What should the top priorities be for train advocates? Please share your ideas at http://ow.ly/C8w9E
What should the top priorities be for train advocates?
- Thread starter CHamilton
- Start date
Help Support Amtrak Unlimited Discussion Forum:
A wish list of long distance exclusive items (seriously, half the list) and the hopelessly unrealistic doesn't inspire me with much confidence in NARP's managing to get anything done if they adopt the suggestions from it. Aside from that bit of cynicism, do you know whether there are any character limits to the write-in option? If I'm going to write something in, I don't want it cut off halfway through and the suggestion itself unknowable.
neroden
Engineer
I ended up putting two things in "Other":
- increase all frequencies *to* one a day (no more three-a-week)
- provide service alerts promptly for freight-induced disruptions (no more of this "8 hours late, no service alert" stuff)
Beyond that, I voted for fixing the pricing bug on sleepers (seriously!) and better on-time performance.
Better on-time performance really dominates everything else though.
- increase all frequencies *to* one a day (no more three-a-week)
- provide service alerts promptly for freight-induced disruptions (no more of this "8 hours late, no service alert" stuff)
Beyond that, I voted for fixing the pricing bug on sleepers (seriously!) and better on-time performance.
Better on-time performance really dominates everything else though.
I don't know about the character limit. I've added a second question for further comments with a text box for replies.
neroden
Engineer
Further thought: "better on time performance" arguably should be unpacked: there are a bunch of different reasons for poor OTP, and they probably need separate advocacy.
In this context, though, I'd be happy if NARP got a message saying "everyone's top priority is better OTP and we don't care about the Pioneer".
In this context, though, I'd be happy if NARP got a message saying "everyone's top priority is better OTP and we don't care about the Pioneer".
Completely understood, Nathanael. I tried to keep the survey as simple and as informal as possible, and based the list in part on the issues that get a lot of discussion here and in other forums. I'm really curious to see what comes out.
- Joined
- Feb 18, 2003
- Messages
- 8,507
I’ll preface this by saying that I am not a fan of NARP at all. I have never been a member, and under the present circumstances, will never be a member. Why?
NARP should be an advocate for railroad passengers. After all, that is what their name says they are. They are not, at least that is not their primary mission. NARP is an advocate for Amtrak. What is good for Amtrak is sometimes good for passengers, but sometimes not. Too often NARP serves as an Amtrak mouthpiece, bemoaning lack of funding, micromanaging, and generally reinforcing the victim mentality that so underlies Amtrak’s existence. I can not remember any occasions when NARP ripped Amtrak for the things that happen that can be corrected by Amtrak. NARP should have been all over Amtrak for the silly, economically insignificant downgrades in sleeper and dining service. I can’t recall hearing a single word from them about Amtrak’s limiting water or coffee or amenity packs, except maybe to blame congress, as if congress cares about 50 cent water bottles.
To my mind, there is simply too cozy a relationship between Amtrak and NARP. You need look no further than the payments NARP receives from Amtrak for running the customer advisory council (about $50,000 a year), and the 10% discount Amtrak affords NARP members for travel. Are those considerations provided by Amtrak out of the goodness of their heart, or are they provided as a thank you to NARP for being a loyal supporter – with the implied meaning that continuation of those considerations is contingent on NARP remaining loyal. If NARP is the advocate for rail passengers, should they really be taking gratuities from the organization they are supposed to be watching? A first step to gain my respect as an advocacy group for railroad passengers would be for NARP to remove itself from the advisory council work, and drop the 10% discount. Show perspective members that they are truly independent and will, if needed, take Amtrak to task.
Were I to suggest things for NARP to pursue, I would aim at things that Amtrak can control today. I would call for more liberal same-day change policies, particularly for elite members of the Amtrak Guest Rewards program. It is nuts that an Acela passenger at the Select Executive level can be hit with a huge fare change for wanting to use a train an hour earlier or later than planned. I would call for some accommodation for sleeper passengers to obtain snacks and beverages off-hours in the lounge. If you have paid several hundred dollars for your ticket, should you really have to pay an additional $4.50 for a can of soda and a bag of chips at 10pm. I would call for a limited rollout of assigned seating in coach, business class, and Acela First Class. Not every seat (maybe 50%), but enough seats to permit a couple or family to be assured of sitting together if booked weeks or months in advance.
These are not new routes, or new frequencies that require lots of funding and years of planning. It is not calling for action by host railroads, that may or may not be possible. These changes do not require congressional or state action. It just requires someone pushing Amtrak to try something new and break with the “it’s not the way we do things” mentality that they have had for 43 years. With the degree to which NARP is beholding to Amtrak and seemingly fearful of poking the bear, I don’t see them as an agent for change within Amtrak to benefit their members.
NARP should be an advocate for railroad passengers. After all, that is what their name says they are. They are not, at least that is not their primary mission. NARP is an advocate for Amtrak. What is good for Amtrak is sometimes good for passengers, but sometimes not. Too often NARP serves as an Amtrak mouthpiece, bemoaning lack of funding, micromanaging, and generally reinforcing the victim mentality that so underlies Amtrak’s existence. I can not remember any occasions when NARP ripped Amtrak for the things that happen that can be corrected by Amtrak. NARP should have been all over Amtrak for the silly, economically insignificant downgrades in sleeper and dining service. I can’t recall hearing a single word from them about Amtrak’s limiting water or coffee or amenity packs, except maybe to blame congress, as if congress cares about 50 cent water bottles.
To my mind, there is simply too cozy a relationship between Amtrak and NARP. You need look no further than the payments NARP receives from Amtrak for running the customer advisory council (about $50,000 a year), and the 10% discount Amtrak affords NARP members for travel. Are those considerations provided by Amtrak out of the goodness of their heart, or are they provided as a thank you to NARP for being a loyal supporter – with the implied meaning that continuation of those considerations is contingent on NARP remaining loyal. If NARP is the advocate for rail passengers, should they really be taking gratuities from the organization they are supposed to be watching? A first step to gain my respect as an advocacy group for railroad passengers would be for NARP to remove itself from the advisory council work, and drop the 10% discount. Show perspective members that they are truly independent and will, if needed, take Amtrak to task.
Were I to suggest things for NARP to pursue, I would aim at things that Amtrak can control today. I would call for more liberal same-day change policies, particularly for elite members of the Amtrak Guest Rewards program. It is nuts that an Acela passenger at the Select Executive level can be hit with a huge fare change for wanting to use a train an hour earlier or later than planned. I would call for some accommodation for sleeper passengers to obtain snacks and beverages off-hours in the lounge. If you have paid several hundred dollars for your ticket, should you really have to pay an additional $4.50 for a can of soda and a bag of chips at 10pm. I would call for a limited rollout of assigned seating in coach, business class, and Acela First Class. Not every seat (maybe 50%), but enough seats to permit a couple or family to be assured of sitting together if booked weeks or months in advance.
These are not new routes, or new frequencies that require lots of funding and years of planning. It is not calling for action by host railroads, that may or may not be possible. These changes do not require congressional or state action. It just requires someone pushing Amtrak to try something new and break with the “it’s not the way we do things” mentality that they have had for 43 years. With the degree to which NARP is beholding to Amtrak and seemingly fearful of poking the bear, I don’t see them as an agent for change within Amtrak to benefit their members.
Last edited by a moderator:
I think it's fair to say that this has been true in the past. I believe that the current changes underway at NARP (new executive director, new staff members, many new board and council members) provide rail advocates with an unprecedented opportunity to steer NARP in a more constructive direction. That's why I'm on the council, and why I undertook the survey.
Thanks for your, and everyone's, comments. I plan to keep the survey open as long as I can prior to the council meeting on the 17th. I'll publish the results.
jis
Permanent Way Inspector
Staff member
Administator
Moderator
AU Supporting Member
Gathering Team Member
So what exactly is NARP doing about Amtrak's inability to even inform its passengers about potential delays that it itself is fully aware of? Let's start with simple things and worry about the grand schemes for later. Has NARP bothered to even write a single note of displeasure to Amtrak yet? Or is it afraid that it will lose its sweet deal with Amtrak if it displeases the boss?
Bug on the form: It requires selecting five priorities rather than no more than five.
My comments, in case they didn't carry over:
1) Amtrak needs to greatly expand their Thruway services. Thruway connections are the single best, and cheapest, way of increasing ridership and revenue on existing services. 20% of California's riders use a Thruway connection for their journeys; there's no reason that Amtrak should not be offering a similar network of connections elsewhere.
2) NARP needs to lobby for greater flow of information from Amtrak to its customers. If a train is delayed, station staff need to let passengers know in a timely manner, the approximate delay, and they need to keep passengers up to date as information changes. Saying sorry has been shown to reduce malpractice lawsuits, it'll also keep riders on trains when they've had bad experiences with delays.
3) NARP needs to focus on the states more, especially with lower level agencies. NARP should be lobbying the California Public Utility Commission to replace its antiquated rules about platform heights so that there is a uniform platform height in the state and then to lobby the surrounding states so that the entire Western region can have level boarding. Similarly, they should be lobbying the states to increase their funding of corridor trains to increase service, improve speeds, and so forth.
4) NARP should consider changing its focus away from a focus on Federal lobbying in support of Amtrak to acting as more of a coordinating committee and central resource gatherer/organizer to focus lobbying on the individual states. Most lines are now funded and controlled by the states and the best growth, such as in California, has come from local state efforts.
5) In line with suggestions 3 and 4, NARP should expend more efforts on behalf of commuter rail improvements. Most American rail passengers are commuter, rather than intercity, and it's not seemly to mostly ignore them while focusing so much effort on rural long distance lines that serve fewer passengers in a year than a commuter railroad may do in a day.
My comments, in case they didn't carry over:
1) Amtrak needs to greatly expand their Thruway services. Thruway connections are the single best, and cheapest, way of increasing ridership and revenue on existing services. 20% of California's riders use a Thruway connection for their journeys; there's no reason that Amtrak should not be offering a similar network of connections elsewhere.
2) NARP needs to lobby for greater flow of information from Amtrak to its customers. If a train is delayed, station staff need to let passengers know in a timely manner, the approximate delay, and they need to keep passengers up to date as information changes. Saying sorry has been shown to reduce malpractice lawsuits, it'll also keep riders on trains when they've had bad experiences with delays.
3) NARP needs to focus on the states more, especially with lower level agencies. NARP should be lobbying the California Public Utility Commission to replace its antiquated rules about platform heights so that there is a uniform platform height in the state and then to lobby the surrounding states so that the entire Western region can have level boarding. Similarly, they should be lobbying the states to increase their funding of corridor trains to increase service, improve speeds, and so forth.
4) NARP should consider changing its focus away from a focus on Federal lobbying in support of Amtrak to acting as more of a coordinating committee and central resource gatherer/organizer to focus lobbying on the individual states. Most lines are now funded and controlled by the states and the best growth, such as in California, has come from local state efforts.
5) In line with suggestions 3 and 4, NARP should expend more efforts on behalf of commuter rail improvements. Most American rail passengers are commuter, rather than intercity, and it's not seemly to mostly ignore them while focusing so much effort on rural long distance lines that serve fewer passengers in a year than a commuter railroad may do in a day.
Responses to the rail advocacy poll have been posted. Thanks for your comments! http://ow.ly/CPoMK
