# Why I will never ride Amtrak



## Katie (Apr 6, 2008)

:angry:

I will never travel with Amtrak agian. My first trip, as I was traveling on your train and going from Denver CO. to East Lansing MI. My train was 5 hours off schedule, not only did I miss my connecting train from Chicago to Lansing because our train crew decided to stop on the tracks for 45 mintues at a time, with no explination and were exstremly rude when anyone asked them for an estimate for arrival, but when I arrived in Chicago, they told the 25 passangers that were straneded if we wanted a hotel we had to walk ten blocks to the hotel Amtrak was willing to pay for at 1:30 AM in downtown Chicago. Finally after an hour of waiting in the lobby they offered us bus, and refused to take anyone to East Lansing, but now we needed to be picked up in Detriot. Then they told us that ever station would be open at the time of arrival, and with every stop we found that we were stranded in -45 degree weather in the slums of the city. My 18 year-old boyfriend and myself at the age of 17, were stuck in the downton, crime ridden part of Detriot MI for 45 mintues until we could receive a ride home to Saginaw. The Amtrak bus driver admitted several times that he needed directions from us because he didn't recieve a map or directions from anyone at Amtrak and had no way of communication. We finaly got home 6 hours after the estimated time, in a differnt city. We recieved $350 in credit for our next trip. I gave $109 of this credit to a friend, only to have his trip from Denver to East Lansing just as awful. I was told I must make the reservation over the phone so I could use my credit on Amtrak file. I was told by an Amtrak employee that he was reseved a ticket from Denver to East Lansing. When he went to pick up his tickets the night of his trip, they told him that he was never booked a connection train from Chicago to Lansing. When I called the "coustmer service" not only did no one have any anwsers but they refused to do anything about it even after the understanding the fact that my 17 year-old friend would arrive in Chicago at 4pm, get kicked out of the station at midnight when they closed and wait on the streets until 6am to try and possibly book another train. The women on "coustmer service" and informed me the day I made the reservations that he would arrive at 3am in East Lansing and gave me the train number, but she never booked a seat. I'm just informing anyone who is possibly intressted this is what happens and no one at Amtrak is willing to help or compensate me.

*I forgot that I had sent this to Amtrak and thats why it says stuff like "your train". I meant to edit all of that!

but yeah, not at all a good situation

P.S. My friend, is STILL stuck in chicago as we speak!


----------



## Green Maned Lion (Apr 6, 2008)

Bad things happen, but hey, Amtrak was willing to pay for a hotel room. Airlines screw up the same way and don't bother to offer you any compensation at all. Amtrak is NOT at fault for the 45 minute delays. The crews did NOT "decide" to stop. The host railroad, Union Pacific primarily in your case, ordered them to stop, so as to benefit Union Pacific's freight trains. The crew does not want to be delayed. The faster they get to their crew change point, the sooner they get off from work. They get paid their eight hours for (usually) 6 hours of running, whether they complete it in 5 hours, or 8.

I would have taken the hotel room, the compensation, and been ok with it.

Lastly, they don't want to tell you when they will get in when they don't know. They don't know when or if UP is going to decide having Amtrak on its tracks is currently inconvenient and shove them off to a siding again. This particular aspect is simply not Amtrak's fault. Write to your congressmen and refer to UP as "satanic" a few times in the letter.


----------



## Rail Freak (Apr 6, 2008)

Green Maned Lion said:


> Bad things happen, but hey, Amtrak was willing to pay for a hotel room. Airlines screw up the same way and don't bother to offer you any compensation at all. Amtrak is NOT at fault for the 45 minute delays. The crews did NOT "decide" to stop. The host railroad, Union Pacific primarily in your case, ordered them to stop, so as to benefit Union Pacific's freight trains. The crew does not want to be delayed. The faster they get to their crew change point, the sooner they get off from work. They get paid their eight hours for (usually) 6 hours of running, whether they complete it in 5 hours, or 8.
> I would have taken the hotel room, the compensation, and been ok with it.
> 
> Lastly, they don't want to tell you when they will get in when they don't know. They don't know when or if UP is going to decide having Amtrak on its tracks is currently inconvenient and shove them off to a siding again. This particular aspect is simply not Amtrak's fault. Write to your congressmen and refer to UP as "satanic" a few times in the letter.


WOW!!!

That was good!!!!!! And, as a newbie, educational.

Thanx


----------



## Katie (Apr 6, 2008)

Green Maned Lion said:


> Bad things happen, but hey, Amtrak was willing to pay for a hotel room. Airlines screw up the same way and don't bother to offer you any compensation at all. Amtrak is NOT at fault for the 45 minute delays. The crews did NOT "decide" to stop. The host railroad, Union Pacific primarily in your case, ordered them to stop, so as to benefit Union Pacific's freight trains. The crew does not want to be delayed. The faster they get to their crew change point, the sooner they get off from work. They get paid their eight hours for (usually) 6 hours of running, whether they complete it in 5 hours, or 8.
> I would have taken the hotel room, the compensation, and been ok with it.
> 
> Lastly, they don't want to tell you when they will get in when they don't know. They don't know when or if UP is going to decide having Amtrak on its tracks is currently inconvenient and shove them off to a siding again. This particular aspect is simply not Amtrak's fault. Write to your congressmen and refer to UP as "satanic" a few times in the letter.



Well, I can agree with you on the fact they did not "want" to stop but had to. But an FYI is Amtrak, as a govermnet owned company, has been caught and reported in newspapers for standing on tracks to rack up thier pay. Also, the hotel vochers were only offerd to a select few, with no transportation to or from the hotel the next morning. Would you personally walk around Chigaco at 2:00AM? Also, if you were under the assumption that you were arriving at a safe place to stay and arrived in Detriot at around 5AM and stood out in the cold as the bus drove away (which by the way, we stopped on the side of the road so the driver could ask directions from a bum, and ended up letting him on the bus to give him a ride). Also there was a women I was chatting with on the bus that had reserved a personal car, and they gave it to her for two hours and kicked her out because they had sold it to someone else. She was left in the isle because no other seats were avalible. Also a women and her three children were left at a station for however long because we were all told by employees that they were open. They did not offer any rides to destinations that people had made, we chose between three stops, which there were over 6 that people had paid for and had to wait for their rides to pick them up an hour further away.

So, what you're trying to say is that you would (at the age of 17 mind you) walk ten blocks to a hotel in chicago, stay there with no money what-so-ever, wait for your train in the morning and walk back only to get more credit, to give to a friend who now has to stay on the streets for 6 hours?

I'm less then surpised this all comes from goverment employees. Sadly my congressmen couldn't care less because he still gets all of the tax money as well as revune to pay for this.


----------



## the_traveler (Apr 6, 2008)

If you're *real* lucky, if you're at an airport and due to some reason, the airline _may_ give you a hotel voucher. But even they will not provide transportation to the hotel. But it just happens that many hotels provide *their own* buses to the airport. Most hotels do not provide transportation to the train station! (I can only think of 2 or 3 in the whole country!)

Instead of walking, there are these things called *taxi cabs*. They happen to go from the train station to the hotel.


----------



## Katie (Apr 6, 2008)

the_traveler said:


> If you're *real* lucky, if you're at an airport and due to some reason, the airline _may_ give you a hotel voucher. But even they will not provide transportation to the hotel. But it just happens that many hotels provide *their own* buses to the airport. Most hotels do not provide transportation to the train station! (I can only think of 2 or 3 in the whole country!)
> Instead of walking, there are these things called *taxi cabs*. They happen to go from the train station to the hotel.





Oh gee-willikers thanks! taxi-cabs? huh never thought of that! well actully they had told my mom on the phone that they would provide hotel voucher, taxi and food, but believe it or not they didn't give it to us! gee thanks thought for the suggestion.

so I should probley call my friend in Chicago and tell him what a silly goose I am by leading him to believe he would get home today! Because he's not getting any voucher even though I have a reciept they mailed me saying he should arrive in east lansing tomorrow morning at 3am. Instead I should just tell him to muster up <i>more</i> money for this trip, and hey it's the weekend why not go all out? I'll just call and tell him your suggestion, but instead lets put on the ritz with a limo to a 5 star hotel and a steak dinner. But I bet you don't remember being 17 where you've only got a few bucks on ya and holy cow your friend gives you a free train trip. Amtrak did tell me that I could provide a credit card number to get him tranportation as well as a hotel wanna offer up yours?

And captin I-hate-the-airlines I have travel several times with planes and not only does the airport provide shelter all night long unlike your delightful trainstations but they have always gotten me home same day or the next without any hassle or rudenss.

A bit curious as to why the airports are more coustomer friendly? BECUASE IT'S NOT GOVERMENT OWNED! If I have a problem and tell them I'm switching my buiness they are more then happy to make up my trouble. Amtrak, just like your run of the mill goverment grunts do not care what happens because it's the only avaible company


----------



## Rail Freak (Apr 6, 2008)

Katie said:


> the_traveler said:
> 
> 
> > If you're *real* lucky, if you're at an airport and due to some reason, the airline _may_ give you a hotel voucher. But even they will not provide transportation to the hotel. But it just happens that many hotels provide *their own* buses to the airport. Most hotels do not provide transportation to the train station! (I can only think of 2 or 3 in the whole country!)
> ...


Maybe a good " Chill or Time Out " is in order to get over it & go forward. ( JUST NOT BY RAIL!!!)


----------



## NOT A BUM (Apr 6, 2008)

Hey,

I think it was me that gave your bus driver directions that night, and just wanted you to know that I am not a bum, I had been to a costume party.

Also, my nice house is near the station in Detroit, and I find it to be quite an upscale exclusive area. (I have 12 televisions) I am however thinking of moving home to Saginaw..

****in Ghengis 3rd.


----------



## Kimo (Apr 6, 2008)

Sigh ... gripe, gripe, gripe. Last fall, my wife sat in a plane on the tarmac at O'Hare for six hours! Stuff happens. Still, this is a good example of a rookie Amtrak passenger just not knowing some of the basics. Like, for instance, not taking ANY connection for granted. I usually plan to stay overnight. One complaint is legit: Amtrak crews are notorious for not informing passengers about delays. Most of the passengers simply want to know the "why". If a conductor will just come on the PA and say "We're waiting for a freight and we expect the delay to be about 30 minutes," that will take care of the problem. I would also like to see conductors make a point of telling people that the delay is caused by UP or BNSF or CSX. Instead, if they DO make an announcement, they apologize, leaving the pax to ASSUME the delay is somehow Amtrak's fault.


----------



## RailFanLNK (Apr 6, 2008)

Flip the calendar back to July '05. I sat at Lincoln NE airport for 4 hours waiting for my flight. Knowing I was going to miss my connecting flight in CHI to Toronto. The airline was telling me the delay was "weather", the Weather Channel was saying, "hottest and most dry summer on record". When my puddle jumper plane arrived, an off duty pilot was onboard. He told us, "its not weather related, we can't get into Chicago because the airspace is so jammed up". I was told on my flight that my Toronto flight had been delayed due to "weather" and that I would make my connecting flight. We landed in CHI and had to taxi for 45 minutes because there was no gate to de-plane at. I was one of 10 passengers let off "first" so I could RUN to my connecting flight to Toronto. When I arrived at the gate, the airline personel laughed and said, "it left 2 hours ago". I then was directed to Customer Service, (customer pimping) where I stood in line with 500 other stranded passengers. From 10pm-1am the rudest employees treated us like we were the "problem". At 1am I recieved a 50% off voucher for a hotel at the airport. I had to figure out where to find their shuttle bus. By the time I found the bus and entered the hotel it was 2am. Customer pimping gave me 50% off a hotel room that was $120. Thus I had to pay $60 for the room. Customer Pimping told me, "you are booked on the 6am flight to Toronto, its considered an International flight so be back here two hours before departure." I slept from 2am to 3:30am and then went back to O'Hare, there was a woman I had stood in line with for 3 hours just 3 hours earlier shaking her head, "the TSA's aren't here until 5:30am, so we can't even get close to our gate". So I was 1 1/2 hours early for no reason. When I finally arrived in Toronto, I could have taken Amtrak and Via Rail (Canada's Rail Company) and arrived 1 hour earlier than the flight I ended up getting on. I missed 1 whole day of a convention that is only once every five years.

On the way back home, (same airline) I was barked at because even though it was a ***** flight, it was operated by Air ***** and that I was in the wrong terminal. They then barked out the message on their PA like I was mentally challenged and 40 of us got out of line, grabbed our carryons and looked for Air *****, things looked great until Air ***** didn't have a plane for that flight. We were delayed 4 hours and then I was then let out "first" again at O'Hare to run for my flight going to LNK, when I ran to the puddle jumper concourse for my flight that was leaving in 5 minutes, I almost boarded a flight to Green Bay WI. The LNK flight had been delayed due to "weather". Sat and waited for the flight that the employees told me was departing in 5 minutes for 3 hours.

Katie, welcome to the wonderful world of the USA and thier messed up transportation system. You chose Amtrak and its underfunded. You can fly the friendly skies and have just as much trouble or more. Sitting in an airport being delayed is alot more uncomfortable than sitting in a train. It was this experience with the airlines that has made me switch to Amtrak. I have had a few problems on a few trips, but nothing NOTHING like this trip from hell in July 2005.


----------



## transit54 (Apr 6, 2008)

While I understand your frustration with what you went through, let me tell you about my day today. I work for an airline, and today I went into work for a 12-6 shift. On the second flight, we were put 2.5 hour ground delay into JFK as a result of high winds. Winds! At least your train had something physical blocking its path (other trains).

Now, there were nine people trying to get to Portland, OR. We fly one flight a day to Portland, OR, and because of the connection time, they weren't going to make it. So they decided to fly to New York tonight and fly to Portland at 7:20 PM tomorrow - more than 24 hours beyond their original flight. Do they get any compensation from us? A hotel, food, anything? Nope. Why? Because the delay was out of our control - it was set by the FAA/JFK ATC and thus there was nothing we could do but wait around and let us to go. No airline reimburses or compensates for anything outside of their control (if we did, we'd probably be out of business).

And I disagree that airlines provide better customer service than Amtrak. Perhaps some do (I'd argue my carrier is one of the better ones out there), but I work around a lot of other airline employees that just don't give a crap and are downright rude to people. So it depends what you get. I'm talking from the experience of flying 2-3 times a month, sometimes 10+ times a month, and having traveled thousands of miles by rail. There's a well known saying in the airline industry - in a customer's eyes, you're only as good as your last flight. And that's so true - you haven't had a horrible (and I mean horrible, not your run of the mill delays/cancelations) flying experience yet. You've only been on a train once - why should you assume that every train and every train crew are the same as you experienced that one time? If you had a bad airline experience, would you never fly again?

I'd urge you to try another Amtrak trip at some point, I really do. Because as someone who knows airlines from the inside out, I can tell you that there are a lot of times when I'd much rather be on a train. I have some real horror stories from flying around this country, and despite a few Amtrak mishaps (some late trains, and a bussing incident involving a derailment), nothing comes close to my worst airline experiences.

Lastly, where did you get the fact that Amtrak trains purposely sit on sidings, and that this is supposedly documented? As someone with an above-average familiarity with trains in this country, I can say I've never, ever heard something like that and really doubt the factual basis for such a claim.

I really urge you to try Amtrak out once more. I assure you that what you experienced isn't Amtrak's best.


----------



## the_traveler (Apr 6, 2008)

Katie said:


> And captin I-hate-the-airlines I have travel several times with planes and not only does the airport provide shelter all night long unlike your delightful trainstations but they have always gotten me home same day or the next without any hassle or rudenss.
> A bit curious as to why the airports are more coustomer friendly? BECUASE IT'S NOT GOVERMENT OWNED! If I have a problem and tell them I'm switching my buiness they are more then happy to make up my trouble. Amtrak, just like your run of the mill goverment grunts do not care what happens because it's the only avaible company


Once, I flew from Providence to Detroit. The flight was normal - until we got to Detroit! We circled and circled - so much that we were running low on fuel. So we flew to Indianapolis to refuel. Then we sat on the runway there for a long time, before they let us go back to Detroit. Then we get back and again circled and circled. Then we finally landed, but sat on the tarmac until a gate opened up.

By the time I got off, it was over 8 hours from when I left Providence. (Normally it is a 2 hour flight!) And of course I missed my connecting flight.

The only way I could get home to Las Vegas (actually a 2 hour drive south) was to fly to Seattle and then take another flight to Las Vegas.

So should I say "*I'm never going to fly again*!"? :huh:

The airlines and airports may not be Government owned, but they are Government subsidized! *NO?* What do you call the Billions and Billions of $$$$ given to the airlines after 9/11? And do you think the airlines paid the full cost to build all the airports? And do you think the airlines pay the full cost of Air Traffic Control?

Without Government support, that $300 ticket (or what ever it cost) to fly from Denver to Detroit would probably cost $75,000.00! But I'm sure you would rather have that than a choice of a train to take.

And I never have, and may never will, fly into Denver International! So why do I have to pay for it (through my taxes)? :angry: Let's close it down!

_____________________________

I agree - it's time for a "time out" and cool down! If you don't want to ride on Amtrak, that's your right.


----------



## Green Maned Lion (Apr 6, 2008)

I don't know about the other people here, and why they take trains. I didn't start out as a rail fan. I started taking trains because my dad doesn't fly. Once I started taking the train, the plane became less and less pleasant. The limited room suffocated me. The social atmosphere annoyed me. The impersonality of EVERYTHING about flying and airports degraded me. The train is spacious, social, and very humanly personal. Until one nightmare flight that involved massive delays, people spilling things on me and then yelling at me for sitting in my assigned seat, and crap like that, I said to myself, never again.

And I haven't looked back. The only acceptable way to get from A to B when A and B are more than 500 miles apart is Amtrak train. Or a cargo freighter. (I did that a couple of times, too.) Yes, flying is faster. It will get you there a lot faster. I don't care. Flying is stressful, and life isn't long enough to be stressed out. Ok, so Amtrak can have some awful delays. So what? They'll put me up in a hotel, and I'll get there a day later. Big deal. I'll get there, relaxed, comfortable, and happy. And not stressed.

I don't care if I miss a guaranteed connection. I miss it, I miss it. Amtrak will take responsibility for it and solve my problem for me. They'll bus me to the train, or put me up in a hotel and put me on the next train. I get the opportunity to spend some extra time in a city I don't know on Amtrak's dime. Why not?

I'm not that much older than you; I'm 23. I wouldn't mind taking a cab to a hotel room by my self. Maybe you are too young to see my point of view on this, maybe not. If you want to race around, ok. Thats your prerogative. Maybe doing everything as quickly as possible matters to you. I want to enjoy as much of my life as I can, and I can't enjoy anything when I am stressed out.

Now I am a rail fan, yes. But that isn't how I started out, and isn't why I did it. I love the magic of riding a train, but that isn't why I use them as transportation. Its why I go on purely rail vacations, but not why I ride them for other purposes. Its a small community of people who have never met before, and will most likely never meet again, eating, sleeping, and living together for an amount of time as a group. I enjoy it.

Maybe you should cut Amtrak a little slack. As for employees leaving trains sitting just to rack up pay, It has probably happened a few times in the history of Amtrak. Crap like that happens places. But for the other 99.9999999999% of trains, it doesn't. Nobody tolerates a train sitting around blocking up their track. A crew does that, they are going to be summarily fired, if not executed. Perhaps you are confusing this with going "dead on the law", which is a matter of legality. Legally, a train crew can not operate a train for more than 12 hours. That means that 12 hours, 720 minutes, or 43,200 seconds after the crew has taken over operation of the train, they MUST legally stop the train and wait for a relief crew. If they don't both they and their employer get heavily fined.


----------



## VentureForth (Apr 6, 2008)

Hi Katie,

I know you're young and impressionable and I really know that Chicago can be a scary place to be at night - especially for a young girl. I drove through South Chicago when I accidentally got off the Interstate to find a McDonald's. I couldn't wait to get back on the highway! As a lone Texas boy in his way-early twenties, it was spooky.

Thanks for writing your concerns. This stuff happens. I know it's too late now to 'prep' you on your first ride, but some of the common advise to new long distance train riders is to think very openly and always expect the unexpected. Hope for the best; plan for the worst.

I think that your complaint has merit - I'm glad you sent it to Amtrak. I don't think you'll get much more than the credit you've already received, but that's better than nothing.

For what it is worth, I believe that the standing Amtrak policy is to only offer hotel rooms to sleeping car passengers who have been inconvenienced.

I know that I'm not really giving deep advise here. But I want you to know that there are certainly very rude people at Amtrak and some that really care. Keep in mind that a vast majority of customer service folks reply very defensively (right or wrong) if they perceive that they are being attacked personally. Of course, there are those who are trained to take the 'next level' of customer frustrations. Always ask to speak with a manager or supervisor if you're not satisfied with the first line folks.

I hope that you get a chance to use your credit to try them again. Keep an open mind - stay safe first - and sit back, relax and enjoy the ride.


----------



## lilyluvstherail (Apr 6, 2008)

Green Maned Lion said:


> I don't know about the other people here, and why they take trains. I didn't start out as a rail fan. I started taking trains because my dad doesn't fly. Once I started taking the train, the plane became less and less pleasant. The limited room suffocated me. The social atmosphere annoyed me. The impersonality of EVERYTHING about flying and airports degraded me. The train is spacious, social, and very humanly personal. Until one nightmare flight that involved massive delays, people spilling things on me and then yelling at me for sitting in my assigned seat, and crap like that, I said to myself, never again.
> And I haven't looked back. The only acceptable way to get from A to B when A and B are more than 500 miles apart is Amtrak train. Or a cargo freighter. (I did that a couple of times, too.) Yes, flying is faster. It will get you there a lot faster. I don't care. Flying is stressful, and life isn't long enough to be stressed out. Ok, so Amtrak can have some awful delays. So what? They'll put me up in a hotel, and I'll get there a day later. Big deal. I'll get there, relaxed, comfortable, and happy. And not stressed.
> 
> I don't care if I miss a guaranteed connection. I miss it, I miss it. Amtrak will take responsibility for it and solve my problem for me. They'll bus me to the train, or put me up in a hotel and put me on the next train. I get the opportunity to spend some extra time in a city I don't know on Amtrak's dime. Why not?
> ...


Thanks for the lovely descriptive about why you like the rail. I am passing it on to a couple of friends who dont understand my plane hatred and train love.

Just have one other comment to Katie. I am a government employee and so so tired of the govt employee bias and hatred. I have been treated far worse by air crew than any train personnel. Yes people have bad days - and guess what it doesnt have anything to do with being an employee of the government. I took my first sleeper and the attendant was unbelievable - it was like being in a first class hotel. Just wish I could afford to ride sleepers all the time. But you know on a government salary....


----------



## darien-l (Apr 6, 2008)

Katie said:


> When he went to pick up his tickets the night of his trip, they told him that he was never booked a connection train from Chicago to Lansing. When I called the "coustmer service" not only did no one have any anwsers but they refused to do anything about it even after the understanding the fact that my 17 year-old friend would arrive in Chicago at 4pm, get kicked out of the station at midnight when they closed and wait on the streets until 6am to try and possibly book another train.


I don't understand this part. Why didn't they simply fix your reservation when you informed them of the error? Also, why would your friend wait 'till 6 am to book another train instead of simply buying a ticket for the 6 pm East Lansing departure after arriving at Chicago at 3:50 pm? (And if this was today, the #6 from Denver arrived 25 minutes early, too, giving him plenty of time)


----------



## transit54 (Apr 6, 2008)

VentureForth said:


> I know that I'm not really giving deep advise here. But I want you to know that there are certainly very rude people at Amtrak and some that really care. Keep in mind that a vast majority of customer service folks reply very defensively (right or wrong) if they perceive that they are being attacked personally. Of course, there are those who are trained to take the 'next level' of customer frustrations. Always ask to speak with a manager or supervisor if you're not satisfied with the first line folks.


Not to get too OT, but this is so true in my experience. Working for an airline, I deal with dissatisfied people day in and day out. If you approach me with a problem, I will go above and beyond to try and help you. If you approach me with an attitude, I'll try and help, but if you continue to give me attitude, I'll basically give you whatever are standard policy is and nothing more. For instance, I had a woman today who was likely going miss her international connection on another carrier, which we had no relation to. I could have just told her (as some would have) that it isn't our responsibility, but instead I offered our phone so she could call them, and when they weren't cooperative, I obtained her a seat in the front of the plane, gave her permission to carry on her enormously oversized bag, and even escorted her up to the plane to make sure the flight attendants wouldn't give her any trouble about its size, and to explain the situation. I occasionally get customers who, during a delay that's out of our control (weather, for the most part), begin berating me and my airline because they might miss a connection. Those are the people I tell to call their other carriers and that we have no responsibility for the issue.

I don't know how the specifics of the OP's situation unfolded, but I find that in any situation, if one approaches someone in a customer service position with an issue as, "I have a problem, I need your help," rather than, "Your train service sucks and I want compensation and I'm never riding again!" they will be far more receptive to what you need. I simply don't understand why people think getting incredibly agitated will make people want to help them. The second someone snaps at me, their chances of getting extra vouchers, meals, transportation or assistance diminishes rapidly. I understand that some people get frustrated and need to vent, and I'm very accepting of that. I completely understand the people who've been delayed four hours and then are quite upset when their bags aren't in. And I have no problem dealing with upset, frustrated customers. But the second that someone's attitude gets in the way of me helping them, that's when I start to make less of an effort, also. (For example, one night I located a customer's missing bags in New York, and was just finishing the baggage paperwork (takes about two minutes). So that we'd know what to look for on incoming flights, I asked her, "Could you describe what the bags look like?" and she screamed at me, "Why do you need to know what the bags look like when you know where they are?!?!?" It's that sort of unhelpful attitude that causes me to be a little bit less helpful also.)


----------



## RobertF (Apr 6, 2008)

>> Would you personally walk around Chigaco at 2:00AM?

Having worked in downtown Chicago, I walked around there at 2am many times. As long as you keep to the main streets, it's plenty safe.

Lot fewer pan-handlers out then too!


----------



## RobertF (Apr 6, 2008)

Katie said:


> the_traveler said:
> 
> 
> > If you're *real* lucky, if you're at an airport and due to some reason, the airline _may_ give you a hotel voucher. But even they will not provide transportation to the hotel. But it just happens that many hotels provide *their own* buses to the airport. Most hotels do not provide transportation to the train station! (I can only think of 2 or 3 in the whole country!)
> ...


I find it interesting that this was your first set of posts here (at least under this name). Perhaps if you had taken the time to see what to expect from rail travel first, rather than blasting it because it didn't meet your expectations, you might have been less disappointed overall. Additionally, the last time I was short sighted enough to assume that my first experience would mirror all or most of my experiences, I was quite young... say maybe GRADE SCHOOL. I think your post is short sighted, lacking in anything resembling balance and elementary. Plenty of people have had wonderful experiences with Amtrak (and there are those who have had bad experiences too).

If I didn't know better, I'd say you must be associated with some representative of congress with an agenda that includes shutting down Amtrak. A Short sighted plan in my opinion.


----------



## RobertF (Apr 6, 2008)

rnizlek said:


> VentureForth said:
> 
> 
> > I know that I'm not really giving deep advise here. But I want you to know that there are certainly very rude people at Amtrak and some that really care. Keep in mind that a vast majority of customer service folks reply very defensively (right or wrong) if they perceive that they are being attacked personally. Of course, there are those who are trained to take the 'next level' of customer frustrations. Always ask to speak with a manager or supervisor if you're not satisfied with the first line folks.
> ...


My WORST flight experience was with United. After being bumped off our originating flight for a flight 6 hours later, we end up in Denver. We then walk to the rebooking desk as instructed. At the desk, a lone employee is handling the rebooking of a line of about 20 passengers. With, say, maybe 14 left in the line, the agent LEFT the desk and told the rest of us to goto the ticketing desk. I was livid. If he had told us that when we first got there, instead of making us wait in line for an HOUR, I would not have erupted at him (which I did).

I WORKED for United at the time (but I was a full revenue passenger). I called the station manager later that week about the incident. Let's just say, I got satisfaction and an apology.


----------



## Cascadia (Apr 7, 2008)

RobertF said:


> >> Would you personally walk around Chigaco at 2:00AM?Having worked in downtown Chicago, I walked around there at 2am many times. As long as you keep to the main streets, it's plenty safe.
> 
> Lot fewer pan-handlers out then too!


Well, Robert, I don't think that's really fair, you are a man and knew the city, she is a teenage girl. I wouldn't expect any woman to feel comfortable walking in any city at 2 am, much less a very young one, in a place she doesn't know. I think if she went walking down the street at 2 am and something happened to her, people would respond with "What did you think was going to happen?" It's very different for men than it is for women. And young women are a target where ever they go, no matter what time of day it is. Just saying, and speaking generally.

More specifically to the thread, she said there were 25 of them at the station who were told they could walk to the hotel, so I'm sure they could have all walked together and that would have been a good way to handle it, or all split cabs together too.

OP, you being a teenage girl, if you had asked the other passengers for assistance, they would have helped you. I know how it is when you get freaked out though, and you probably weren't thinking too clearly at 2 a.m, for which I don't blame you.

I think everyone on this thread wants you to try the train again just so you don't miss out on what can be a good experience, we don't want you to be cheated of the pleasures of rail travel just because you had one bad experience, for your own sake. As you can tell from the stories above, flying is no picnic either sometimes.


----------



## RobertF (Apr 7, 2008)

Cascadia said:


> RobertF said:
> 
> 
> > >> Would you personally walk around Chigaco at 2:00AM?Having worked in downtown Chicago, I walked around there at 2am many times. As long as you keep to the main streets, it's plenty safe.
> ...


You probably make a good point there..... I just know I've seen women walking around Chicago downtown alone at night. You are right though, I would not want my daughter to do so. But thats more because I'm an over-protective daddy!  I wouldn't let he walk down Las Vegas Blvd. at 2am, which I think is plenty safe (again, stay on the Blvd, and avoid the side streets!!!)


----------



## AlanB (Apr 7, 2008)

Katie,

First and foremost let me tell you that this site is not owned, nor is it operated by Amtrak. This is a privately owned and operated site that has no relationship with Amtrak. This site was created to help educate people about Amtrak and its intricacies, to give people a place to ask questions, to give people a place to have discussions about Amtrak, a place for reports about Amtrak, as well as a place for the good and the bad about Amtrak. And you will find both of those two later things here.

So while we can offer advice, suggestions, and corrections to things that you’ve stated, we can’t intervene with Amtrak for you. We can only give you a place to vent, which you’ve done, and again some advice/suggestions for now and the future should you decide to reconsider your decision not to use Amtrak again.

Second, I truly am sorry that your trip did not go as expected. It is too bad that you didn’t find us first, as you might have been better prepared for some of the issues that you did encounter.

Now, turning to the actual experience, I don’t understand why you were still in the station at 1:30 AM if your train was only 5 hours late.  It shouldn’t have taken 4 and a half hours to get you a hotel voucher.

I also have to say that I’m surprised that you weren’t offered a taxi voucher, as that is standard operating procedure, unless a shuttle is arranged which often does happen. But I’ll take you at your word for that.

Next, Amtrak doesn’t own any buses and they don’t employ any bus drivers. They contracted with some company that night to get you on that bus. That’s probably why the driver didn’t want to be bothered going to every stop. Why his company would let him go out without proper directions though, I can’t say. But that isn’t something that Amtrak can control. I suspect that the fact that this was thrown together at the last minute probably did contribute to things, but still it shouldn’t have happened. But really all Amtrak can do about that is to never use that company again. They can’t fire the driver, since he doesn’t work for them.



Katie said:


> But an FYI is Amtrak, as a govermnet owned company, has been caught and reported in newspapers for standing on tracks to rack up thier pay.


I’d love to see the proof on this one. I’m sorry, but I’ve been following Amtrak for years and I’ve never heard this story before. And short of standing in Chicago’s Union Station, it can’t happen and wouldn’t happen just about anywhere else, for several reasons.

First, as already mentioned by other’s Amtrak runs on tracks owned by freight companies and there is no way that they would permit Amtrak to block their tracks for something like this. Making money off of moving their freight is far more important to them, than ensuring that some Amtrak worker gets an extra hour of pay! Some of those freight RR’s would do anything that they could to prevent Amtrak from ever running on their tracks. So they certainly aren’t going to let them park a train there.

Second, the operating crews (engineer & conductors) can’t easily play a game like that, as two things happen. First, they are only allowed by law to work a certain number of hours. If they go over that, bad things happen. Second if they don’t get to where they are going within a reasonable amount of time, then they don’t get enough rest and can’t work their next shift, which means that they now loose potentially 8 or more hours of pay.

And believe me; most of the crews want to ensure that either they get home to their own beds that night, or to the hotel where they are supposed to stay. They don’t want to run out on their hours of service and be stuck in the middle of no where waiting for a van to come pick them up and take them to their hotel, much less standing there facing angry passengers who want to know why the train is stopped.

As for the on board service crew, the car attendants, waiters, cooks, café attendants; those guys and gals have pretty much been on duty for two days straight by the time they get to Chicago. They aren’t looking for an extra hour or two of work at that point; they are looking for a bed!

Finally, we don’t know all of the fact regarding the women who said she had booked a sleeper. Occasionally double bookings do happen. But it is also possible that she boarded at the wrong stop, and therefore the crew believed that she was a no-show and sold her room to someone who wanted to upgrade.


----------



## jackal (Apr 7, 2008)

Katie said:


> A bit curious as to why the airports are more coustomer friendly? BECUASE IT'S NOT GOVERMENT OWNED! If I have a problem and tell them I'm switching my buiness they are more then happy to make up my trouble. Amtrak, just like your run of the mill goverment grunts do not care what happens because it's the only avaible company


Actually, I just wanted to correct a minor mistake here--most, if not all, major airports in the United States (and quite possibly the world) are owned by governments--either city governments, state governments, or quasi-governmental organizations (e.g. the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey).


----------



## RailBirder (Apr 7, 2008)

Green Maned Lion said:


> Amtrak is NOT at fault for the 45 minute delays. The crews did NOT "decide" to stop. The host railroad, Union Pacific primarily in your case, ordered them to stop, so as to benefit Union Pacific's freight trains.


Don't let the facts get in the way of your opinions. From Denver to Chicago, the CZ runs on BNSF lines, not UP rail. Host railroads don't screw with Amtrak for fun. Delays are caused by congestion, mechanical breakdowns, weather, etc. Yesterday, Amtrak 5 was stopped west of Grand Junction due to rock slides. Was that anyone's fault?


----------



## jackal (Apr 7, 2008)

RailBirder said:


> Green Maned Lion said:
> 
> 
> > Amtrak is NOT at fault for the 45 minute delays. The crews did NOT "decide" to stop. The host railroad, Union Pacific primarily in your case, ordered them to stop, so as to benefit Union Pacific's freight trains.
> ...


Very true, and UP doesn't intentionally delay Amtrak just because they hate having to give it space. However, it does seem that BNSF does go the extra mile to ensure Amtrak is treated as well as possible, even going as far as to have a dedicated person in their dispatch center to watch over Amtrak's trains and ensure they are given priority and kept on time. While UP can't be accused of killing Amtrak for sport, they certainly appear to do the bare minimum (although I'm sure UP freights are delayed quite a bit as well, since they didn't have the foresight BNSF did to double- and triple-track the entirety of their core high-volume routes).


----------



## RailBirder (Apr 7, 2008)

jackal said:


> Very true, and UP doesn't intentionally delay Amtrak just because they hate having to give it space. However, it does seem that BNSF does go the extra mile to ensure Amtrak is treated as well as possible, even going as far as to have a dedicated person in their dispatch center to watch over Amtrak's trains and ensure they are given priority and kept on time. While UP can't be accused of killing Amtrak for sport, they certainly appear to do the bare minimum (although I'm sure UP freights are delayed quite a bit as well, since they didn't have the foresight BNSF did to double- and triple-track the entirety of their core high-volume routes).


I'm not sure where you get your information but, the UP also has a dedicated manager in their dispatch center to answer to for delaying Amtrak. I don't know, but I would be surprised if the CSX and other major railroads don't also have a dispatch Amtrak manager. Which BNSF Amtrak routes are double- and triple tracked their entirety? None that I know of. Certainly not any of the scenic mountainous routes.


----------



## had8ley (Apr 7, 2008)

Katie;

I just want to add that no transportation system is perfect. I don't care what Donald Trump says about everything he rides on is "perfect." There is no such thing. You, unfortunately, experienced just about everything that could go wrong on Amtrak. Why don't you sit back and read some of the other stories that posters have written under Travelogues. Combined with what you experienced plan another trip and give it an educated shot. I'm sorry you were the lamb who went to the meat packer but next time, with a little investigating, you can come out of the gate like a lion at the Coliseum.


----------



## had8ley (Apr 7, 2008)

jackal said:


> Very true, and UP doesn't intentionally delay Amtrak just because they hate having to give it space.


I would like to agree with you but I have been on the Sunset and sat in a siding, more than once, when not one, but two, hot shot stack trains went sailing by at 70 mph going in the SAME direction. I have also been in the Harriman dispatching center (it's called the "bunker" because it's under ground) when I heard a dispatcher say, "Oh well, #2's only 10 hours late. What's another couple of hours gonna hurt?" If I had not been standing there I would never have believed it.


----------



## the_traveler (Apr 7, 2008)

RailBirder said:


> Which BNSF Amtrak routes are double- and triple tracked their entirety? None that I know of.


I think most of the BNSF trans-con is double tracked, except in a few small places. (And those are being expanded to double track!) And most of the trans-con through AZ is (IIRC) triple-tracked!


----------



## VentureForth (Apr 7, 2008)

the_traveler said:


> RailBirder said:
> 
> 
> > Which BNSF Amtrak routes are double- and triple tracked their entirety? None that I know of.
> ...


Very true. There are a few exceptions. One of the last ones on the main trans con is at Abo Canyon, just East of Belen where the trains go back into the mountains.

The former BNSF line from Belen to Trinidad, CO where the SWC rides is single track, but was sold to the state of New Mexico. The bottle neck here will be negotiating with the Rail Runner which gets priority if Amtrak isn't on time.


----------



## D.P. Roberts (Apr 7, 2008)

I was just watching CNN at lunch today, & the anchor was talking about all the trouble the airlines are in lately. She quoted the following statistics, all without sources (which is one of the great things about TV news, you apparently never have to bother about quoting your sources):

*three airlines have shut down this week (ATA, Aloha, and my local favorite Skybus)

*passenger complaints are up 60% over last year

*25% of all flights now arrive late

And the higher gas prices go, the worse air travel is going to get. So yes, Amtrak has its faults, but air travel is far from an "ideal" alternative to rail travel.


----------



## jis (Apr 7, 2008)

RobertF said:


> My WORST flight experience was with United. After being bumped off our originating flight for a flight 6 hours later, we end up in Denver. We then walk to the rebooking desk as instructed. At the desk, a lone employee is handling the rebooking of a line of about 20 passengers. With, say, maybe 14 left in the line, the agent LEFT the desk and told the rest of us to goto the ticketing desk. I was livid. If he had told us that when we first got there, instead of making us wait in line for an HOUR, I would not have erupted at him (which I did).


Ah yes, good old United. Their crowning achievement was when they told me that their flight from Newark to Chicago connecting to a flight to Tokyo cannot make it into Chicago in time on a perfectly clear and weather free day both in New York and Chicago, and hence I should just go home and come back tomorrow to try again. No voucher for nuthin'. I was supposed to make arrangements to get back home which then was 65 miles away and make arrangement to get back to the airport the next day too. When I complained, they said well you could consider spending the whole day and night at the airport if you wish.

In all I have flown from Newark to Tokyo about 9 round trips on United of which they have managed to get me to Tokyo on the day on which I was scheduled to arrive only 5 times. The other 4 times they were a day late! Needless to say I don;t fly them anymore. So please don't tell me about how private companies are soooooo much better.


----------



## Green Maned Lion (Apr 7, 2008)

Try to take Amtrak to Tokyo! 

I once went to europe as a non-booked (I made the arrangements with the captain) passenger on a container ship. Thats how I'd go to Japan if I ever felt the need to.


----------



## PRR 60 (Apr 7, 2008)

Green Maned Lion said:


> Try to take Amtrak to Tokyo!
> I once went to europe as a non-booked (I made the arrangements with the captain) passenger on a container ship. Thats how I'd go to Japan if I ever felt the need to.


Did you have to be packed in a container, or could you be out and about?
Years ago, before containers took over marine freight, you could book travel on freighters. Some of them were pretty nice rides with nice cabins and great food. There was only a hint at a schedule, but that made it a little like Amtrak.


----------



## AlanB (Apr 7, 2008)

Just in time for this little discussion, NBC World News Tonight just tonight did a segment on the Airlines. Complaints are up by 60%, 27% of all flights were delayed, and many many other complaints and issues.

You can view the video by clicking here.


----------



## Green Maned Lion (Apr 7, 2008)

PRR 60 said:


> Green Maned Lion said:
> 
> 
> > Try to take Amtrak to Tokyo!
> ...


Was a pretty nice cabin. Nothing luxurious or such, but nice sized. Bigger than anything I've ever been in on a cruise ship. Food was danged good. I figured it would be plain, but it wasn't. I could walk around so long as I didn't get in the way.


----------



## Crescent ATN & TCL (Apr 8, 2008)

AlanB said:


> Just in time for this little discussion, NBC World News Tonight just tonight did a segment on the Airlines. Complaints are up by 60%, 27% of all flights were delayed, and many many other complaints and issues.
> You can view the video by clicking here.


Sounds to me like its time to take away airline subsidies and spend them on Amtrak and high-speed rail.


----------



## VentureForth (Apr 8, 2008)

Some folks have commercialized container ship cruises - to the tune of several thousand dollars per leg.

So much for that pastime. Will swab deck for passage and chow.


----------



## gswager (Apr 8, 2008)

VentureForth said:


> the_traveler said:
> 
> 
> > RailBirder said:
> ...


Two more- Pecos River bridge and the flyover over UP line in Vaughn.

As for Abo Canyon, I believe it is either now double track or almost completed.



> The former BNSF line from Belen to Trinidad, CO where the SWC rides is single track, but was sold to the state of New Mexico. The bottle neck here will be negotiating with the Rail Runner which gets priority if Amtrak isn't on time.


True, but the distance is not that bad, so the delay is minor since ABQ is Amtrak's service stop which scheduled for about an hour.


----------



## gswager (Apr 8, 2008)

Green Maned Lion said:


> PRR 60 said:
> 
> 
> > Green Maned Lion said:
> ...


How do I find the information over the website about booking on freight ships and even freight airlines as a pasenger?


----------



## caravanman (Apr 8, 2008)

I suppose in fairness to the original post, passengers do have less familiarity with trains than planes, in America. I think it would be reasonable, given the high percentage of late trains, for whatever reason, that Amtrak spelt out their policy about getting people to their destinations. Everyone is a first time user at some point, and most first timers will not be aware of what happens after the delays. I am sure info is there in the Amtrak terms and conditions for keen readers, but I am guessing that most ticket agents will not inform purchasers of the potential for delay, and the consequences for that passenger..

It is a complex issue, and a lot depends on the customer service attitude of the Amtrak staff at the time, but I feel that if it was clear to first time users what would happen to them in a delay situation, before they bought their ticket, it might cut down the incidence of passenger expectations not being met.

Ed B)


----------



## the_traveler (Apr 8, 2008)

caravanman said:


> I suppose in fairness to the original post, passengers do have less familiarity with trains than planes, in America. I think it would be reasonable, given the high percentage of late trains, for whatever reason, that Amtrak spelt out their policy about getting people to their destinations. Everyone is a first time user at some point, and most first timers will not be aware of what happens after the delays. I am sure info is there in the Amtrak terms and conditions for keen readers, but I am guessing that most ticket agents will not inform purchasers of the potential for delay, and the consequences for that passenger.. It is a complex issue, and a lot depends on the customer service attitude of the Amtrak staff at the time, but I feel that if it was clear to first time users what would happen to them in a delay situation, before they bought their ticket, it might cut down the incidence of passenger expectations not being met.
> 
> Ed B)


While I agree that Amtrak could spell out their policy, most people would not care and would still complain.

There are radio and/or TV traffic reports, so people are aware of the traffic up ahead, but I'm sure many people complain about the traffic they encounter in New York, Los Angeles or London! The airlines may tell you what will happen if your plane is delayed, but I'm sure many people complain if the flight is 2-3 hours late and they miss their connecting flight!

So why do you think that people will read "the Amtrak policy" and not complain? :huh:


----------



## BobWeaver (Apr 8, 2008)

gswager said:


> Green Maned Lion said:
> 
> 
> > PRR 60 said:
> ...


A quick Google search pulled this one up first: http://www.geocities.com/freighterman.geo/mainmenu.html.


----------



## AlanB (Apr 8, 2008)

the_traveler said:


> caravanman said:
> 
> 
> > I suppose in fairness to the original post, passengers do have less familiarity with trains than planes, in America. I think it would be reasonable, given the high percentage of late trains, for whatever reason, that Amtrak spelt out their policy about getting people to their destinations. Everyone is a first time user at some point, and most first timers will not be aware of what happens after the delays. I am sure info is there in the Amtrak terms and conditions for keen readers, but I am guessing that most ticket agents will not inform purchasers of the potential for delay, and the consequences for that passenger.. It is a complex issue, and a lot depends on the customer service attitude of the Amtrak staff at the time, but I feel that if it was clear to first time users what would happen to them in a delay situation, before they bought their ticket, it might cut down the incidence of passenger expectations not being met.
> ...


Agreed, far to many people never read the fine print and disclaimers. Not to mention that you'd be shooting yourself in the foot to advertise that your train could be a day late.

The airlines certainly don't go around advertising that their planes can be late. It just simply isn't done and won't be done.


----------



## RailFanLNK (Apr 9, 2008)

Well...I hope Katie didn't decide to try and fly on American Airlines this week! :angry:


----------



## TraneMan (Apr 9, 2008)

rail rookie said:


> Well...I hope Katie didn't decide to try and fly on American Airlines this week! :angry:



LOL Yeah, I was thinking of the same thing! What a mess they got going!


----------



## GG-1 (Apr 10, 2008)

TraneMan said:


> rail rookie said:
> 
> 
> > Well...I hope Katie didn't decide to try and fly on American Airlines this week! :angry:
> ...


Aloha

Someone who knows a lot more about the wire issue in the planes told me the grounding and inspections are only beginning. So far they are finding about 7% don't pass. This person reported to me some heads will role in FAA for allowing this to become this serious and delaying these inspections.


----------



## Chris J. (Apr 10, 2008)

rail rookie said:


> Well...I hope Katie didn't decide to try and fly on American Airlines this week! :angry:


Giving American Airlines credit where it's due, they did reroute me to get me back to the UK having cancelled my flight. It may have helped I was at the airport early (so the other flights weren't full yet) and I was willing to take a London flight rather than try to get to Manchester (it made little difference for me in terms of time, and they gave me a form to (try and) claim back the extra expense).

I don't think the cancellation was related to the inspections (it was meant to be a 767), but I was relieved to be able to get a flight and not spend the night at O'Hare!

This was an international flight tho, I can imagine passengers on internal flights might not be so fortunate!


----------



## had8ley (Apr 10, 2008)

AlanB said:


> Katie said:
> 
> 
> > But an FYI is Amtrak, as a govermnet owned company, has been caught and reported in newspapers for standing on tracks to rack up thier pay.
> ...


Alan; I'm not sure about Amtrak but the freight railroads have a "free day" work rule. If you are not rested for your next tour of duty for working "over the hogs" (beyond 12 hours) you get paid what the relief, or extra, crew makes the next trip while you sit at home.


----------



## Neal (Apr 14, 2008)

Green Maned Lion said:


> Try to take Amtrak to Tokyo!
> I once went to europe as a non-booked (I made the arrangements with the captain) passenger on a container ship. Thats how I'd go to Japan if I ever felt the need to.


Wow, I would love to try that


----------



## frj1983 (Apr 15, 2008)

Just a quick note on timeliness:

Took CNO from Chicago to New Orleans on Saturday April 5th, arrived on the 6th 25 minutes early!

Took CNO from New Orleans to Chicago on Saturday April 12th, arrived on the 13th 5 minutes early!

Crew both ways...excellent!!

Food both ways...excellent!!

Will file a report in travelogues later this week!


----------



## had8ley (Apr 15, 2008)

Fellow posters and guests;

There is an important aspect to railroading that many of you do not see while sitting in a siding or stopped behind a hog-lawed train. Most freight railroads run 8,000 foot, 140-150 car freight trains with only two crew members riding the engine; one conductor and one engineer. Amtrak shares the same tracks. When something goes wrong with a freight train (engine breaks down, air hose bursts, hot box detector goes off) the conductor has to walk the entire 8,000 feet of that train twice! Once going to the hind end and then back to the engines. That equates to over three miles of walking in goodness knows what kind of terrain especially up north in the winter. Then there are mechanical defects that cannot be fixed on line and the car has to be set out. The nearest siding or house track might very well be fifteen or twenty miles away. All the while an Amtrak train is barreling down at 79 mph on a stopped freight train. Today's long distance Amtrak travel is a timekeepers nightmare. I don't even wear my watch when I go on three or four day expeditions. I will look at my cell phone if I absolutely need to know what time it is.

When Amtrak came into being in 1971, freight trains had a caboose and as many as five crew members. Freight trains over 100 cars were rare. Now that railroading is a cheap means of moving bulk commodities such as coal and grain their infrastructure is almost bursting at the seams. Just look how fast the UP is trying to finish double tracking the Sunset route which should have been done when they bought the SP (1996, I believe.)

So the reality is that you CANNOT set your watch by a trains arrival no matter what the timetable says. Sadly, there were times like that but the current good fortune of the freight railroads cannot accomodate Amtrak in a timely fashion. If you're looking for almost perfect OTP you need to ride the Northeast corridor which is devoted strictly to passenger trains during daylight hours. The Downeaster is another good bet for on time performance. I hope this takes some of the luster away from your dislike of Amtrak; it's not Amtrak's fault but a sign of the times. Just look at our air travel network and you'll see where I am trying to go with this.


----------



## transit54 (Apr 15, 2008)

Yes, but I think that you're dealing with a slightly different issue here. Obviously, things come up that could delay an Amtrak train, things that simply can't be planned for. That's the case in any form of transit - by air or ground. But the issue is more the result of freight RRs inability to run Amtrak trains on time when their operations are normal. Of course I can't fault the host RR when there is a stopped freight train causing a major delay, or something of that nature. But is that really the cause of delays that can be hours long several times in a given week? And why do some RRs (BSNF, for instance) seem to have little problem running trains on time while others can almost never do so? I don't think they have an excuse for regularly running Amtrak late. The occasional incident happens, sure, but that's an entirely different issue.


----------



## Joel N. Weber II (Apr 15, 2008)

had8ley said:


> Then there are mechanical defects that cannot be fixed on line and the car has to be set out. The nearest siding or house track might very well be fifteen or twenty miles away.


How slowly does the freight train cover the fifteen or twenty miles in that case?



had8ley said:


> If you're looking for almost perfect OTP you need to ride the Northeast corridor which is devoted strictly to passenger trains during daylight hours.


My experience has been that northbound Amtrak trains into BOS hardly have perfect OTP. (I think for northbound trips I've taken starting south of New York City, two out of two have been over an hour late. I suspect Metro-North may be to blame there.) The MBTA Commuter Rail system, for the most part, does a lot better.


----------



## AlanB (Apr 15, 2008)

Joel N. Weber II said:


> had8ley said:
> 
> 
> > If you're looking for almost perfect OTP you need to ride the Northeast corridor which is devoted strictly to passenger trains during daylight hours.
> ...


Part of the problem can be MN, but there are many other things that can and do affect things. And if Amtrak is even a few minutes late in arriving at MN territory, that can really impact how they get treated on MN.

As for the MBTA, to be fair it must be noted that the MBTA pays Amtrak to both dispatch and maintain the line.


----------



## had8ley (Apr 15, 2008)

To answer the question about how fast a freight train can go to set out a "bad order" it depends on the mechanical problem. If it is a wheel bearing getting ready to shear off the dispatcher will restrict you to 5-10 mph. If it's just a broken train line then you can go as fast as the conductor can hold on. Just remember you have to come back to your train at restricted speed (20 mph or less) and make an air test before moving again.

One hour delay is nothing to the 24 plus hour delays I have personally witnessed on #1 and #2.


----------



## Green Maned Lion (Apr 15, 2008)

UP is disinterested in running Amtrak trains on time and tends to do so at its convenience.

CSX has horrible trackage, awful safety mindedness, and seems to like dumping chemical trains on various towns and wildlife. Frankly, I'd rather they ran their own darned trains _*safely*_ before they concentrate on running Amtrak fast. Naturally, doing one would facilitate the other.


----------



## AlanB (Apr 16, 2008)

Green Maned Lion said:


> UP is disinterested in running Amtrak trains on time and tends to do so at its convenience.


I'm certainly no fan of UP, but I do have to disagree with this statement. Yes, the Sunset still has major problems. But then, so does UP freight moving on the Sunset corridor.

But UP has done a much better job with the Coast Starlight and the California Zephyr, since they made that agreement with Amtrak a little more than a year ago. Things aren't perfect, but they are doing better and do seem to be trying. In fact, on my trip last summer on the CZ, it was BNSF that torpedoed us coming east. We were on time out of Denver. And going west, we were over 4 hours early into SLC. Now granted the CZ was on a detour route due to track work in the Rockies, but UP handled us just fine.

And so far for the first three months of this fiscal year, the CZ has been on time 53.3% of the time. Last year at this point the CZ hadn't arrived even one on time. That is a huge improvement. Would I like to see it on time every time? Sure. But that's a 50% improvement in just one year, and again I'm sure that both BNSF and Amtrak are responsible for at least a few of the percentage points were the CZ was late.

By the way, the Coast Starlight has seen a 22.8% improvement over the same period, and it's track record from last year wasn't nearly as bad as the CS's track record.

So while there is no doubt still room for more improvement, it is quite clear that UP is trying to do better.


----------



## gswager (Apr 16, 2008)

AlanB said:


> Green Maned Lion said:
> 
> 
> > UP is disinterested in running Amtrak trains on time and tends to do so at its convenience.
> ...


I agree with you Alan about the UP's reputation with Amtrak. Majority of Sunset Limited's route is single track and too many freight trains, just like driving your car/truck on LA freeways during rush hour. Last year while driving on I-10, parallel along the Sunset route, the contractors are putting double track. So use your patience a little longer.


----------



## the_traveler (Apr 16, 2008)

AlanB said:


> I'm certainly no fan of UP ...
> And so far for the first three months of this fiscal year, the CZ has been on time 53.3% of the time. Last year at this point the CZ hadn't arrived even one on time. That is a huge improvement. ... But that's a 50% improvement in just one year, and again I'm sure that both BNSF and Amtrak are responsible for at least a few of the percentage points were the CZ was late.


I'm no fan of UP either.

As far as the OT performance, it may be 53.3% but that is with *3 hours of padding*!  What would the OT performance be if not for that padding? :huh: (I bet it would be closer to 0% than 53.3%!)


----------



## AlanB (Apr 16, 2008)

the_traveler said:


> AlanB said:
> 
> 
> > I'm certainly no fan of UP ...
> ...


That is true, the run is three hours longer. However, that was part of the agreement between UP and Amtrak. UP asked for and received that concession while they work on the problems that have been delaying Amtrak. They are gradually supposed to start returning those three hours back to Amtrak, with the train returning to it's original schedule IIRC in three years from the date of the agreement. It might be four, I'm not sure and one year has already come and gone.

And the fact that those three hours weren't just gobbled up, like happened to the 10+ hours on the Sunset, I see as a positive thing. This to me means that UP is make an effort to honor the agreement with Amtrak that gave them those three extra hours, and they are trying to get Amtrak over the road as best as they can. Had OTP remained at zero, despite adding those three hours, that would be a problem.

Besides, we don't know where all of the delays occurred. For all we know, UP's record might be holding at 80%, with Amtrak and BNSF having accounted for the other 30% or so of lateness.


----------



## the_traveler (Apr 16, 2008)

AlanB said:


> UP's record might be holding at 80%, with Amtrak and BNSF having accounted for the other 30% or so of lateness.


80% + 30% = *110%*

Now you're starting to sound like a politician! :lol: :lol: :lol: (Well, they do want Amtrak to give 110% with less funds! :lol: )


----------



## AlanB (Apr 16, 2008)

the_traveler said:


> AlanB said:
> 
> 
> > UP's record might be holding at 80%, with Amtrak and BNSF having accounted for the other 30% or so of lateness.
> ...


Um, no. 53.3% + 30% = 80%, give or take the 3.3%.

Or if you prefer, 80% OTP from UP - 30% lateness by Amtrak and/or BSNF = 53.3%


----------



## Guest (Apr 16, 2008)

Wow Katie, I tried to read every post before I put in my 2 cents, since I didn't want to repeat anything again, but by the third page I realized I was of the tiniest tiniest minority that would offer you empathy for your experience rather than EXCUSES and repetitive EXPLANATIONS and incessant COMPARISONS to the airline industry and gasp even ACCUSATIONS and SUSPICIONS of your MOTIVES.

No wonder the number of members doesn't swell on this site and no wonder why I don't enter my name. Folks, this is a site not to just praise the glories of Amtrak, it is also a place where people should be able to vent about their experiences. Why do you instantly ATTACK? For heaven's sake just read the post, imagine her feelings. Don't judge and don't compare and if you are going to give suggestions do so in a gentle and mannerly way. In order to survive, Amtrak needs to recruit new ridership. When experiences like this happen, the ripple effect can be great. So instead of trying to defend the non defendable, lend your ear, and constructively inform someone who is lodging a complaint that maybe in YOUR experience her situation was extremely unusual and just maybe, maybe, if she would attempt to ride the rails again, she can enjoy the excellent and consistant service and on-time performance that you all seem to have had.

I have traveled almost every long distance train on this system and countless times on the Northeast Corridor Line. I travel almost monthly on Amtrak (not just a casual or infrequent rider). I can attest to having some unbelievable and terrifying experiences that were in large part due to some failure of Amtrak's personnel. However, for every bad, there has been a good and I continue to ride the rails because I believe this type of transportation is necessary for this country and I want to support it. I write letters and complain when it merits it and yes I even write and praise an employee who deserves it. I have also met (hundreds?) of first time riders who regrettably had a bad experience and did say that they will never return.

If you truly want to support Amtrak and the rail system of this county, than you would not beleaguer the first time riders who have had bad experiences. Afterall, they are the ones who could eventually become lifelong rail fans.


----------



## transit54 (Apr 16, 2008)

Well, to be honest, we're not Amtrak. It's Amtrak's job to apologize. It's our job to explain. If the OP wanted compensation from Amtrak, an apology, or something else, then she needed to go to Amtrak (and IIRC, she did).

What else do you expect us to do? We're really not here to be Amtrak's customer service team - we're here to discuss the aspects of Amtrak service, and provide advice and assistance.

I agree completely on the attack aspect, however, but I recall little of that going on. My previous discussion about dealing with customer service personnel made it clear that it wasn't directed at the OP, but I was just commenting in general how about my own experiences of how I'm approached by passengers.

There's really little more we can do except deconstruct what happened, explain some of the reasons why it did, and suggest that while Amtrak encounters the difficulties common to any other form of transit, the vast majority of our experiences have been positive.


----------



## AlanB (Apr 16, 2008)

And if you thought guest that what Katie got here was harsh, thank god she came here first, rather than say Railfan.com or some of the other major sites. Katie would have needed a flack jacket and a pith helmet to survive the collatoral damage that would have occured there with her post. And that's assuming that they didn't delete her post outright figuring that she couldn't possibly be telling the truth.

Here at least most of those responding gave her the benefit of the doubt on most of what she said, although there were a few things like the "crews just parking trains on the tracks to get overtime" that even I had to respond to.

As for this site, it's primary purpose is to provide a place for people to come and ask questions about Amtrak and get answers to same. That was the reason behind the owner's creation of this site. Everything else is secondary and icing on the cake.

Next, maybe you should try joining. After all you don't have to give your real name. And as a member, A) you would be taken more seriously; B ) might have some influence on the direction of this site.

Finally, I'm not quite sure what your definition of swelling is, but I'm quite happy with the fact that we've gained 233 new members so far this year.


----------



## Guest (Apr 16, 2008)

Advice and assistance? And where in my post did I mention that you were supposed to be the complaint department? There have been 60 plus responses for the initial post and here are some interesting quotes from* the first 15!*

"Bad things happen, but hey, Amtrak was willing to pay for a hotel room." Has a nice sympathetic ring to it, especially for an inexperienced rider who is 17 years old.

"Instead of walking, there are these things called taxi cabs." Nice sarcasm, really sets the tone for the rest of the response.

"Maybe a good "chill or time out" is in order to get over it and go forward. Say that to your mother or 17 year old daughter when they run into some trouble.

"Sigh....gripe, gripe, gripe." Wow, another understanding member that will surely get her to try and ride the rails again.

"I don't care if I miss a guaranteed connection. I miss it. I miss it." Hey poster it is not about YOU!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! She cares and so might others. Especially when you might not have extra money to shell out for something so unexpected. How many credit cards did you have at 17? And trust me, having had quite a few "hotel arrangements" made by Amtrak for missed connections, you were lucky to get a bagle and a taxi for a 24 hour stay.

"Having worked in downtown Chicago, I walked around at 2 a.m. many times." EXCUSE ME? You're telling that to a 17 year old? Luckily a woman posted that this was not a good suggestion and he eventually concurred, but this is good advice? Several years back, we were delayed at Chicago Union Station for hours and the place was almost empty, when one of the passengers waiting on the Lake Shore Limited decided to go on a walk. She was accosted by a gunman at the doors of Adams Street and had a pistol pointed at her head and was molested. She was 18.

"I find this interesting that this was your first set of posts here (at least under this name)." Wow, suspicion from the get go. What? You think she is making it up so that you have things you can fire back at her. Considering that most of the members have trouble listening to valid complaints, I doubt this would be a forum to set up a propaganda attack. The only attack throughout this whole posting has been from members. Frankly, it's sad.


----------



## Guest (Apr 16, 2008)

To AllenB-

Your responses and insights are always welcome, and I appreciate them. But I am disappointed that you defended the responses here to Katies' complaints by resorting to comparing how her statements would have fared in different forums. We are not talking about other message boards. We are talking about this one and how your members and guests reacted to it. Let's focus on the issue at hand. You don't know if she would have been butchered on those other sites, it is just your opinion. Since she didn't post, (or we don't know if she did) so how are you so sure and why would you stipulate that as truth if it didn't happen?

Frankly, who cares. Her statement was in this forum, and your members fell short. Yeah, that you have 200 plus new members. I just hope that they have a better outlook, and that they can give better advice.


----------



## Guest (Apr 16, 2008)

Guest Guest,

You sound like you may be Katie's mom. There were several unanswered inconsistencies and inaccuracies in Katie's posts that it made it difficult to answer her objectively. If you hang around this board you'll find that most of the answers make sense in light of what information is provided to those who respond. The tone may go up or down with the holidays , the age, the experiences or whatever but this is a very reasonable group. Recognize that the board seems predominantly men and their responses relative to a female's safety issues may not seem relevant. But the rest of the story has to make sense (or details provided) to get the best answer.

Jody


----------



## Green Maned Lion (Apr 17, 2008)

Guest said:


> "Bad things happen, but hey, Amtrak was willing to pay for a hotel room." Has a nice sympathetic ring to it, especially for an inexperienced rider who is 17 years old.


We can pretend to be operating in a vacuum, if you'd like. In that case, Amtrak is an awful company incapable of doing anything right and should be chucked off the face of the earth in favor of the New York Central in the 1930s. However, if we choose to be more realistic, we can instead consider that Amtrak is not the only transportation company in the world.

How would it be different if she had been dropped off in Atlanta by one of the Airlines after missing her connection? Would she have been offered a hotel room? Would they have offered a bus? Another flight? What, madam, would they have done that would clearly surpass Amtrak's handling of this?



Guest said:


> "Instead of walking, there are these things called taxi cabs." Nice sarcasm, really sets the tone for the rest of the response.


Yes, I'm sarcastic. I think dropping Amtrak as a form of transportation because of its failures, based upon an apparent belief that other modes of transportation don't have them, calls for a degree of sarcasm. You are free to disagree with me. If the worst monetary loss I'd experienced due to inept airline handling of problems was a taxi ride to a hotel the airline paid for, I'd probably still be flying.



Guest said:


> "I don't care if I miss a guaranteed connection. I miss it. I miss it." Hey poster it is not about YOU!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! She cares and so might others. Especially when you might not have extra money to shell out for something so unexpected. How many credit cards did you have at 17? And trust me, having had quite a few "hotel arrangements" made by Amtrak for missed connections, you were lucky to get a bagle and a taxi for a 24 hour stay.


I carried a gas credit card, and usually a small amount of cash. However, when I go on a trip a thousand miles from home, I made a point of either bumming my dads credit card in case emergencies came up, or carried a nice sized wad of cash for same. Unlike Katie, regardless of whom I took from A to B, I expected problems.



Guest said:


> "Having worked in downtown Chicago, I walked around at 2 a.m. many times." EXCUSE ME? You're telling that to a 17 year old? Luckily a woman posted that this was not a good suggestion and he eventually concurred, but this is good advice? Several years back, we were delayed at Chicago Union Station for hours and the place was almost empty, when one of the passengers waiting on the Lake Shore Limited decided to go on a walk. She was accosted by a gunman at the doors of Adams Street and had a pistol pointed at her head and was molested. She was 18.


I do not live in Chicago, and god forbid I ever do. It is one of the most dreary and boring large cities I have ever visited. The only redeeming value the place seemed to hold was good pizza. I have, however, walked around so-called bad areas of New York at night. I've seen younger women walking around too. I presume they have the wisdom to carry some manner of self-defense system with them. I also assume they have the wisdom to keep aware of their surroundings. I've noticed numerous examples of same giving me hairy eyes, probably because of my size and unkempt appearance.

As I said though, m'am, they have these things called taxis you can use to avoid such things.


----------



## transit54 (Apr 17, 2008)

To agree with Alan and further expound on his post, Katie did come onto the forum with a hostile attitude towards something that most people here support very strongly. I don't think its unreasonable that you'd see some of the responses that you quoted considering the fact that she stated: 1) She only traveled Amtrak once and will never travel again, 2) She made blatantly false assertions about certain Amtrak practices.

1) There is nothing that bothers me more when people do this. They try Amtrak/an airline/a transit system once and claim, based on a single poor experience, they will never ride it again. This especially bothers me in regards to delays and chance occurrences such as missing baggage (which is mostly where I see it in the airline world). For instance, people come up to me occasionally and say, "I was delayed on your airline for X hours, and it sucked, and I'm never going to fly it again" as if we're the only airline that delays occur to, and every other carrier is somehow more reliable. People do the same thing for Amtrak. Now, I understand if you've taken my air carrier or Amtrak several times, and just every time have had a bad experience. At that point, it's probably best to find another method of travel (or just stay home). But to acknowledge that things can't come up during transportation is ludicrous. I've never, ever heard someone say, for instance, "I got a flat tire today! I'm never going to drive again!" That's the same as writing off all future train travel in the US based on a single experience. When I'm at work, I try and win these people back, placating them with vouchers, refunds, new bags, kind words, or whatever will help the situation. But here I call it as it is.

2) As someone who's done a fair amount of reading on Amtrak and the subject of train travel, I've never even heard some of Katie's assertions, such as that trains purposely sit on sidings for hours due to greedy crews. It's one thing to come on here and suggest certain ideas, ("I've heard that...is this true?") but to state them as fact, especially as someone with very little knowledge of Amtrak is bound to irritate some people, myself included. As much as you may argue Katie was "attacked" by members of the forum, I feel a method of transport I feel very passionate about (Amtrak travel) was attacked by her with her assertions about their operating practices. It's one thing for her to recount her negative experience, but you'll see an entirely different reaction if someone is going to try and prop up blatantly false accusations like that. At the same time, I feel the response was measured, civil, and informative. As Alan pointed out, there are a lot of other forums where this would not have been the case.


----------



## Guest_yERRY_* (Apr 17, 2008)

Sorry, but my vote goes with the plaintiff. Some of these defenses being thrown around justifying the customer service meltdown are beyond ridiculous.

I love riding the train, have done so 48,000+ miles and enjoyed almost every mile, but if any of my nieces ran into that kind of difficulty, I'd be in my truck in moments and down the road, and pull them off the train (or out of the station) at the first place we could possibly meet. And yes, I've made that trip before-- drive all night, back home by 4 AM, and up again at 6 to go to work. I love them dearly, far more than any F40 or named sleeping car.

And just because you don't like the message, it doesn't mean the messenger is lying. I've gone out of Chicago on the last train out a dozen times or more (Three Rivers and Cardinal), and quite frankly, there are several late-night staffers there that seem to be hell-bent at making sure everyone knows that their being a passenger is interfering with their job. Also, some of you have clearly shown great ignorance of just what exactly the Adams/Canal/Jackson area is like THAT LATE at night. A young female going up those Adams Street steps alone at that time is just plain wrong, and no sarcastic comment can make it right. While better patrolled than most stations in cities, there are far too many turns, corners, columns, doors and dead-ends to be successfully wary of that late. And I'm saying that after teaching two years in an inner-city Washington, DC neighborhood that none of you would dare walk through in daylight.

And the _ad hominem_ attacks (avoiding the issue by attacking the person instead) aren't showcasing much comaraderie nor is it encouraging the traveler to take the train like is claimed. In one post, it's her fault for being a naiaeve traveler, and in another she's suspicious because of too many details. This isn't court; she doesn't have to detail every moment in minutea.

And what issue is it whatsoever if she's posting as a guest or not? The question that begs to be asked is that if registering doesn't require even a real name, then how can it possibly establish any real legitimacy? Obviously, a Guest post saying "I road the AMterk and gotted dead when it rekked" is bogus, but registering doesn't install a truth filter; i can easily pull up over a hundred posts that are just plain dishonest (different from being wrong).

Good friends went Chicago to Grand Canyon last week with three boys; they had a great time, raved about the ride, slept in Coach quite well, loved the food, and were late a total of 35 MINUTES. . . TOTAL. But their experience doesn't disprove the experience detailed here, and it doesn't make the bad experience okay, nor does it excuse it.

Anyone remember the Trains article written during the early years of Amtrak, "A Train Full of Fools"? That was a bad one-- I have a copy of it somewhere-- and the last thing Amtrak needs now is something like that written by some Newsweek reporter experiencing something similar. Or worse, like being brushed off only to become a crime victim.


----------



## Guest_Yerry_* (Apr 17, 2008)

Oh, I get it!

Since she's wrong about crews standing trains still just to earn more money, then none of this ever took place. yeah right; like anyone having this kind of first impression is going to hear that story and NOT believe it, given the experience at hand.

How many posts here claim trains are many hours late?

How many posts here claim refund vouchers were too inconvenient to be useable (and therefore worthless)?

How many posts here complained about the "tough luck, buster" attitude with the Coast Starlight landslide?

_And how many of those posts were made by those who love to ride trains and would do so at any opportunity_?

If we're supposedly encouraging train travel, wouldn't a far better set of responses go something like, "Wow, that's terrible! I'm upset and wrote Amtrak myself! But you know what; my good experiences outnumber the bad ones by a 20-to-1 margin, so why don't you try it just one more time, like on a shorter day trip, etc."

And there's only one chance for a first impression, and her first impression with Amtrak was one of the worst first impressions I've ever come across. Amtrak could have handled it better without much effort. And her first impression here didn't go over to well either. Like any rookie stumbling over this thread is going to trust any "sunshine letters" here.


----------



## transit54 (Apr 17, 2008)

I'm not defending the poor customer service here. I've said elsewhere that Amtrak needs to revamp its customer service, and needs to do so sooner rather than later. You are absolutely right there is no excuse for that, and I have no personal tolerance for poor customer service and have certainly experienced it on trains I have ridden. I think most people adequately expressed that in this thread. How Amtrak can go about changing that issue is a long topic for another thread.

Here's the main points that I see about the case:

1) Inbound to CHI, the OP experienced poor customer service regarding the train's delay. Absolutely inexcusable, as I've said above. Not much more that can be said on that, unfortunately. Amtrak did issue vouchers as compensation (which I would say is reasonable based on parallels in the air industry)

2) The OP's original Amtrak train was late, causing her to miss her connection. The cause of the delay was outside of Amtrak's control.

3) As per Amtrak's policy, they offered her a hotel room at their expense. If she had flown any air carrier, this would have not occurred under any circumstance, which is an important difference that should be acknowledged.

4) The OP was uncomfortable walking to the hotel. IIRC, she refused to do so, but she did not ask Amtrak to pay for a cab to get her there safely.

5) An hour after the hotel had been offered, Amtrak arranged a bus. As mentioned in this thread, it is not easy to find a bus and driver on immediate notice at 1 AM. However they did so, but the driver had incorrect or incomplete information as to where he needed to go.

6) With the OP's help, the driver got to Detroit, where the OP had to wait in an unsafe area for 45 minutes. Unfortunate, but I'm not sure what could have been done differently at this point.

I think the main point of many people's posts here was that if the OP had been flying, she would have ended up out of luck in some airport with no accommodations.

What did Amtrak do wrong? #1 clearly, which has been addressed to the extent it can, and in #4, they should have offered a cab upfront, rather than relying on the OP to ask. However, since she didn't ask, they also didn't deny her one. #5, they should have provided more complete information to the driver, or otherwise ensured he knew how to get where he was going. Had #4 been addressed, this likely wouldn't have been an issue.

The other difference between you and the OP, is while you acknowledge the unacceptability of the situation, you also wouldn't write off the entire national rail network because of it.


----------



## transit54 (Apr 17, 2008)

Guest_Yerry_* said:


> How many posts here claim trains are many hours late?


Yes, but this is a broader issue outside of Amtrak's direct control. This has been acknowledged, but there are a lot of politics involved.



Guest_Yerry_* said:


> How many posts here claim refund vouchers were too inconvenient to be useable (and therefore worthless)?


This I'm not really familiar with as an issue. If this is the case (I'm not doubting it is, its just been a while since I've been active on here), Amtrak should do something like my airline recently did - integrate a mechanism to apply vouchers during the payment phase of an internet booking.



Guest_Yerry_* said:


> How many posts here complained about the "tough luck, buster" attitude with the Coast Starlight landslide?


Again, Amtrak's fault, especially their ineptitude to deal with certain customer services crises, has been acknowledged here. I really can't do much more than that except to launch into a pages long analysis about the broken customer service culture at Amtrak and what they need to do to fix it (which won't be easy).



Guest_Yerry_* said:


> _And how many of those posts were made by those who love to ride trains and would do so at any opportunity_?


I think you can exclude me from this one. I love to ride trains for a variety of reasons, including comfort, reliability, and personal environmental beliefs. But I also work for an airline. I fly for free on my carrier and a lot of other carriers. So in fact, I find very few opportunities where I end up taking the train, but I generally enjoy it when I do, namely because I've intimately experienced the hassles of air travel, and have generally found train travel to be absolutely blissful compared to them.* Sure, as an Amtrak proponent I come from a skewed vantage point, but how exactly is this relevant? I believe that my air carrier is one of the best in the industry (for the type of carrier we are and the markets we serve), but that doesn't make me any less able to deal with customer service issues that crop up in my day to day work. In fact, I think it makes my ability to deal with such things better.

I suppose my point is, yes, Amtrak has tons of acknowledged issues. But what can we really do about them except acknowledge them, and hope that the politicians sort them out (and actively encourage them to do so)?

*I should note here, I find flying itself to be an exhilarating and beautiful experience. It's the current state of commercial air travel I'm absolutely fed up with. The time I've spent taking flight lessons, for instance, was time I'd never want to have spent any other way, including being on an Amtrak train, as wonderful as the experience is.


----------



## VentureForth (Apr 17, 2008)

Guest_yERRY_* said:


> And the _ad hominem_ attacks (avoiding the issue by attacking the person instead) aren't showcasing much comaraderie nor is it encouraging the traveler to take the train like is claimed. In one post, it's her fault for being a naiaeve traveler, and in another she's suspicious because of too many details. This isn't court; she doesn't have to detail every moment in minutea.


I take exception to this comment, because *every single one of her issues* were addressed. Many were even addressed with a level of empathy completely disproportionate to the way the vitriol was spewed in the first place. In fact, some of the more aggressive responses didn't take into consideration her age - and were later retracted. Even the fact that her original post was a copy of what she sent to Amtrak was not very clear until further down the thread.

If Katie gets anything out of any of this, I hope for the following:

1) When travelling, be prepared. Prepare for the worst, hope for the best.

2) If you come in screaming, you're going to get a whole lot less empathy than if you show respect and decorum.

3) Please don't say that you won't ever ride again because of one bad experience. You are only 17, and that would really limit your horizons for the next several decades of your life.

4) When people try to help you, try to hear the message, not necessarily the bantering. I know that can be difficult, especially when dealing with a very emotional situation, but a willingness to express your concerns should be coupled with a willingness to understand other points of view.


----------



## RailFanLNK (Apr 17, 2008)

I have a friend whose daughter is 18 years old and started to talk about going to Argentina for spring break. When I heard this I about fainted. She's not mature enough to travel to another country to see a friend that was a foreign exchange student. Not that maturity is needed, but I have travelled enough to know, "expect the worst" theory. Katie in my opinion was too young to be out galavanting around the country on a mode of transportation that can take days instead of hours. I to, agree with others where she came on this forum with "guns blazing", ok....lets set the tone here, she comes and blasts things that most folks here are passionate about. Not a good move by Katie. My friends daughter is smart, but the maturity part that I'm talking about is when "things go bad, how will she/he handle it?" With Argentina, totally different world, the US....at least we speak the same language here.

So how many cups of coffee will Katie "share her story" about how "terrible" Amtrak was and never spend 1 minute saying, "I was too young and ill-prepared for a trip of this magnitude?" It won't ever be said because pride and ego will not let it happen. Live and learn and she will end up on a trip from hell on the airlines, on Mega Bus, on Greyhound or with a rental car. Those trips from hell are out waiting for her, and if she is ill-prepared again, there will be another mode of transportation she will eliminate due to the terrible consequences of the trip itself.


----------



## had8ley (Apr 17, 2008)

rail rookie said:


> I have a friend whose daughter is 18 years old and started to talk about going to Argentina for spring break. When I heard this I about fainted. She's not mature enough to travel to another country to see a friend that was a foreign exchange student. Not that maturity is needed, but I have travelled enough to know, "expect the worst" theory. Katie in my opinion was too young to be out galavanting around the country on a mode of transportation that can take days instead of hours. I to, agree with others where she came on this forum with "guns blazing", ok....lets set the tone here, she comes and blasts things that most folks here are passionate about. Not a good move by Katie. My friends daughter is smart, but the maturity part that I'm talking about is when "things go bad, how will she/he handle it?" With Argentina, totally different world, the US....at least we speak the same language here.
> So how many cups of coffee will Katie "share her story" about how "terrible" Amtrak was and never spend 1 minute saying, "I was too young and ill-prepared for a trip of this magnitude?" It won't ever be said because pride and ego will not let it happen. Live and learn and she will end up on a trip from hell on the airlines, on Mega Bus, on Greyhound or with a rental car. Those trips from hell are out waiting for her, and if she is ill-prepared again, there will be another mode of transportation she will eliminate due to the terrible consequences of the trip itself.


Nice post Al. The blurb about crews sitting on the tracks to make overtime makes absolutely no sense. It is the sign of immaturity because either a dispatcher for the host RR or Amtrak HQ is going to want to know why and where they are stopped "making overtime." Sometimes a crew can be a little loose lipped and stopped at a red block or behind another train and blurt out, "We're on O/T so what the heck?" but I can't buy into sitting on tracks that 150 car freight trains need to use in order for a small (in comparison) Amtrak train to "make O/T." At age eight I used to take a Lackawanna train from Morris Plains, NJ to Hoboken. Then the ferry across the Hudson to Barclay Street. Then walk through the Farmer's Market to the subway. Then go to Grand Central Station and catch a NYC train home. I never remember ever being confronted by anyone and never having a hard time. I guess it's a sign of the times.


----------



## Guest_Yerry_* (Apr 17, 2008)

Come off it; once again someone else is going on about the "trains sitting around for OT" bit. Like it's the cornerstone of the experience. More likely, it's brought up solely because it's the only thing that can be solidly proven wrong. Now it's a "maturity level" thing, as if ANY measurable percent of the US population knows that trains are DISPATCHED, let alone HOW, so 99.99%+ of the US is immature. And yes, that's a GLARING example of an _ad hominem_ attack.

And whether she should have ASKED for a taxi is immaterial. Amtrak is in the business and and should have automatically offered, whether she looked 17, 25, like a debutante or a biker. Inexcusable. And politics, budgets or host railroad fault doesn't enter into it.

Comparing the experience with being stranded in an airport is comparing apples to oranges. I was amazed last Spring at how busy stands were at O'Hare at three in the morning and how many 'bummish looking" people had radio microphones poking out of their sleeves. And how many airports are in high-crime areas?

Yeah, I've wondered too about how many people will hear her story. One story may not do much, but _I hear so many so often_. And "romance of the rails" doesn't excuse it. MOST of my experiences with Amtrak have been nothing short of STUPENDOUS, but the few times things went bad, they were total meltdowns. I've seen with my own eyes passengers in wheelchairs being rolled out to trains early, ahead of the crowd, only to sit in the rain because crew "wasn't ready for boarding", and when they finally boarded after waiting a half hour, the one who dared complain was snapped at with a "You don't know how hard my job is." A friend summed it up for me once; "Amtrak is doing everything it can to put itself out of business"-- and he's motorcycled across India.

If you're all so bent about her decision not to ride again, and it offends you so much, why didn't any of you make any attempt to change her mind or offer suggestions? And why are so many of you taking what she posted so personally? Really. so many of the responses read more like, "Mrs, Lincoln, you would have liked the play better if you had chosen a better seat."


----------



## had8ley (Apr 17, 2008)

Guest_Yerry_* said:


> Come off it; once again someone else is going on about the "trains sitting around for OT" bit. Like it's the cornerstone of the experience. More likely, it's brought up solely because it's the only thing that can be solidly proven wrong. Now it's a "maturity level" thing, as if ANY measurable percent of the US population knows that trains are DISPATCHED, let alone HOW, so 99.99%+ of the US is immature. And yes, that's a GLARING example of an _ad hominem_ attack.
> If you're all so bent about her decision not to ride again, and it offends you so much, why didn't any of you make any attempt to change her mind or offer suggestions? And why are so many of you taking what she posted so personally? Really. so many of the responses read more like, "Mrs, Lincoln, you would have liked the play better if you had chosen a better seat."


Dear Guest;

Let me first say that most, not all, of the posters here are NOT railroad employees. They are just like you and found the site in the same manner. I personally know some of these posters and they have nothing but the best interests of our damsel in mind. There's seldom "attacks" on this site unless someone's perception of an attack is different than most of the posters on here. The purpose of a Forum is to gather knowledge and convey it, in a dignified manner, to others who may share in that knowledge. To that end Alan and Anthony (who established this site but seldom posts) have done a magnificent job of keeping the site up and running. One lady who gets in distress distresses me but when 37 years of railroading experience kicks in and tells me all is not well as far as our damsel's post, then I have to cry, "TIME OUT." No, my friend, we are not here to attack or take personally someone else's misfortunes~ we strive to help those that want guidance and information obtain same and use it wisely. I hope I speak for a majority of my fellow posters.


----------



## the_traveler (Apr 17, 2008)

Back in the days that airlines provided hotel vouchers easily, they just provided the voucher (even though it was "only" 1/4 mile away) I never had to ASK "How am I supposed to get there"?" I KNEW that there would probably be a shuttle van or - heaven forbid - I would have to take a cab!

True, Katie is a 17 year old female, but if you are mature enough to be traveling alone, you should be mature enough to plan ahead in case of the unexpected.

Even if your taking a city bus across town, and because of some reason (such as an accident, traffic, detour, etc...) it must end the run early, or gets in too late for the connection to be made, you have to have some other plan (plan B?). In her post, I didn't read anything about Katie's plan B in case something went wrong with her plan A!

I agree that Amtrak was not 100% right, but Katie was not 0% wrong either! There were some thing that she could have done (even before the problems arose) to help the situation.

"_How many credit cards did you carry at 17_?" True, she probably didn't have an acccount in her name, but most credit cards allow a second card to be issued on the account *with someone else's name* - and *for no extra charge*! (My sister had a VISA card on my account in her name - and there is no extra fee!) So she could have had a credit card with her name on (say) her mother's or father's account (for emergencies) - and it would not cost any more! (Maybe they didn't think she's mature enough for a credit card, but she's mature enough to be taking a cross country trip!)

I have had problems with Delta, United, Amtrak, cruise ships, the city bus (in numerous cities) - and even driving or walking! So should I say "I'm never going to fly, take the train, go on a cruise, take a bus, walk or drive ever again!" If I do that, the house is going to be very confining for the next 40 or 50 years!

If I don't sound sympathetic, I'm sorry. But Katie's first post didn't either.


----------



## AlanB (Apr 17, 2008)

Guest said:


> To AllenB-
> Your responses and insights are always welcome, and I appreciate them. But I am disappointed that you defended the responses here to Katies' complaints by resorting to comparing how her statements would have fared in different forums. We are not talking about other message boards. We are talking about this one and how your members and guests reacted to it. Let's focus on the issue at hand. You don't know if she would have been butchered on those other sites, it is just your opinion. Since she didn't post, (or we don't know if she did) so how are you so sure and why would you stipulate that as truth if it didn't happen?


First please, it’s Alan, not Allen.

Second, I was neither defending nor criticizing the responses of this board’s members. That’s not my job here, my job is to ensure that people don’t start calling one another names, making personal attacks, using vulgar language, and seeing that posts are in the correct forums. It’s not my job to tell people how to think, or what the appropriate reaction should be to any posts made on this board.

People are going to believe what they want to believe in any given situation, as demonstrated even by a few who agree with you that perhaps people were to harsh and other’s who disagree with you.

I was however pointing out that if you personally were disappointed by the reaction here, that things would have been far worse else where. And that is not my opinion. I’ve seen it happen time and time again on other forums. I didn’t have to step in and clean up any of the comments made here in order to keep things within the rules that I’ve been given for running this forum. I’m positive that I would have needed to do so on most other forums, at least with our rules. There are a few forums, where even the members fight viciously amongst themselves, much less a brand new member making a post like Katie did.

But here at least everyone is allowed to put forth their opinion about anything. There are forums out there where Katie’s post would have simply been deleted. For that matter, so would yours. And please that’s not a threat against you; I’m simply stating the facts. At least here Katie got some skepticism, some support and supportive suggestions, as well as some disbelief. But she was allowed to put forth her complaint, and without being brutally attacked or cut off at the knees by the deletion of her post.

To Katie,

Should you find yourself in such a situation again, be it with Amtrak or not, next time just stick to the facts. Adding things like the bit about a woman who lost her sleeper don’t do anything to prove your case and are irrelevant. Especially to Amtrak or what ever company you’re trying to get some compensation or apology from. That is between Amtrak and that customer.

Including such a detail can cause others to think that you think that your case is weak, and therefore you’re trying to bolster it with other examples. To a customer service rep working on your case, it doesn’t matter what happened to others. It only matters what happened to you, and what he/she can or cannot do about it.

To all members and guests,

I don’t normally do this, but I do want to point out the Guest_Guest is not Katie posting in disguise. He/she has made many other posts to this board, which is one reason that I do wish that they would sign up. It would make it easier for people to communicate with them privately and vice-versa.

Additionally the guest post signed Jody is yet a third person and should not be confused with either Guest_Guest or Katie.

And Yerry has been posting here for years, although I’m not sure why he’s not using his account. Did you loose your password Yerry?


----------



## George Harris (Apr 17, 2008)

Guest said:


> "Maybe a good "chill or time out" is in order to get over it and go forward. Say that to your mother or 17 year old daughter when they run into some trouble.


I would definitely have said it to my daughter. Can't picture it with my mother. But then, we always had some discussion about the possibilities ahead of time. Where were her parents on this?

OK, so it wasn't a train, but my daughter made her first international flight alone at 16. Nearly 24 hours door to door with three changes of planes. On the other hand it was a route she had been on before, more than once.


----------



## D.P. Roberts (Apr 17, 2008)

AlanB said:


> Second, I was neither defending nor criticizing the responses of this board’s members. That’s not my job here, my job is to ensure that people don’t start calling one another names, making personal attacks, using vulgar language, and seeing that posts are in the correct forums. It’s not my job to tell people how to think, or what the appropriate reaction should be to any posts made on this board.
> People are going to believe what they want to believe in any given situation, as demonstrated even by a few who agree with you that perhaps people were to harsh and other’s who disagree with you.


As the kiddies say, QFT!

Some of the worst, flame-ridden threads I've seen - on any board - involve this very issue. Someone - usually a "newbie" - makes a statement that many posters disagree with. The OP and his/her detractors then criticize the "regulars" for their lack of compassion. It escalates from there, until eventually Godwin's law is invoked & the thread is shut down.

What we need to remember - as Alan said - is that our only obligation is to obey the forum rules. No one is under any obligation to support, condone, criticize, condemn, or empathize with any poster or any behavior. We may think that it's in someone's best interest to do so, but that does not make it mandatory.


----------



## Green Maned Lion (Apr 18, 2008)

rail rookie said:


> I have a friend whose daughter is 18 years old and started to talk about going to Argentina for spring break. When I heard this I about fainted. She's not mature enough to travel to another country to see a friend that was a foreign exchange student.


I've been galavanting around the world un-accompanied since I was 14 years old. I'm pretty sure there were times that I was a bit immature for where I was and what I was doing. I can think of quite a few examples, but would rather I didn't- I'd like to forget them. I came prepared with money, a cell phone or pone card, and what wits I had. And I'd say each of these experiences were part of my learning curve.

And I'm not saying that I don't realize that there can be serious consequences. I still vividly remember racing out of the guest house at a border kibbutz in southern Israel, getting into the shelter, and leaving a few hours later to see that same building a shattered ruin. I felt I was ready to go there, my parents gave up fighting me about it, and I went. If I wasn't ready to expect waring in Israel, I shouldn't have gone. If I wasn't ready for travel delays, I shouldn't travel in the US. But I wouldn't say that a 17 year old girl isn't ready by factor of age (or gender).



Guest_Yerry_* said:


> Come off it; once again someone else is going on about the "trains sitting around for OT" bit. Like it's the cornerstone of the experience. More likely, it's brought up solely because it's the only thing that can be solidly proven wrong.


When someone states the ridiculous, one tends to view their words as words coming from someone who just said something ridiculous. The boy who cried wolf wasn't believed when they were telling the truth for the simple fact that he lied several times. Anything blatantly inaccurate stated by someone, especially something absurd in its inaccuracy, tends to greatly reduce the credibility of all other statements made.

Combine that with the utterly childish- and stating you won't use one American transportation method because it has provided a bad experience the one time you use it, whilst tendering the clear implication that others are problem free is the epitome of childish in my mind- and you find it rather hard to take the person seriously.

That being said, I don't generally disbelieve the OP. Looking at what she actually said, and filtering it through eyes of the inexperienced, emotional, harried traveller, much of what she said not only sounds plausible, it sounds sadly familiar. I have no doubt Amtrak would have been happy to provide a taxi for the OP if she had asked- after all, they were willing to rustle up a bus and driver at 1 in the morning.

But I could easily see them not offering one automatically to a hotel they felt to be within walking distance. And I can see the OP, hassled, annoyed, and bothered, storming off angry about it. But it is the OPs fault that she didn't ask. It is not Amtrak's job to coddle people like babies- they are a rail company, not a pupil-transportation service. If one wants all their problems solved for them, they better be wealthy, because then they can hire a "personal executive secretary" to do all this for them. Otherwise, you have to speak up and deal with your own problems.


----------



## RailFanLNK (Apr 18, 2008)

My statement with the 18 year old that I knew was wanting to go, was a person I know very well. When things don't go accordingly, she falls apart. So she's sitting in Mexico City, awaiting Argentina Air (or whatever flies there) a situation close to 9/11 happens, she now needs to find a cab and a hotel room and navigate the streets of Mexico City when she even has difficulty navigating the streets of LNK pop: 225,000, this person would completely fall apart. We (her elders) are thousands (plural) miles away, she has enough money for the trip but now we need to wire her money since she's going to be sitting for 1-4 days due to delays and she "can't fly home", now she needs to find a Western Union and this person (the person I mentioned in my post) would be going to pieces. I think Katie was having an extremely difficult time handling the transportation curve balls that were being thrown to her. In 5-10 years, this poster may have never posted because they would have been able to handle it alot better. I have discussed this thread with a couple of friends and the first thing they say is, "why is a 17 year old going on a trip unaccompanied without an adult" especially with a mode of transportation that takes days instead of hours?!?

Al


----------



## transit54 (Apr 18, 2008)

I completely agree with the above two posts. I've been traveling by myself since I was about 17, but I'm the type of person who can deal with things coming up very easily. At 18, I was also responding to 911 calls as an EMT, and I had already spent four years running a successful business, to put things in perspective. So, I've always been one to hate to accept arguments that are purely based on age. But at the same time, most of my friends I had when I was that age weren't prepared to take on journeys of the described magnitude.

The reality is that, regardless of age, some people just aren't great at dealing with things that come up unexpectedly in the course of travel - though its almost always a function of experience. When delays hit flights I'm working, I can tell the business travelers and experienced flyers from those who don't do much flying in the first five seconds they talk to me. With travel experience comes the understanding that things occasionally go wrong - and the knowledge to have a good sense of whether its just an uncontrollable situation or something where some blame needs to be handed to the carrier.

I think the more relevant question is how much travel experience Katie has had. If she hasn't had much (as I suspect), I think that she'll see that every form of transportation has its advantages and disadvantages, and no matter how you travel, sometimes things just go wrong. And also that, within any organization, there are a good employees and employees who frankly shouldn't be working for the company. You can't judge an entire company (and form of transit) based on a single experience.


----------



## Guest (Apr 18, 2008)

Wow, after how many responses. comes a rational observer guest, guest. Thanks so much for chiming in. I thought I was the lone ranger here for awhile. Sorry about the mispelling of your name AlanB, I am usually meticulous about my spelling, but in my zeal to respond, I did not look at the correct wording of your name.

I guess after all this, the consensus remains the same. Excuses and the non-ability to sympathize or emapathize is the name of the game. Disect, criticiize and subjugate. Yeah, what a great way to welcome folks to your site.

I was 15/16 years old when I hitch hiked and rode trains through out Europe. It may have worked for me but why would you ever think that would apply to everyone else? When a person is angry, frustrated or scared they want reassurance, guidance and comfort. I would say that this person struck out on all three when she posted on this site.


----------



## frj1983 (Apr 18, 2008)

Guest said:


> Wow, after how many responses. comes a rational observer guest, guest. Thanks so much for chiming in. I thought I was the lone ranger here for awhile. Sorry about the mispelling of your name AlanB, I am usually meticulous about my spelling, but in my zeal to respond, I did not look at the correct wording of your name.
> I guess after all this, the consensus remains the same. Excuses and the non-ability to sympathize or emapathize is the name of the game. Disect, criticiize and subjugate. Yeah, what a great way to welcome folks to your site.


Excuse me but that's not true: please note Green Maned Lion's response: "That being said, I don't generally disbelieve the OP. Looking at what she actually said, and filtering it through eyes of the inexperienced, emotional, harried traveller, much of what she said not only sounds plausible, it sounds sadly familiar."

 

I too feel bad for the way the whole situation unfolded and it sounds somewhat familiar to me too. But you see this kind of customer service response everywhere, not just at Amtrak...as others pointed out the Airlines are rife with it! This cannot be the first time Katie has encountered this kind of thing or she has been really sheltered. 

 

What makes you think she came here for reassurance, guidance, and comfort?? Because you might, does not mean that she did....does what you think apply to everyone else too? But lets say that she did, quite a few posters pointed out what could/could have been done, in what I thought was a non-threatening way. When you are dealing with strangers, as on this forum, you have to be willing to accept what's going to be said and also be willing to filter the information. If Katie is smart enough to use Google to find info about Amtrak and find this forum, smart enough to register for this forum, and smart enough to send a message, then she's got to be smart enough to accept that people are going to respond either negatively or positively to whatever statements she makes.

 

I have belonged to this forum for a number of years and have regularly seen people drop in here, rip Amtrak, and then leave and we never see them again! Katie ventilated, we responded, it's up to her to, once again, filter the information and pick up what would be helpful to her! I have the strange feeling, that we won't see her again!

 

Finally Guest_Guest, if you want to be the "Devils Advocate" here, please have the courage of your convictions and register. What you have to say would have more CREED with me IF you registered!


----------



## Guest_Yerry_* (Apr 19, 2008)

CREED is a belief or motto you live by.

CREDENCE is the amount or trust placed in a statement purporting to be factual.

CREEDENCE is the partial name of a Fullerton, CA rock band of the late '60's and early '70's that pretended to be from the Bayou South.

Since AlanB said you don't have to submit your real name, just what exactly establishes or improves a registered poster's credence? I have a feeling it's not that fact that you're registered or not.

And the question begs to be asked-- if AlanB has to edit someone's post, what does that do to THEIR credence?


----------



## jackal (Apr 19, 2008)

Guest_Yerry_* said:


> Since AlanB said you don't have to submit your real name, just what exactly establishes or improves a registered poster's credence? I have a feeling it's not that fact that you're registered or not.


I'm not taking sides here (I think I'm pretty much of the same mind as GML, and you (Yerry) make some valid points), but I just wanted to make an observation on the subject of registering.

I think for general questions or light conversation, unregistered guests and registered users are more or less equivalent.

But when you start to get involved in substantive debates, it is only natural to take someone who is an established member of the community, or at least shows an interest in establishing themselves as a member of a community, more seriously. In most communities, online and offline, internal criticism and debate is treated with greater regard than one-off comments from random outsiders who have no investment in the community. (Occasionally, it can be good to solicit advice from outside experts, but I don't think that's the case here.)

Registering on an anonymous Internet forum doesn't in and of itself prove commitment, but it does lend more weight to your arguments because, as a known member with an identity, you can then be held more accountable for your opinions. Random people who show up and say things anonymously are much more likely to disappear than someone who's taken the time to create an identity and register an email address.

It's also in your best interests, as someone could come along and post anonymously under your name by typing in "Yerry" and completely undermine your points or dash the credibility of your arguments with a single post.

I've participated in both forums that require registration and ones that are completely anonymous, and I have to say that forums requiring registration are typically more civil, because people are held accountable for their speech and community members will shun those who cause unnecessary discord. Anonymous forums (the altamontpress.com forums are notorious for this) are filled much more with vitriol and personal attacks, because it is hard to track a member's establishment in the community and impossible for administrators and moderators to establish rules and enforce discipline. And I'm not sure I'd buy that unregistered/anonymous fora are more open to debate--a good moderating team can still allow an appropriate, healthy amount of argument and discourse (and it appears we have a very good moderating team here). If anything, the moderators can foster healthy debate by curbing the unhealthy debate and personal attacks more common on unmoderated/anonymous forums.

Also, it's generally considered bad form on Internet forums to correct someone's spelling or grammar when the intended meaning is obvious (although you did so with humor, and I got a slight chuckle). It detracts from your argument, as it turns the attention from the facts and opinions to a form of a personal attack. Whereas an out-of-place capital or comma splice stands out to me like it's printed in red ink, I've come to realize over the last few years that some people just naturally don't see these mistakes or, despite receiving the same schooling I've had, just have a harder time grasping the concepts than I did. They're typically more gifted than I in other areas, whether it's differential equations, public speaking and live debate (I argue much better in writing, where I can analyze and formulate my thoughts more slowly than in person), or self-discipline and organizational skills (which I completely lack).

I'm not a moderator here, and it's probably slightly out of place for me to post this, but I just wanted to provide my perspective on this subject for your consideration.


----------



## MrEd (Apr 19, 2008)

Katie said:


> :angry: Then they told us that ever station would be open at the time of arrival, and with every stop we found that we were stranded in -45 degree weather in the slums of the city.


Katie, that does sound like a horrible experience. I have been to Detroit in the summer and I didn't really like it all that much. I hope your next trip finds better conditions, glad you made it home safe this time.


----------



## AlanB (Apr 19, 2008)

Guest_Yerry_* said:


> Since AlanB said you don't have to submit your real name, just what exactly establishes or improves a registered poster's credence? I have a feeling it's not that fact that you're registered or not.


In addition to the two main points that Jackal provided:



jackal said:


> Registering on an anonymous Internet forum doesn't in and of itself prove commitment, but it does lend more weight to your arguments because, as a known member with an identity, you can then be held more accountable for your opinions. Random people who show up and say things anonymously are much more likely to disappear than someone who's taken the time to create an identity and register an email address.
> It's also in your best interests, as someone could come along and post anonymously under your name by typing in "Yerry" and completely undermine your points or dash the credibility of your arguments with a single post.


The other major reason that I see is simply the fact that it provides a way to contact the member privately via the PM system. This allows one to continue the discussion or express things that you might not express publicly.

And then there is the minor point of believing in your statements enough to make the extra, but slight effort to actually register and join the community. After all, a forum is only as rich as its members. All of them, no matter what their views or opinions might be.



Guest_Yerry_* said:


> And the question begs to be asked-- if AlanB has to edit someone's post, what does that do to THEIR credence?


I edited his post because the quotes were screwed up. Lack of understanding the nuances of the BB in no way diminishes his words.


----------



## Green Maned Lion (Apr 19, 2008)

Guest_Yerry_* said:


> CREED is a belief or motto you live by.CREDENCE is the amount or trust placed in a statement purporting to be factual.
> 
> CREEDENCE is the partial name of a Fullerton, CA rock band of the late '60's and early '70's that pretended to be from the Bayou South.


Yerry, just to continue what others are saying, briefly, when I get into AIM debates with people, I occasionally come across a certain type of person that, when they run out of answers or places to check my points of view, they start tearing my syntax to shreds. They start saying that if I can't type correctly, I am obviously not mentally capable of continuing the argument, and am not worthy of having my own opinion. Which is ridiculous. Everyone is worthy of having an opinion, and everyone is worthy of expressing it, so long as they take the trouble to support them with facts.

In British (I think) slang, "cred" is often used to mean "credibility". I automatically assumed that to be what FRJ was referencing. On rare occasions, one's mistake in typo makes it hard to understand what they mean. Otherwise, its kind of irrelevant. I mean, if dey R tpin liek dis, if u no wut i men, then it would be reasonable to question their credibility, but if they add an extra letter, subtract one, misspell a word, or accidentally strike the wrong letter, (or my most popular problem of simply leaving out a word because I think faster than I type) its sensible to ignore it.

Also, registering gives people a name to put on a personality. I have an unusual style of talking/typing/writing or so I am told. Knowing it is me typing probably gives someone a better idea of what to take seriously, what to lighten in their mind, and when I am being sarcastic. So in addition to adding credibility and identity, it also increases understanding. Also, you get to understand what each persons area of expertise is. For example, rail information as pertaining to operations is an area of expertise best served by Had8ley, OBS Gone Freight, George Harris, and some I'm not going to list, while other members know more about history, or the science of rail, or particular rolling stock, or customer relations, or whatever.


----------



## the_traveler (Apr 19, 2008)

I agree that taking the time and effort to register allows other members to "put a face" on a certain poster's words. That is not to say that "they have all the answers", but it does make them more believable. You get to know their areas of knowledge by seeing their postings over and over.

Some examples that I would not know if they did not register:

1) jackal - I would not know he is from Alaska and worked for the Alaska Railroad as a brakeman, and has railroad knowledge

2) rnizlek - I would not know that he works for an airline in customer service, and has been on "the other side" of many of the problems we raise

3) OBS gone freight - I would not have known he has knowledge of train operations

4) AlanB - Besides being a moderator, he has a wealth of knowledge about Amtrak

These are just 4 examples out of ~1500+ *members* of this forum that have taken the time to register. However, I can't think of 1 thing about "guest.guest" that stands out about her/him!


----------



## Guest (Apr 19, 2008)

_"I can't think of 1 thing about "guest.guest" that stands out about her/him "_

Sometimes our first post on here is in reference to something really off the wall that is unlikely to ever happen again. The intensity of the experience provokes a post that is then met with more intensity... and sometimes animosity. In future responses to the poster the events that inspired the first post would be foremost in the responder's mind. You will always remember "Katy"s first post. She's probably a very decent human being who encountered something very stressful for her and it came out in her writing. Flight or fight doesn't always engender the most rational responses.

For some reason, I'm under the impression that Alan and the other moderators have access to the IP addresses and know if a registered poster is the same as an guest poster. If so, he knows that there are those of us who ARE registered but prefer not to post under the registered name. I've been posting pretty consistently, but not under the registered name, since last summer.

Many times I read posts about upcoming trips and could probably with enough Googling and searching this forum determine where you live. Folks, THAT could be a safety issue. While the folksiness is wonderful, this is read by people around the world and by anyone with a computer and an interest in this forum. For that reason, many of us are very careful about our posts.

I would advise Katy and her fellow GuestGuest poster to continue reading this forum to become astute about traveling on Amtrak and not to give up on Amtrak. Recognize that it was a learning experience. She's obviously safe and at her destination. I took my first train trip with 2 friends around age 16. It is my understanding that European childen commonly travel (or did) alone (part of the reason for the establishment of the youth hostels- correct me if this is wrong). So, learn from it, Katy, and add it to your life's experiences. Don't cut out Amtrak or you'll miss out on some future good-to-great experiences.

Jody


----------



## The Metropolitan (Apr 19, 2008)

I guess there's not a whole lot to add to the discussion by this point. I doubt we'll ever hear back from the OP, but would have liked to ask just what, within reason, she would have suggested should have been done differently.

True that arranging transportation to the hotel would have probably gone a long way, but perhaps not. I've been on trains into Chicago where people were going to miss their westward connections and were being offered overnight hotel and transportation to/from and they were still angry as all could be for missing the connection.

As for the Bus Driver into Michigan, it seems like someone dropped the ball here, though I guess it would be hard to say if it was Amtrak or the Bus Driver himself. It *may* have even been an FTA "Hours of Service" limitation for the Operator himself that kept him from diverting up to East Lansing.

I do agree however that given the repeated nature of the need for bus fill-ins to passengers into Michigan who missed the last train due to their connecting trains running late, Amtrak should be at the ready with some sort of "trip-tik" itinerary routing for the Operators of these emergency situations.

I had a rather dismal trip out of Chicago last February on the Cardinal that tested my endurance significantly. On that, our very late train was almost stranded in West Virginia, and the crews were particularly nasty or dismissive with even the slightest inquiry. Yet, 7 months later, I hesitantly returned to the Cardinal for a return from Charlottesville, and was pleasnatly suprised at the difference.

I guess what I'm trying to say is

1- that one bad trip does not define a carrier.

2 - that when travelling by any means, it helps to lower your expectations from "perfection" to "definitely acceptable" and realize that things can happen to cause things not to occur as planned

3 - that Customer Service Reps are people too, that they have a very stressful job to handle on top of any personal stress, and that they don't always have the power to give you all that you ask. However, they should always treat you as a person and with due empathy for your situation.

Of course, when you fail to get a satisfactory response within reason and you've done a good job of being reasonable with a CSR, then by all means, it's time to take action to try to get proper restitution.


----------



## AlanB (Apr 19, 2008)

Guest said:


> I When a person is angry, frustrated or scared they want reassurance, guidance and comfort. I would say that this person struck out on all three when she posted on this site.


Hmm, let’s just think about that for a moment.

She clearly wasn’t seeking guidance, since 1) she never asked a question, not even an implied one; 2) she already knew what to do and had done so, that being contacting Amtrak. And Amtrak had already responded to the first incident obviously, since she had a $350 voucher for that trip. Basically a refund for her entire trip.

I’m actually a bit unclear as to how she gave $109 off that voucher to a friend in Denver, but that’s not really relevant.

Next, I want to point out to everyone that she was never alone in downtown Chicago at 1:00 AM, her 18 year old boyfriend was with her the whole time.

Also regarding guidance, why after that first experience, would she then let her other friend a 17 ride the same route without being the least bit prepared for any problems. It’s also left unexplained as to why the friend had to overnight in Chicago. Katie only mentions that something went wrong with the reservation when he went to pick up the tickets in Denver, such that the connecting ticket wasn’t there. But why they didn’t just buy/deal with the issue at that moment is unclear. I’m also not sure why he didn’t just buy a ticket when he got to Chicago for the train heading out that night.

If he was able to buy a ticket for the next morning, why not that night?

If after her first horrible experience she didn’t think to warn her friend to be prepared for anything, and to have alternatives in mind, I’m not sure that our guidance would much matter.

Now turning to reassurance and comfort, her post was really about her friend stuck in Chicago. There is very little that even she could do to reassure and/or comfort her friend stranded in CHI, much less anything that we could do. And our comforting her about her friend wasn't going to help him.

Her own experience was far enough in the past that she should have gotten over it at least a bit. But I didn't get the impression that she was looking for reassurance or comfort for herself. She was worried about her friend, a friend that she let set out on a trip, unprepared for a problem.


----------



## AlanB (Apr 19, 2008)

Yes, Jody, we can see your IP addresses when you post. As an admin I can even see the address that one uses to register, although in your case you didn't use the same IP as you've got now. Not that I would ever reveal or otherwise cross reference the two publicly anyhow.

I only made mention of IP's at all, since people were beginning to wonder if all the posts were coming from Katie. So I wanted it to be clear to everyone, that we did indeed have three different people.


----------



## VentureForth (Apr 20, 2008)

As any moderator of a bulletin board knows (and I am one elsewhere), there are those who find joy in posting things to rowl up the community. Either Katy or Yarri accepting or appreciating any of the dozens of sympathetic posts would lend to some amount of credence.


----------



## Green Maned Lion (Apr 20, 2008)

Katie did seem to be trying to rile us, I'll admit. I think, though, she was primarily venting.


----------



## Shawn (Apr 26, 2008)

Wow, i must say it wasn't a good trip, that I agree with.

Now for the things I don't...

They compensated you for your troubles, provided a hotel, yes they should have been better at the transportation to the hotel, but get resourceful and grab a cab.

And as for the airports, yes, they are government owned!



Katie said:


> the_traveler said:
> 
> 
> > If you're *real* lucky, if you're at an airport and due to some reason, the airline _may_ give you a hotel voucher. But even they will not provide transportation to the hotel. But it just happens that many hotels provide *their own* buses to the airport. Most hotels do not provide transportation to the train station! (I can only think of 2 or 3 in the whole country!)
> ...


----------

