MikefromCrete
Engineer
You should probably learn how to spell principal correctly before asking for any exceptions to the rules.
'Not liking a rule' is neither a valid nor a reasonable basis for seeking to change it, or for trying to get an exception. Rules exist for a reason; You and I - and the other members of this forum - are not special, where the rules only apply to everyone else but shouldn't for us. It is true that many times a specific regulation or law may be written like it is because a few people have ruined an opportunity for the rest of us, but we still have to live within the same guidelines.sorry if I seem silly, I try to find ways to get exceptions, when I don't like the rules. I've written papers and submitred them to my principle to request an exception to the phone policy, as I felt like I could handle having a phone. (I basically use my phone for AU, texting with parents and a few select friends, and music). If I don't like the rules, I try to change them. I fully acknowlege this may not work (it rarely does), but I always am willing to give it a shot.Now you're just being silly. You claim to be mature enough to do this, but then don't understand why the policy exists, why exceptions aren't made, and how much in resources you're asking of Amtrak just to make an exception for you? Do you think that they'd be willing to consider an executive order to allow pets because someone claims that their pet can handle it? Or that someone has a gun permit and wants to be able to carry a loaded weapon on board?So is my best shot to get an executive order for an exception?
All the reasons for a uniform policy that is applied evenly without exceptions has been laid out here. A policy is very difficult to implement if executives can simply override it based on a letter written to Amtrak.
In short, you have no shot. Wait until you turn 16, and you'll be able to ride Amtrak anywhere you want without restriction. Perhaps you think that's unfair, but to Amtrak I'm not special, you're not special, and that's just the way it is. You can always try, but I can almost assure you that your response will be some form letter that they can't make any exceptions to their published policy.
Well, the one thing you don’t seem to understand very well is the predicament that such a request is going put someone in. You’re not asking for an exception or rule change back to the way things were. You’re asking for something that never was (an unaccompanied minor departing at an unstaffed station) under the previous policy. You’re suggesting that either the policy be changed (almost assuredly won’t happen), or that you be granted a one-off exception (absolutely won’t happen). And on top of that you seem to believe that someone at Amtrak might consider a detailed, time-sucking interview in order to make that exception - either for you personally or as part of a general policy update. Nobody has been trained as to how to conduct such an interview. So who is going to conduct it, where/when does it happens, and who fills in for someone tied up for an hour talking to you? You’re talking about a rail system where over 100,000 passengers ride every weekday and where station staffing levels already aren’t adequate.sorry if I seem silly, I try to find ways to get exceptions, when I don't like the rules. I've written papers and submitred them to my principle to request an exception to the phone policy, as I felt like I could handle having a phone. (I basically use my phone for AU, texting with parents and a few select friends, and music). If I don't like the rules, I try to change them. I fully acknowlege this may not work (it rarely does), but I always am willing to give it a shot.Now you're just being silly. You claim to be mature enough to do this, but then don't understand why the policy exists, why exceptions aren't made, and how much in resources you're asking of Amtrak just to make an exception for you? Do you think that they'd be willing to consider an executive order to allow pets because someone claims that their pet can handle it? Or that someone has a gun permit and wants to be able to carry a loaded weapon on board?So is my best shot to get an executive order for an exception?
All the reasons for a uniform policy that is applied evenly without exceptions has been laid out here. A policy is very difficult to implement if executives can simply override it based on a letter written to Amtrak.
In short, you have no shot. Wait until you turn 16, and you'll be able to ride Amtrak anywhere you want without restriction. Perhaps you think that's unfair, but to Amtrak I'm not special, you're not special, and that's just the way it is. You can always try, but I can almost assure you that your response will be some form letter that they can't make any exceptions to their published policy.
We need to be measured in our view of rules. The OP is tempted (as we all are) to see himself as above the rules. However, just because a rule exists is nothing special in and of itself. It doesn't mean it was created for better reasons than those for removing it. Taking a uncritical position toward rules and rulers can be needlessly subservient and invites manipulation to support bureaucratic abuse and authoritarianism.'Not liking a rule' is neither a valid nor a reasonable basis for seeking to change it, or for trying to get an exception. Rules exist for a reason; You and I - and the other members of this forum - are not special, where the rules only apply to everyone else but shouldn't for us. It is true that many times a specific regulation or law may be written like it is because a few people have ruined an opportunity for the rest of us, but we still have to live within the same guidelines. Exceptions to rules should only exist when there is a specific and documented need, often a hardship case. While I admire your perseverance and enthusiasm, you really don't have a valid cause for seeking an exception. But you do have options to live within the rules - which apply to all of us - and still travel by rail. You can find an adult to go with you, stick to staffed stations, or just wait a matter of months until your next birthday and take a bigger trip then. I know having to wait seems like an eternity when you're young, but it really isn't (you'll realize this in 30 years or so). I realize this isn't the answer you want - but it is a solution, which is what you should be seeking. As suggested by someone above, if a rule truly is unreasonable you should be seeking to change it for everyone, not just solve your own problem and leave everyone else out in the cold. But if the rule is not unreasonable, but rather just something you find inconvenient or don't like, then you have to find a way to live within the restriction just like the rest of us.sorry if I seem silly, I try to find ways to get exceptions, when I don't like the rules. I've written papers and submitred them to my principle to request an exception to the phone policy, as I felt like I could handle having a phone. (I basically use my phone for AU, texting with parents and a few select friends, and music). If I don't like the rules, I try to change them. I fully acknowlege this may not work (it rarely does), but I always am willing to give it a shot.Now you're just being silly. You claim to be mature enough to do this, but then don't understand why the policy exists, why exceptions aren't made, and how much in resources you're asking of Amtrak just to make an exception for you? Do you think that they'd be willing to consider an executive order to allow pets because someone claims that their pet can handle it? Or that someone has a gun permit and wants to be able to carry a loaded weapon on board? All the reasons for a uniform policy that is applied evenly without exceptions has been laid out here. A policy is very difficult to implement if executives can simply override it based on a letter written to Amtrak. In short, you have no shot. Wait until you turn 16, and you'll be able to ride Amtrak anywhere you want without restriction. Perhaps you think that's unfair, but to Amtrak I'm not special, you're not special, and that's just the way it is. You can always try, but I can almost assure you that your response will be some form letter that they can't make any exceptions to their published policy.So is my best shot to get an executive order for an exception?
Milwaukee is way too far, my grandma lives in Stevens Point, WI. I think the best option would be for Amtrak to start passenger operations on the ex WC/Soo Line (now CN), as that passes right through, Stevens Point, but I can't see that happening any time soonYour best option is probably to have a designated adult meet you in Milwaukee and then drive you to your grandma's place. Perhaps there's something like a car service that would be willing to serve in that capacity. It would be a lot more practical than trying to get a rule exception. It would also be expensive. Having a family member drive you there would be far more practical. And by the time you're of legal age to ride alone, you'll also be of legal driving age.
I guess you can tell that there's a lot of snark in this topic. I'm as guilty as anyone. I guess most of us were there at one time, thinking we knew more than most adults would give us credit for. And at least you're not asking how to break the rules, but rather how to function within the rules. I don't doubt that you can handle it, but there's a lot more to the rules than simply whether or not one 14 year old can handle traveling alone.
Well said. For every person who shrugs at the de-staffing of a station because "I have a smart phone," there's another person who can no longer check a bag, and another person who can no longer travel on Amtrak at all.The OP may be misguided and unsuccessful in his plea for special consideration, but his post was still valuable for pointing out that the continuing loss of staffed stations has an even greater impact than many of us considered in the past.
I'm not aware of another passenger rail network that is as restrictive and limited in their handling of UM's as Amtrak. So far as I can tell the rest of the world seems to be okay with hauling kids back and forth so why is Amtrak uniquely incapable?I do not see the rule as stupid. There is a very good reason for the rule. Many at this age think that nothing can happen, but in their very limited years, most have not had enough life experiences to understand the potential for something bad to happen.
Rules and policies are created for all sorts of reasons, both reasonable and irrational. If you don't believe me try reading up the convoluted history of drug and alcohol legislation.Rules and policies are created for a good reason.
Several rail systems around the world have their own unaccompanied minor policy. Eurostar does. SCNF in France apparently will allow for unaccompanied minors to travel with an escort, but that's only on weekends and school holidays.I'm not aware of another passenger rail network that is as restrictive and limited in their handling of UM's as Amtrak. So far as I can tell the rest of the world seems to be okay with hauling kids back and forth so why is Amtrak uniquely incapable?I do not see the rule as stupid. There is a very good reason for the rule. Many at this age think that nothing can happen, but in their very limited years, most have not had enough life experiences to understand the potential for something bad to happen.
Depends on the driver. There's nothing that says that a driver can't turn down a minor as a passenger. Uber, Lyft, and other services don't allow a minor to be a passenger without an 18+ year old passenger present.A 13 year old can catch a taxicab by themselves. And that is right, proper, and extremely useful. Particularly in emergencies. Amtrak's policy actually can prevent minors from using Amtrak to *get home* in an emergency. It was simply written by someone who had not bothered to think things through at all.
Yeah, I know they all have policies, the point is that Amtrak appears to be uniquely restrictive with theirs.Several rail systems around the world have their own unaccompanied minor policy...I'm not aware of another passenger rail network that is as restrictive and limited in their handling of UM's as Amtrak. So far as I can tell the rest of the world seems to be okay with hauling kids back and forth so why is Amtrak uniquely incapable?I do not see the rule as stupid. There is a very good reason for the rule. Many at this age think that nothing can happen, but in their very limited years, most have not had enough life experiences to understand the potential for something bad to happen.
Nice, unwarranted slam at Amtrak staff.I'm just speculating, but I wonder if the real reason behind the restrictive policy is Amtrak's fear of putting unaccompanied children in the care of an incompetent train crew that can't be trusted to ensure that they get off at the right stop. It's bad enough when adult passengers miss their stop (whether because the crew doesn't notify them or wake them up on time, or the PA system isn't working, or the passengers themselves are just being stupid) and have to travel far out of their way to get on a train going back the other way, which may not arrive until more than a day later (or worse, get put off the train in the middle of nowhere and told to walk back to the station). Imagine what the news stories would look like if that happened to a child.
It's not a problem on subways and commuter rail, because passengers on those systems are usually locals who can recognize where they are and where they're going, and the stops are closer together and the trains are more frequent, so retracing your path isn't a big deal.
And it's not a problem on other countries' intercity rail systems, because (at least in my experience) they seem to have no difficulty hiring competent, courteous staff that can help out when something goes wrong or a passenger is confused. It seems like it's only Amtrak that's incapable of making sure that all of its staff do their jobs consistently and correctly.
Well, you've just described nearly 100% of every job category at nearly every company in this country.Most Amtrak staff are good. Some are great. But a select few are completely uninterested in doing their jobs
Maybe they're talking about the safety and comfort of the other passengers, not the kids. I can see 8 - 12 year olds getting rambunctious, especially on a long train trip.Nope, a totally warranted slam against some Amtrak staff.
Most Amtrak staff are good. Some are great. But a select few are completely uninterested in doing their jobs. All it takes is one person like that, when the care of a child is concerned, to cause a very bad situation.
According to this, it was around five years ago that the minimum age to travel unaccompanied (with restrictions) was raised from 8 to 13. The explanation Amtrak gave at the time was clearly BS: "This is not in response to any incidents... but out of an abundance of concern for the comfort and safety of all our travelers.” So either they changed the policy for no reason at all, or it was in fact "in response to incidents" that they don't want anyone to know about because they reflect badly on Amtrak. I'm speculating about the latter case, and what they might be trying to hide.
Neorden,There are good ways to write "unaccompanied minor" rules. This is not one of them. It was done casually, sloppily, and without thought. This is evident from the fact that every subway, commuter rail, and so forth in the country has *much much more generous* rules, despite having *far less staff* and being a much less supportive environment. They bothered to think through the rules and make rules which make sense. Amtrak didn't bother because some clerk figured "eh, who cares about unaccompanied minors, we don't need their business".
A notarized authorization letter from the minor's legal guardians and a special ID card should be sufficient to allow a 13-15 yo. to ride on a designated route (for instance, to attend college classes or such). I've seen this done at other agencies for *much younger* children.
A 13 year old can catch a taxicab by themselves. And that is right, proper, and extremely useful. Particularly in emergencies. Amtrak's policy actually can prevent minors from using Amtrak to *get home* in an emergency. It was simply written by someone who had not bothered to think things through at all.
But then, this is the country where idiots won't let their kids walk down the street to the neighborhood park, so I should expect this sort of lunatic imprison-the-kids attitude. It's not actually making kids safer.
Unstaffed stations are a problem in and of themselves, of course, but nobody cares on the commuter rails.
....actually, this rule is a lot like Amtrak's former blanket prohibition of pets. It was stupid, customer-hostile, revenue-hostile, ridership-hostile, and above all *lazy*. Could they do better? Sure they could. But Congress had to pass a law to force them to. Likewise, it may require Congressional action to get Amtrak to bother to create a *sensible* unaccompanied minor policy which doesn't leave furious parents swearing at Amtrak.
The trip this particular minor is taking is a scheduled 5 hour journey. Emphasis on the word "scheduled." It could take a lot longer. The previous policy would basically allows for an 8 year old to travel for 16 hours and passenger did utilize the option, particularly on trains like the Palmetto, where they'd board on the NEC and end up in the Carolina's.I'm just speculating, but I wonder if the real reason behind the restrictive policy is Amtrak's fear of putting unaccompanied children in the care of an incompetent train crew that can't be trusted to ensure that they get off at the right stop. It's bad enough when adult passengers miss their stop (whether because the crew doesn't notify them or wake them up on time, or the PA system isn't working, or the passengers themselves are just being stupid) and have to travel far out of their way to get on a train going back the other way, which may not arrive until more than a day later (or worse, get put off the train in the middle of nowhere and told to walk back to the station). Imagine what the news stories would look like if that happened to a child.
It's not a problem on subways and commuter rail, because passengers on those systems are usually locals who can recognize where they are and where they're going, and the stops are closer together and the trains are more frequent, so retracing your path isn't a big deal.
And it's not a problem on other countries' intercity rail systems, because (at least in my experience) they seem to have no difficulty hiring competent, courteous staff that can help out when something goes wrong or a passenger is confused. It seems like it's only Amtrak that's incapable of making sure that all of its staff do their jobs consistently and correctly.
In the end, a lot of age restrictions are more or less arbitrary. We live in a litigious society, and a lot of the talk on this topic has been that the parents who think that their kid is ready might be the first to sue if something happens to their kid. Once a lost kid (14 actually) found me in an area with poor cell phone coverage, and asked me for help getting back to his high school group. I was a little freaked out about the possibility that someone sees a teenager with an solo unrelated adult male and takes it the wrong way. I actually helped him, but I did think about telling him to simply wait somewhere and I would call for help.At the end of the day, these are your children and if you're ok shipping them through multiple states as if they were luggage and dropping them off at an unattended station when you can't even leave them unattended in a car at convenience store for 10 minutes, I say more power to you. I'm all for a policy change. My version would call for zero liability and tiered travel. In other words, at 8 years old, you can travel up to 4 hours. At 10 years old, you can travel up to 6 hours but if you travel multiple times throughout the year, you may travel up to 8 hours.
Something along those lines because as I indicated, some of the unattended minors are seasoned veterans, and often behave better than the adults.
I still think you should write the letter and flip the script. Tell them you'd happily comply with the policy (as you did in the past) except the station is now unstaffed.
Or, you can just sit here in a thread and rejoice in the whining of people that intend to do nothing.
Enter your email address to join: