and rows of chairs facing the tv. I have never been down there, but I recall seeing pictures. I don't think it would be the place where people would want to be for a wine tasting.

Really, all Amtrak has to do is create a system and guidelines that meets the needs of all of the passengers, and then make sure that all crews follow the system. Of course, they have procedures for all areas of customer service, and there are many individuals who go out of their way not follow the procedures.

I have been critical of crews in a couple of my earlier posts, and I think that it is important to point out that their working conditions have been deteriorating system wide. The dining cars on most trains have a reduced staff which puts unrealistic expectations on the crew. I think coach attendant staffing has been reduced, and maybe even sleeping car staff to in some instances with the transition sleeper attendant also being responsible for coaches. Any time unrealistic expectations are placed on employees, the system breaks down. With lower staffing, there is less room for things to go wrong. If just one person gets sick, is injured, is having a bad day, or just unable to do the job efficiently, the effect ripples through the entire crew and creates more work for all for extended periods of time. Thus if somebody is exhausted, their ability to make judgements and decisions is impaired.

 

[Joel N. Weber II]

having your scanner on FULL BLAST for the rest of the train to hear.

I doubt that scanner could be heard on every single car of the train.

 

[AAARGH!]

Just to get this out of the way -- I do not condone poor customer service and grant that there is more than one perspective in this story. Some posters allege that many of us are too quick to defend Amtrak in situations such as this.
On that note -- What was going on downstairs in the Parlour Car? It is, after all, a bi-level car. If it is somehow necessary to close off the upper level for a wine tasting, why can't non-wine tasting sleeper passengers go down to the lower level until it is over? Based on photos, it's not the most comfortable option for sightseeing (and perhaps there was a movie being shown which would eliminate sightseeing). However, if it were open, it would enable passengers to remain in the car and avoid having to mingle with the "common rabble" in the Sightseer Lounge.

Very good question. I did consider this option but did not for two reasons:

1. While only about 8 feet lower, the view is not quite as good as the Sight Seer (sp?) lounge (where I ended up).

2. The movie theater seats are narrow and uncomfortable. With the built in raisable desk top, they reminded me of college lecture hall seats.

If I was not able to find a seat in the SSL, I may have taken this option for the hour the tasting was going.

 

[AAARGH!]

having your scanner on FULL BLAST for the rest of the train to hear.

I doubt that scanner could be heard on every single car of the train.

Earlier in this thread it was stated by the observer that while the scanner was audible, it was not too loud and that nobody complained about it. That being said, it certainly didn't help that they had this when talking to the crew. I would think that was a big strike against them from the start in the crew's mind.

 

[Ryan]

having your scanner on FULL BLAST for the rest of the train to hear.

I doubt that scanner could be heard on every single car of the train.

Earlier in this thread it was stated by the observer that while the scanner was audible, it was not too loud and that nobody complained about it. That being said, it certainly didn't help that they had this when talking to the crew. I would think that was a big strike against them from the start in the crew's mind.

Yes, not following the rules tends to do that.

The rule isn't "Always use headphones (unless nobody complains).

While it's true that there are two sides to every story, and the truth lies somewhere in between, the traveler ALWAYS had the option of saying "Yes, sir", complying with the crews instructions and not putting themselves in the position that they found themselves in. If you really feel that strongly about it, complain after the fact and if the crews behavior was egregious enough, it'll be dealt with.

 

[amtrakwolverine]

when i ment the whole train i ment the PPC car.

 

[Dental Wiz]

This is my take on the situation for what it's worth:

1. Amtrak is free to sponsor events aboard a train. The wine tasting is a nice amenity and asking a nominal five dollar cover for the event is more than reasonable. Please note, this amenity is offered to sleeping car passengers only, who obviously can afford the premium for first class service. A token five dollar cover for an event such as a wine tasting shouldn't really be an issue to this passenger. If it is, perhaps they shouldn't be traveling in a sleeper. In addition, it's wonderful Amtrak has made the decision to keep these antiques rolling for the benefit of the sleeping car passengers. The old highlevels were recently refurbished but still are very expensive to keep maintain . I'd be more than happy to put my five dollars down to help keep this service afloat. I can't believe these guys were arguing over a five dollar charge.

2. Running a wine tasting isn't easy for the crew if some passengers have paid and others have not. Serving may be a problem. In addition, the wine tasting is an advertised event in which the passengers know well in advance there is a nominal charge. Amtrak should clear the car so that all passengers wishing to take advantage of this service, can. There are ample places for a sleeping car passenger to go if they wish to opt out of this event. Demanding to stay, disregarding company policy is not an option. My feeling is either ante up and enjoy the event, or leave.

3. Passengers using audible electronic devices have to use headphones. Again, this is company policy. When you are aboard an Amtrak train you follow their rules. It doesn't matter if a passenger thinks their particular equipment is loud enough to be disturbing. That is not their choice. Amtrak quite clearly spells out the rule. They have their reason for it. Passengers must abide by it, no questions asked.

4. The conductor is the head of the train and he is responsible for the safety for all passengers on board. He is the authority on the train. I have not heard the conductor's side of this story so I cannot comment on whether the conductor was being unruly. However, based on the facts alone given by the disgruntled passenger, I would say they had unreasonable expectations regarding Amtrak's responsibility about communicating reroutes. In addition, they felt perfectly in the right to be disobeying company rules published in the Amtrak timetable and further demanded free admission to an advertised event which clearly required a nominal cover to participate. Finally by this passenger's own admission, they made confrontational gestures to the conductor and disobeyed him.

Railfans have to remember that the majority of Amtrak's passengers are taking the train to get from A to B. Railfans like all passengers, must obey the rules set out by the carrier, they must be respectful of others, they must have manners and must be mindful of the fact that they are not the only passengers aboard the train. Just because a railfan feels "they are in the know", does not give them carte blanche authority to do whatever they want aboard a train irrespective of company rules or policy.

The incident reported in this blog is unfortunate, but based on this writer's take, could have been easily avoided.

Respecfully submitted,

Steve

 

[tp49]

1 the conducter was in the wrong for yelling if the conducter is yelling at you for no reason hes asking to start a fight. thats harrassment and he can be sued for that.

Facts are too weak for that on the civil side, and from the "facts" as stated there is a very high likelyhood that the recovery for emotional distress would be non-existant. As for criminally California does not have a charge of "harrassment."

I doubt this is true.see here for laws regulating scanners. In any case it's not illegal in California.

It is illegal to use a scanner in furtherance of a crime in California. And that gives law enforcement, again, an excuse to be suspicious.

Also, interfering with a train crew *is* illegal in California, and in this case, the police were called. So this guy's scanner use was arguably illegal in this case, as he was potentially using it in furtherance of that crime - it would be up to the police if they wanted to try to prosecute that .

For example, in New York it's arguably illegal to own a scanner without a permit (hasn't really been tested in court; the law itself is vague on what this applies to). It's definitely illegal to use a scanner while in a car; that's explicit. So it's best to use something of a "lowest common denominator" mentality when using a scanner while traveling, which means not drawing attention to yourself.

The police do not prosecute at all. They don't even charge. They will recommend charges be filed but the ultimate decision on what to charge is made by the District Attorney.

I seriously doubt that one could say with a straight face that the scanner was being used in furtherance of a crime. However, common sense would have dictated use of headphones.

The NY scanner law does not aruably make it illegal to own a scanner. You do not need a permit to own one. It is also not illegal to use one in your car. However, to operate it in the car you need a permit from the police commissioner of the jurisdiction you are using it in.

Discression is definitely the better part of valor.

Do California laws apply while on an Amtrak train that happens to be in California, though? I thought something had been said about railroads being federal territory.

Short answer is yes. Generally a state's criminal laws will apply while on trains travelling through a particular state. However, Amtrak PD (as well as other RR's) are able to cite into US District Court or turn cases over to the US Attorney's office but it is at their discretion. I've seen both done. Generally though since in California you're much more likely to get a local officer than Amtrak PD the cases go to state court under state law. This is why the case of the engineer and crew attacked on the "I" Street bridge in West Sac is being heard in Yolo County Superior Court as it was handled by West Sac PD.