CS to EB no longer bookable after April 1

[Ryan]

In speaking with the lady at AGR this morning re the connection from #14 to #8. It will not be ticketed without an overnight stay in PDX(requiring another set of points). Had been planning a trip from LAX to Glacier for months. :angry:

She claims "service distruptions" on the EB because from "increased BNSF freight traffic" causing #7 to arrive very late. It doesn't make sense if there is a trainset to protect the #8's schedule departing PDX. But she said to "check back as they are trying to work things out with the freight railroad." :unsure:

When Amtrak broke the connections coming off of the EB, AGR published a policy that said they would permit overnights (on the customers dime) on a single award.
You may want to call back and remind them of that and see if they'll accommodate you. Logically they should, but this is the AGR call center we're talking about.

If you can link me to that policy, I, and others, would appreciate it.I didn't push it this morning (like requesting to talk to a super) but I will before I give up on the idea, but after a moment of research she was adamant about the fact that it was going to cost me another 40K points or $1128 cash for a BR and a Roomette from PDX to GPK.

http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/amtrak-guest-rewards/1541911-agr-redemption-travel-connecting-empire-builder.html

AGR redemption travel connecting from the Empire Builder

As you may be aware, some previously guaranteed connections from the Empire Builder were suspended/removed by Amtrak this week due to excessive delays. We have decided to allow an overnight(s) at the customer's expense, as part of the same redemption, at PDX or CHI to catch the next run of these trains that were previously guaranteed connections from the Builder. This exception would remain in effect until/unless the guaranteed connections are restored or modified. The contact center leadership is aware of the decision and should be allowing this exception as of yesterday. If the individual agent is unaware of the exception, please ask him/her to consult with a lead agent or supervisor who would have the information available.

Examples:

8/28 to 30 (at CHI) - can overnight once to next run of 30

8/28 to 50 (at CHI) - can overnight until next run of 50

8/28 to 59 (at CHI) - can overnight once to next run of 59

8/28 to 48/448 - same-day connection remains; no overnight permitted

27 to 11 (at PDX) - can overnight once to next run of 11

Anthony Rizos

Program Manager

Amtrak Guest Rewards

 

[dabrilloman]

Looks as thought I will be making a call about my situation. I have a CS to EB connection on April 1. I wonder if I am good to go or not??? :unsure:

 

[SarahZ]

Looks as thought I will be making a call about my situation. I have a CS to EB connection on April 1. I wonder if I am good to go or not??? :unsure:

It says no longer bookable after April 1.

Since you've already booked and are connecting on April 1, you're okay.

 

[rusty spike]

Ryans. Thanks, for the policy quote.

 

[dabrilloman]

Thanks Sarah...speed reading and paranoia can play tricks with my head sometimes... :wacko:

 

[Devil's Advocate]

Looks as thought I will be making a call about my situation. I have a CS to EB connection on April 1. I wonder if I am good to go or not??? :unsure:

It says no longer bookable after April 1.

Since you've already booked and are connecting on April 1, you're okay.

I would not feel comfortable making such a claim. Right now the Empire Builder route is anything but okay. If there is one thing that's clear it's that Amtrak has little if any control over the situation and their apparent decision to abandon most if not all connections would be a serious development. Although we often refer to guaranteed connections and arrivals there have been cases were passengers who booked well in advance were provided little more than a refund of the purchase price due to extenuating circumstances. I would consider any trip that involves the Empire Builder route to be at risk of further changes despite whatever has been relayed at this time.

 

[SarahZ]

Sure, in the future, but if he calls AGR tonight, they're just going to tell him it can't be booked after April 1, since that's the policy as of right now. I'm trying to save him some hold time.

Now, as the date gets closer, I'd probably watch out for updates regarding that connection, definitely.

 

[Just-Thinking-51]

Wait I be confused.

OP ask about Coast Starlight to Empire Builder. The post from AGR insider only covers Empire Builder to other trains. We know about the connection from The Empire Builder getting screwed up. The OP was asking about connection to the Empire Builder not from.

Again it could be me, dang long day.

 

[rusty spike]

Wait I be confused.

OP ask about Coast Starlight to Empire Builder. The post from AGR insider only covers Empire Builder to other trains. We know about the connection from The Empire Builder getting screwed up. The OP was asking about connection to the Empire Builder not from.

Again it could be me, dang long day.

Realiizing AGR does not specifically cite a #14(CS) to #28(EB) situation I'm thinking they should apply the same logic they used to allow overnights with a #27 connection to a #11. It should work in reverse for #14 pax connecting to #28 since Amtrak apparently is no longer providing the extra trainset to protect #27's on-time departure, which will then depend on 28 arriving on time. If not the pax should be allowed on the next day run on 28 on the same reward. Will logic prevail? Stay tuned.......

 

[Ryan]

No, you're right.

If they were willing to bend on the EB->CS overnight, logically they should do it going the other way. However, logic and reason don't always carry the day.

Edit: Yeah, what he said.

 

[tomfuller]

I remember not so long ago that when the CS was running late that Amtrak would run a bus north from Klamath Falls on US 97 and then east and north to Pasco to connect to the EB.

The OTP of the CS has improved since then.

I guess if I want to take the eastbound EB, I'll drive to Wishram and park there instead of boarding in Chemult. My other alternative would be to drive to Eugene and take an earlier bus or Cascades train to Portland.

 

[Meat Puppet]

Looks as thought I will be making a call about my situation. I have a CS to EB connection on April 1. I wonder if I am good to go or not??? :unsure:

It says no longer bookable after April 1. are

Since you've already booked and are connecting on April 1, you're okay.

en

These are not official Amtrak policies just something I discovered trying some random booking dates on Wed night. At 11pm Wed, both AGR and regular reservations were not even aware that the CS to EB was no longer a valid connection.

 

[PRR 60]

I wonder if Amtrak is anticipating rescheduling the eastbound Builder with earlier departures from PDX (and SEA). If they move up the PDX and SEA departures by, say, two hours, it could make it possible to reestablish the now broken connections at Chicago. However, that would kill the connection between the northbound Starlight and the eastbound Builder at PDX.

They may be thinking that the PDX connection is less valuable that the multiple Chicago connections. I know that no post-April 1 changes for the Builder show right now, but if the change is in the works, blocking the through PDX bookings now would limit the number of reservations that would have to be rebooked or cancelled when (if?) the schedule change occurs.

 

[montana mike]

That is a very good thought process-and it makes good sense. My only concern is almost all of the delays occur not in the first half of the trip, but towards the latter part. Amtrak would need to move up the arrival times at all of the stations between SEA and PDX to about Williston in order to achieve a reasonable chance of arriving within a two hour window in CHI. For example, #8 would by necessity be arriving in WFH at 5:24 AM, instead of the current 7:24 AM.

 

[rusty spike]

I wonder if Amtrak is anticipating rescheduling the eastbound Builder with earlier departures from PDX (and SEA). If they move up the PDX and SEA departures by, say, two hours, it could make it possible to reestablish the now broken connections at Chicago. However, that would kill the connection between the northbound Starlight and the eastbound Builder at PDX.

They may be thinking that the PDX connection is less valuable that the multiple Chicago connections. I know that no post-April 1 changes for the Builder show right now, but if the change is in the works, blocking the through PDX bookings now would limit the number of reservations that would have to be rebooked or cancelled when (if?) the schedule change occurs.

That might be the case. But why punish AGR members by charging a second AGR point award for next day travel on the same train? It's not the member's fault that the host RR can't get Amtrak over the route to make connections. Or at least give more than 2 months notice.

 

[Devil's Advocate]

Personally I think Amtrak would be doing a great service for their customers and for themselves if they chose to allow scheduled stopovers at obvious route connection points on the same award. PDX, LAX, CHI, SAC, SAT, etc. If they allowed that the customer would be able to control their own destiny and have extra time to experience interesting locations along the way. Amtrak would benefit from not having to pay for hotels and buses and vouchers when same day connections get screwed up for some reason. Not that I expect this to ever happen, mind you, I just think it would be a win-win if it ever did.

 

[montana mike]

Your suggestion makes too much sense!!

 

[JayPea]

As I have an AGR trip coming up in August that involves the CS-EB connection in Portland, I called Amtrak a little while ago to see what was what. The extremely helpful agent hadn't heard anything about this, so she first called the ticket agent in Portland. He knew nothing of it. Then she called another person in customer service, one who handles info on any changes. She knew nothing of it either. That person usually gets emails about changes like this before anyone else. The agent I talked to did make a test booking Los Angeles-Glacier Park for a random date, July 1st. No go. She got the same notation about no same-day connection. She also looked up my reservation and found no note about any pending changes. She called yet another person, one who is high up in the chain of command amongst Amtrak agents. That person hadn't heard about any changes either, though they did suggest that perhaps schedule changes for the EB may be in the works. That person also suggested I call back after April 1st. Well, I think we will all know what's up by then. But the Amtrak agent I talked to went the extra mile to find out what she could. A big shout out to Karen!

 

[montana mike]

This mess has got to be as frustrating to those agents as it is to us! I have trips scheduled on the EB coming up going East this spring and summer and so far all I get from Amtrak is "stay tuned" they will "try" to let me know ahead of time of potential cancellations and schedule changes--this is no help at all.

Of course my urgent email to the Amtrak CR folks on Monday pleading for them to provide some guidance so I can possibly make other travel arrangements (these are all business trips) has gone unanswered and here it is Friday-nothing like a timely response from the Customer Relations folks.......bummer.

 

[PaulM]

Going into the summer season, it's probably revenue-maximizing to(1) isolate the Empire Builder and prohibit connections to it

(2) Put the cars from the "sixth trainset" onto trains which are running more-or-less on time

I think this logic has already been debunked by several posters. Pulling the sixth trainset make connections at PDX more secure.

You might argue, long term revenue-maximizing-wise, that newbies might get disgruntled to find a longer than planned layover in PDX. But I suspect that forcing passengers for no apparent reason to stay overnight in Portland in order to guarantee the connection would be more revenue deadening. Besides by the time the newbie got to Montana or ND they would have forgotten the PDX delay.

 

[PaulM]

I'm wondering if part of the reason for breaking the connection from the Starlight might have to do with the need to reaccommodate people in the event of disruptions that cancel or truncate the train. If the passenger gets to PDX and train 28 isn't running for some reason (track washouts if there are major floods, for example), then Amtrak has to figure out what to do with them. If their origin is Portland, it's not Amtrak's responsibility to find them a hotel or what have you, but if they came from California, now Amtrak has to reroute them back to California or put them up in a hotel for a while.

That is essentially what AGR told me this morning (only using BNSF freight traffic as the reason). Trying to connect pax off #14 to #8 the same day has been problematic for Amtrak.

Did she explain problematic? Trodor's theory make some sense if you are talking about paid guaranteed connections. But I thought your post had to do with AGR requiring two awards to make the connection. There was no suggestion of Amtrak paying hotel expenses.

As the flyertalk post by the AGR program manager (compliments of Ryan) said, AGR will let passengers spend the night in Chicago and Portland (then only 27 to 11) without requiring two awards. If what you experienced is policy, not one agent's doing, that represents a new low.

Thinking more about Trogdor's post, this is very depressing. if you take this logic very much further, Amtrak won't be booking any connections at all. I mean track washouts, not to mention avalanches, bridge burning, snow drifts, asteroid strikes, etc. can happen anywhere any time.

 

[gn2276]

You can still make a res from the Starlight to the Builder, you just can not make it in one segment(KFS-MOT) on the same day you would have to make one seg KFS-PDX and the 2nd seg PDX-MOT.

 

[rusty spike]

I'm wondering if part of the reason for breaking the connection from the Starlight might have to do with the need to reaccommodate people in the event of disruptions that cancel or truncate the train. If the passenger gets to PDX and train 28 isn't running for some reason (track washouts if there are major floods, for example), then Amtrak has to figure out what to do with them. If their origin is Portland, it's not Amtrak's responsibility to find them a hotel or what have you, but if they came from California, now Amtrak has to reroute them back to California or put them up in a hotel for a while.

That is essentially what AGR told me this morning (only using BNSF freight traffic as the reason). Trying to connect pax off #14 to #8 the same day has been problematic for Amtrak.

Did she explain problematic? Trodor's theory make some sense if you are talking about paid guaranteed connections. But I thought your post had to do with AGR requiring two awards to make the connection. There was no suggestion of Amtrak paying hotel expenses.

Initially the agent I spoke with was clueless as to why I could not connect 14 to 28 the same day on a single reward. I waited on hold for maybe 5 or more minutes before she said Amtrak was having a lot of problems trying to get 14's pax out the same day on 28 because of greatly increased freight traffic on the EB's route. For an AGR member it would require an overnite in PDX and a separate reward to continue the next day on 28. I have not pursued this further at this point, but I will, citing the Flyertalk policy that Ryan provided.

I assume the same would apply to "paid" pax as well, that the guaranteed same-day connection has been suspended and they would require an overnite. Depressing? Yes, Surprised? No. There's not much more Amtrak can do to surprise me.

 

[benale]

As a poster mentioned it would be great if Amtrak would allow the same reward spending an overnight in Portland connecting to or from the EB and the CS. We were planning a trip from Los Angeles to Toledo on a two zone reward later this year via the CS and the EB. Spending the night in Portland on our own dime wouldn't bother us at all. Using 35,000 points is not going to cut it. After all, it is a two zone trip. I really hope this can be done, but I have a feeling I'm going to have to alter my travels.

First, no more wine and cheese tastings, then the loss of the Parlour car,which seems a done deal,and now this. The wine and cheese tasting elimination is no big deal, but we were looking forward to the Parlour car. We've done it a few times,and it's a really enjoyable part of the journey.

Whats next? Eliminating food if you are in a sleeper?

 

[greatcats]

benale - I thought getting rid of the Parlour cars was just talk at this point. It would not surprise me if they axed them, but my impression has been that this is not a definite at this time.