Boardman: Amtrak Commits to End Food and Beverage Losses

[Anderson]

The biggest issue I see is two-fold:
(1) Someone wants to break a bill to leave a tip; and

(2) Someone realizes at the end of a meal that they don't have a card on hand (or that their card has been unexpectedly frozen...been there, done that more than once).

#1 is annoying; #2 is a potential problem. The "quick fix" to #2 is if someone else in the room is willing to swap, say, a $20 bill for an $18 charge (or something like that)...I've been in the reverse of this at the border and made a small differential (i.e. $10 USD for $10 CAD) on offering out-of-country passengers change to clear the agents with. But if there's nobody handy, that could be an issue.

 

[amtrakmichigan]

IMO...If Amtrak wants to make the dining cars profitable, the first thing that needs to go is the waitstaff who make $50,000+ per year between union benefits and wages. I believe that if you cut salaries and benefits in half to all Amtrak food service employees, then Amtrak would turn a profit without changing menu prices or lowering the quality of products.

There are many simple things that could be changed too in the dining cars like I observed on my last 2 trips. If making a profit is such a issue, why is Amtrak offering premium name brand products? Instead of Newmans Own dressings, Heinz ketchup, Hellmens mayo..etc....Why not generic brands such as Sysco, Sams club brands....etc? To me this could save a million $ plus a year by just switching to generic brands like most restaurants serve now days anyway.

What do you do for a living? Give me your boss' name and I'll suggest he cut your salary and benefits in half.

If my boss said one day either take a pay and benefits cut or don't bother showing up anymore...well I guess I will have to take the cut. If I don't like it then I'm free to look elsewhere.

When a business operates with a loss, one of the first things that has to be looked at is salaries and benefits of employees to see what can be cut. Not long ago a sleeper attendent told me that the dining car wait staff on the train I was riding makes $100,000 + a year when they factor in there tips. If this is true and there is no reason not to think it is, this is a big issue! Service in Amtrak dining or lounge cars is fair to good at best. I find that the college age girl at my local diners provide more cheerful and friendly service than most Amtrak food service employees do. In that case, why should these employees make more then a lot of college graduates do, especialy when Amtrak is in the hole by millions in the food service department?

UAW workers now start out at a fraction of what they did just 10 years ago and with lower benefits. This had to be done in order for the big 3 to survive. I'm suprised Amtrak hasn't done something about this years ago.

 

[amtrakmichigan]

I don't think that economic reform of Amtrak Food and Beverage will live or die with the brand of salad dressing purchased.

When you use an Amtrak dining car and see your order recorded by hand on a large, multi-part paper form (that you have to sign, in black ink only, of course), you know there is considerable room for improvement on the process side of F&B business. The degree to which that visible side of the operation reflects what happens behind the scenes can only be imagined. Whether Amtrak means business with this pronouncement or is just creating a diversion remains to be seen.

I agree It won't put Amtraks food service back in the black again on it's own. But just like when amyone that is trying to ballance a budget at home for example, every little bit adds up and helps. Just getting rid of the newspaper subscription alone most likely won't put someones personal finances in the black again. However when you add that savings to 8 other items that seem meaningless it could equal a nice chunk of money

 

[jebr]

I don't think that economic reform of Amtrak Food and Beverage will live or die with the brand of salad dressing purchased.

When you use an Amtrak dining car and see your order recorded by hand on a large, multi-part paper form (that you have to sign, in black ink only, of course), you know there is considerable room for improvement on the process side of F&B business. The degree to which that visible side of the operation reflects what happens behind the scenes can only be imagined. Whether Amtrak means business with this pronouncement or is just creating a diversion remains to be seen.

I agree It won't put Amtraks food service back in the black again on it's own. But just like when amyone that is trying to ballance a budget at home for example, every little bit adds up and helps. Just getting rid of the newspaper subscription alone most likely won't put someones personal finances in the black again. However when you add that savings to 8 other items that seem meaningless it could equal a nice chunk of money

But would the changes command enough savings to even make the transition worth it? It could be that the "name-brand" products they use allow them to command a higher price for their meals than they would otherwise. Maybe they have an arrangement with those name brands which makes them equal to or less than the price of off-brand products.

As for the wage argument, while I tend to think that they are well compensated for what they do, they do have to pay a premium due to the nature of the job, in that Amtrak employees must have schedules that allow them to be away from home for a few days at a time. This creates a premium for a couple reasons:

1. Amtrak cannot hire part-time help at the low wages that go along with most server positions. Arguably, part of the reason part-time help is paid less than full-time help is that the restaurant must pay more overhead for each employee (scheduling, training, etc.) with less return. Not that that justifies the below-minimum-wage wages many servers make, but it does drive down wages.

2. Going along with part 1, Amtrak must compete for people looking for full-time work. They're not going to be able to hire a teenager who's looking for a job for 10-20 hours a week after school, which many stationary restaurants can (and do) hire. They're going to be hiring people who are willing to work long hours, full-time, and also be away from home for a few days at a time. Each of those commands a premium over an equivalent stationary job.

Assuming your $50,000/year figure, an Amtrak SA would be making the equivalent of $25/hr. if they're working 40 hour work weeks 50 weeks a year, including benefits. While not a bad wage, lowering that wage too much could easily make Amtrak have no choice but to hire bottom-barrel employees (as they may be the only ones that would apply at a lower wage level.)

 

[EB_OBS]

IMO...If Amtrak wants to make the dining cars profitable, the first thing that needs to go is the waitstaff who make $50,000+ per year between union benefits and wages. I believe that if you cut salaries and benefits in half to all Amtrak food service employees, then Amtrak would turn a profit without changing menu prices or lowering the quality of products.

There are many simple things that could be changed too in the dining cars like I observed on my last 2 trips. If making a profit is such a issue, why is Amtrak offering premium name brand products? Instead of Newmans Own dressings, Heinz ketchup, Hellmens mayo..etc....Why not generic brands such as Sysco, Sams club brands....etc? To me this could save a million $ plus a year by just switching to generic brands like most restaurants serve now days anyway.

What do you do for a living? Give me your boss' name and I'll suggest he cut your salary and benefits in half.

If my boss said one day either take a pay and benefits cut or don't bother showing up anymore...well I guess I will have to take the cut. If I don't like it then I'm free to look elsewhere.

When a business operates with a loss, one of the first things that has to be looked at is salaries and benefits of employees to see what can be cut. Not long ago a sleeper attendent told me that the dining car wait staff on the train I was riding makes $100,000 + a year when they factor in there tips. If this is true and there is no reason not to think it is, this is a big issue! Service in Amtrak dining or lounge cars is fair to good at best. I find that the college age girl at my local diners provide more cheerful and friendly service than most Amtrak food service employees do. In that case, why should these employees make more then a lot of college graduates do, especialy when Amtrak is in the hole by millions in the food service department?

UAW workers now start out at a fraction of what they did just 10 years ago and with lower benefits. This had to be done in order for the big 3 to survive. I'm suprised Amtrak hasn't done something about this years ago.

How about this then. Your boss cuts your wages in half AND in addition you begin to work average 15-16 hours days and when you're off, you spend your unpaid off-time in a closet at work, unable to go home and spend time with family & friends or do anything else.

 

[OBS]

IMO...If Amtrak wants to make the dining cars profitable, the first thing that needs to go is the waitstaff who make $50,000+ per year between union benefits and wages. I believe that if you cut salaries and benefits in half to all Amtrak food service employees, then Amtrak would turn a profit without changing menu prices or lowering the quality of products.

There are many simple things that could be changed too in the dining cars like I observed on my last 2 trips. If making a profit is such a issue, why is Amtrak offering premium name brand products? Instead of Newmans Own dressings, Heinz ketchup, Hellmens mayo..etc....Why not generic brands such as Sysco, Sams club brands....etc? To me this could save a million $ plus a year by just switching to generic brands like most restaurants serve now days anyway.

What do you do for a living? Give me your boss' name and I'll suggest he cut your salary and benefits in half.

If my boss said one day either take a pay and benefits cut or don't bother showing up anymore...well I guess I will have to take the cut. If I don't like it then I'm free to look elsewhere.

When a business operates with a loss, one of the first things that has to be looked at is salaries and benefits of employees to see what can be cut. Not long ago a sleeper attendent told me that the dining car wait staff on the train I was riding makes $100,000 + a year when they factor in there tips. If this is true and there is no reason not to think it is, this is a big issue! Service in Amtrak dining or lounge cars is fair to good at best. I find that the college age girl at my local diners provide more cheerful and friendly service than most Amtrak food service employees do. In that case, why should these employees make more then a lot of college graduates do, especialy when Amtrak is in the hole by millions in the food service department?

UAW workers now start out at a fraction of what they did just 10 years ago and with lower benefits. This had to be done in order for the big 3 to survive. I'm suprised Amtrak hasn't done something about this years ago.

How about this then. Your boss cuts your wages in half AND in addition you begin to work average 15-16 hours days and when you're off, you spend your unpaid off-time in a closet at work, unable to go home and spend time with family & friends or do anything else.

Not to mention, literally working EVERY weekend and EVERY holiday (with very little holiday pay) for the first 10-15 years of your career...

 

[Anderson]

IMO...If Amtrak wants to make the dining cars profitable, the first thing that needs to go is the waitstaff who make $50,000+ per year between union benefits and wages. I believe that if you cut salaries and benefits in half to all Amtrak food service employees, then Amtrak would turn a profit without changing menu prices or lowering the quality of products.

There are many simple things that could be changed too in the dining cars like I observed on my last 2 trips. If making a profit is such a issue, why is Amtrak offering premium name brand products? Instead of Newmans Own dressings, Heinz ketchup, Hellmens mayo..etc....Why not generic brands such as Sysco, Sams club brands....etc? To me this could save a million $ plus a year by just switching to generic brands like most restaurants serve now days anyway.

What do you do for a living? Give me your boss' name and I'll suggest he cut your salary and benefits in half.

If my boss said one day either take a pay and benefits cut or don't bother showing up anymore...well I guess I will have to take the cut. If I don't like it then I'm free to look elsewhere.

When a business operates with a loss, one of the first things that has to be looked at is salaries and benefits of employees to see what can be cut. Not long ago a sleeper attendent told me that the dining car wait staff on the train I was riding makes $100,000 + a year when they factor in there tips. If this is true and there is no reason not to think it is, this is a big issue! Service in Amtrak dining or lounge cars is fair to good at best. I find that the college age girl at my local diners provide more cheerful and friendly service than most Amtrak food service employees do. In that case, why should these employees make more then a lot of college graduates do, especialy when Amtrak is in the hole by millions in the food service department?

UAW workers now start out at a fraction of what they did just 10 years ago and with lower benefits. This had to be done in order for the big 3 to survive. I'm suprised Amtrak hasn't done something about this years ago.

Trying to guess what tip income looks like is a bit tricky. I'll throw some assumptions against the wall and we'll see what sticks:

(1) For a Western train, I assume two days with three meals on each day. I assume that 16 tables are in use, and I assume that each table turns over twice during each meal. This would provide 32 tables per meal. I assume $20/table in tips per day. That gives:

$20/table*32 tables=$640/day*2 days on a one-way and four on a round-trip=$2560/trip to split. Assuming they do the trip twice per month, that's 24*$2560=$61,440 split between them. Assuming three OBS upstairs and that the kitchen gets nothing, that would be about $20k/person in tips.

(2) For an Eastern train, I assume one day of three meals, $20/table/day, and 10 tables in use. That comes to about $800 for a round-trip, but I also assume that they can do more round-trips per year. 40 round-trips is $32,000/yr to split between the team, which would probably come to about $10-15k depending on whether it's split two ways or three.

None of that is getting towards covering the gap I'd expect between salaries and $100k/yr.

 

[The Davy Crockett]

From what I've seen in the dining cars Anderson's numbers are at the very high end of tips per table.

 

[OBS]

From what I've seen in the dining cars Anderson's numbers are at the very high end of tips per table.

Agreed, and also most crews make sure the kitchen staff gets a portion, to insure good service from the kitchen...

 

[Bob Dylan]

Edited: Never mind, when People can't see the Forrest for the Trees it's Hopeless!

 

[Anderson]

From what I've seen in the dining cars Anderson's numbers are at the very high end of tips per table.

Agreed, and also most crews make sure the kitchen staff gets a portion, to insure good service from the kitchen...

And my point is further illustrated. I was basically tossing together rough figures to see if the claims had any merit. It seems clear that a claim of $100k tips+salary doesn't hold water.

 

[John Bobinyec]

Glide Path to Self Obscurity.

jb

 

[Rule G]

The best way for Amtrak to make money with its food service cars is to sell them to private operators. I don't know how many diners Amtrak owns, but selling them for 500K to 1M each, would be a nice start.

Then Amtrak could charge the new owners the same rate that they charge the owners of other private cars to haul their new rolling restaurant between cities.

The new owners are now responsible for maintenance and inspections, as well as staffing stocking and securing the car.

Amtrak makes a couple grand per trip for simply moving the car, and someone else has to figure out how to make a profit with them.

When the new business fails, Amtrak could offer to buy back the cars...at a much reduced price.

 

[JoeBas]

Sell perpetual money pits for $1M each? I think you're in violation of your screen name...

 

[MiRider]

From what I've seen in the dining cars Anderson's numbers are at the very high end of tips per table.

Seriously.

I've seen very few people leave a decent tip and quite a few leave absolutely nothing.

 

[Nathanael]

I don't care about that one bit. I have nothing to hide.

People who think they have nothing to hide.... have something to hide. Always. Perhaps you don't have to hide your record of food purchases, but as I always tell people who say they have nothing to hide, if you have nothing to hide, how about publishing your credit card number, birthdate, social security number, home address, full legal name, etc. etc. etc.? Identity theft is an issue, for one thing.

If you haven't published all of that stuff in a public forum you have something to hide.

 

[Nathanael]

The challenge with doing any prix fixe menu is getting your menu engineered to where all meals are at a relatively similar price point. Granted its virtually impossible to get it exactly the same, but you want it to be relatively similar so that your yield is relatively even.

You can always price it to cover the most expensive meal, and anyone who orders a cheaper meal... well, you make more money. Given Amtrak's prices, the people eating in the diner are not terribly price-sensitive anyway, and the price variation isn't that high anyway. It must be viable; after all, sleeper passengers are already getting a prix fixe menu.

 

[Nathanael]

Ever notice the little 'fine print' on the front of all US bills? "THIS NOTE IS LEGAL TENDER FOR ALL DEBTS, PUBLIC AND PRIVATE" What is amazing is that people can get away with not accepting cash. Amtrak has stated that using only electronic transactions will cut down on fraud. While true it will protect Amtrak from its own employees, it puts its customers who prefer to use cash at greater risk for fraud.

It Is Legal Tender, but I don't think that implies the merchant/service provider HAS to take cash..............just saying..

I know the legal tender rules.
If you pay after the meal is eaten, then you owe a "debt". If the price of the meal is set in dollars, it is a debt denominated in dollars. In that case, the merchant is *required* to accept cash -- that's what "legal tender" means. (Interestingly, they're not required to give *change*. If you owe $5 and you "legally tender" a $20 bill to them, they're required to accept it -- they're not required to give you any change.)

If you pay *before* getting your food, then it's not a "debt", and so the merchant is not required to accept cash. Got the picture? A merchant can, legally, go cashless if and *only* if the customers pay *before* receiving the goods.

 

[SarahZ]

I don't care about that one bit. I have nothing to hide.

People who think they have nothing to hide.... have something to hide. Always. Perhaps you don't have to hide your record of food purchases, but as I always tell people who say they have nothing to hide, if you have nothing to hide, how about publishing your credit card number, birthdate, social security number, home address, full legal name, etc. etc. etc.? Identity theft is an issue, for one thing.

If you haven't published all of that stuff in a public forum you have something to hide.

I just meant I don't care if someone knows what I purchased on iTunes or what I buy at the grocery store. Of course I don't want people to have my credit card number, so I take steps to protect it.

By "nothing to hide" I meant that I've done nothing wrong and really don't care if the NSA or CIA or FBI know that I eat a Subway breakfast sandwich on Tuesdays and Thursdays and play World of Warcraft on the weekends. I haven't done anything illegal, so they can waste all the time they want spying on me.

 

[gmcguire]

Ever notice the little 'fine print' on the front of all US bills? "THIS NOTE IS LEGAL TENDER FOR ALL DEBTS, PUBLIC AND PRIVATE" What is amazing is that people can get away with not accepting cash. Amtrak has stated that using only electronic transactions will cut down on fraud. While true it will protect Amtrak from its own employees, it puts its customers who prefer to use cash at greater risk for fraud.

It Is Legal Tender, but I don't think that implies the merchant/service provider HAS to take cash..............just saying..

I know the legal tender rules.
If you pay after the meal is eaten, then you owe a "debt". If the price of the meal is set in dollars, it is a debt denominated in dollars. In that case, the merchant is *required* to accept cash -- that's what "legal tender" means. (Interestingly, they're not required to give *change*. If you owe $5 and you "legally tender" a $20 bill to them, they're required to accept it -- they're not required to give you any change.)

If you pay *before* getting your food, then it's not a "debt", and so the merchant is not required to accept cash. Got the picture? A merchant can, legally, go cashless if and *only* if the customers pay *before* receiving the goods.

I'm not sure this is true. According to the treasury department businesses can set their own policies for what they accept as payment. I don't see anything about paying in advance or after services are rendered.

 

[Bob Dylan]

The Belief that US Currency Has To Be Accepted is an Urban Myth just like Big Foot, Visiting Aliens and Honest Politicians that just want to Serve!!

 

[Bob Dylan]

I don't care about that one bit. I have nothing to hide.

People who think they have nothing to hide.... have something to hide. Always. Perhaps you don't have to hide your record of food purchases, but as I always tell people who say they have nothing to hide, if you have nothing to hide, how about publishing your credit card number, birthdate, social security number, home address, full legal name, etc. etc. etc.? Identity theft is an issue, for one thing.

If you haven't published all of that stuff in a public forum you have something to hide.

I just meant I don't care if someone knows what I purchased on iTunes or what I buy at the grocery store. Of course I don't want people to have my credit card number, so I take steps to protect it.

By "nothing to hide" I meant that I've done nothing wrong and really don't care if the NSA or CIA or FBI know that I eat a Subway breakfast sandwich on Tuesdays and Thursdays and play World of Warcraft on the weekends. I haven't done anything illegal, so they can waste all the time they want spying on me.

I hear you Sarah, but the thing is they aren't Supposed to do this by LAW! and were Spending Billions on the Huge Homeland Security Department! (and have Congressmen that want to Gut Amtrak over a few Million Dollars Expense in the Food Service Cars!)

If you give Government an Inch they will take a Mile!! Just Say No to Domestic Snooping by ALL Agencies of Government AND Corporations!!

 

[OBS]

But customers respond to brand names. For example, I'm more likely to order salad knowing they stock Newman's own, which is tasty, as opposed to Kraft, or, worse, some of the more common food service varietys (Hain's, etc), which taste disgusting to me. As for some of those other items where customers maybe don't perceive a difference you may find that Sysco's broadline isn't that much of a savings. Sysco carries different quality points of items and the good quality (good tasting) items are not inexpensive! Remember, to get Sysco they would probably have to contract with Sysco and presumably they have reasons for contracting with the suppliers that they use now. Sysco is by no means the cheapest.

I am pleased to announce we no longer carry chopped onions and dijon mustard as condiments in an effort to save money...

 

[Bob Dylan]

But customers respond to brand names. For example, I'm more likely to order salad knowing they stock Newman's own, which is tasty, as opposed to Kraft, or, worse, some of the more common food service varietys (Hain's, etc), which taste disgusting to me. As for some of those other items where customers maybe don't perceive a difference you may find that Sysco's broadline isn't that much of a savings. Sysco carries different quality points of items and the good quality (good tasting) items are not inexpensive! Remember, to get Sysco they would probably have to contract with Sysco and presumably they have reasons for contracting with the suppliers that they use now. Sysco is by no means the cheapest.

I am pleased to announce we no longer carry chopped onions and dijon mustard as condiments in an effort to save money...

Rep. Mica will be Thrilled! Wonder if he'll Hold a Press Conference and Hearings to Announce the "Huge' Savings for the American People! I want my Chopped Onions and Dijon for the $5 Microwave Hot Dogs in the Cafe! Now Grey Pupon (sp??)and Diced Onions would be Another Story! :giggle:

 

[Nathanael]

I'm not sure this is true. According to the treasury department businesses can set their own policies for what they accept as payment. I don't see anything about paying in advance or after services are rendered.

Well, I'm quite sure it's true, because I've actually done the legal research. The Treasury Department doesn't like to explain the legal tender laws to people, for some reason.

Now, there are all kinds of weird caveats -- did you notice that I said "denominated in dollars", for instance? You can run a store where you demand payment only in Canadian dollars, or only in ounces of gold, or something equally bizarre. So the situation where legal tender laws apply is really very specific. But it does apply to restaurants where the menu lists prices in US dollars; you pay nothing in advance; and then you eat. At that point you, legally speaking, *owe a debt denominated in dollars to the restaurant*. If at that point you offer Federal Reserve Notes of the correct amount or more, that is a "legal tender".

If the restaurant refuses the legal tender, *then you do not have to pay anything at all and the debt has been wiped out*. This is very old black-letter law. There's a fun short story from the 1920s about it, called, uh, "Legal Tender", written by a lawyer, Arthur Train. Back in the '20s, Federal Reserve Notes *weren't* legal tender, which forms the gimmick for the story, actually. Reading the story is what caused me to be curious enough to actually do the law review research.