# NEC equipment cleanliness



## GB Bari (Jan 5, 2008)

Thanksgiving 2006 my son-in-law was transfered from Norfolk VA to Groton Ct. Yes he is Navy. Since then, my wife and I have used Amtrak NEC regional trains to commute between Baltimore-BWI and New London-NLC. It's ashame the Acela doesn't stop there else we'd try that too.

With maybe two exceptions since then, including a trip just at the end of this past Christmas week, we have been constantly disgusted with the filthy conditions of the restrooms on these trains. We use regional trains that travel between Newport News VA (or Wash, DC) and Boston MA. We upgrade to Business Class whenever possible to gain the leg room and the electrical outlet.

Why can't Amtrak include an attendant who simply walks thru the train for 8 hours and keeps the restrooms clean?? Every train we ride on is always moderately to heavily occupied so the rest rooms get a lot of use. My wife has made the trip several times by herself and has seen mostly rude and apathetic conductors who are disinterested in the rest room problems. Yes some people are pigs in the restroom and treat the equipment horribly, urinating and defacating all over the seats and floors, but an attendant could at least keep them usable.

The rest room in her business class car was totally unusable the week before last. She nearly had an embarrassing accident trying to hold until they arrived at New London. She tried several other cars but the rooms were occupied each time she walked back.

C'mon Congress. Want Amtrak to show profit? Start by telling Amtrak's management they have to start acting like they care about the customers.


----------



## AlanB (Jan 5, 2008)

GB,

Sorry to hear that you have been encountering such problems, but I'm also not exactly surprised. First off your experiences so far have been during the busiest time of the year for the regional trains, that being the period between Thanksgiving an Christmas. I won't tell you to expect remarkable improvements from here on out, but things might be a bit better now that the trains should be a bit less busy than they have been.

The conductors will be of no help, in part because they have nothing to clean the bathrooms with, in part because it isn't part of their job description and the union will not allow them to do it either. Besides, they have many other far more important duties to perform anyhow.

As for why Amtrak doesn't have someone on board to try and clean things, that's mainly the fault of Congress. For years Congress has insisted that Amtrak must make a profit (even though no train system in the world makes a profit) and continues to pressure Amtrak to cut it's operating expenses. So there is no way that Amtrak can afford the salary dollars needed to hire full time people to do nothing other than ride the trains and keep the bathrooms clean. If you want that to happen, then you need to lobby Congress to find the funding for it.

Finally while it's probably not all that helpful, since the calling times are rather poor, Acela does indeed stop in New London. There are actually two trains per weekday going northbound that stop in New London, one train per day going southbound. The first eastbound train of the day however originates in NY, so that won't help you down in Baltimore. The second Acela however does originate in DC, stops in Baltimore only at 4:30 PM and gets to New London at 9:04 PM, that is train #2172.

Southbound your only choice is train #2151, again a weekday only train, which stops in New London at 6:35 AM, Baltimore at 11:09 AM, and BWI at 11:21 AM.

If you do decide to try Acela for one of your trips, make very sure that you pay careful attention to the conductor's announcements as the train gets close to New London. The New London station has a very short high-level platform, so only one car on the train is able to open its doors. Acela's don't have built in stairs like the regionals do, so they can't use the main platform. So you want to make sure that you allow enough time to walk through the train to the appropriate car that is going to open its doors. You don't want to have to run through the train or worse get carried by to Providence and have to double back.


----------



## Guest (Jan 5, 2008)

Would you ask a Airline Pilot or a Ship Captain to clean the plane bathroom, or cabin bathroom? NO. The Conductor is the Captain the train. To ask them to clean the bathrooms is an insult. Ask Amtrak to provide car cleaners..


----------



## GB Bari (Jan 5, 2008)

Guest said:


> Would you ask a Airline Pilot or a Ship Captain to clean the plane bathroom, or cabin bathroom? NO. The Conductor is the Captain the train. To ask them to clean the bathrooms is an insult. Ask Amtrak to provide car cleaners..


Two problems with your reply.

1. My wife was not asking the conductor to actually clean the rest room himself. My wife simply tried to ask if there was anyone who could maintain the rest room to usable condition...and was told "I can't do anything about it". That's a cop-out. The conductor can certainly call the problem in and have it fixed somewhere up line. He should have shown a little empathy, but didn't. It made a bad situation even worse.

2. Bad analogy. The conductor is not driving the train. The conductor is Amtrak's agent on the train who is paid to interface with the paying customers. Before Amtrak there were porters on the B&O trains that I rode who did just such work. You'd better believe I would ask **ANY** company employee on a plane, train, or boat, to see to it that equipment which is supposed to be working for the comfort and health safety of the passengers is working.

I don't buy the argument for one minute that is was an insult to the conductor. It is actually a MAJOR insult to the paying customer that the crew and company does not give a da-- about the customer's comfort. The conductor represents the company, like it or not. So does the Ship captain if there are no other crew, and so does the Airline pilot if there are no other crew. Would YOU run a transportation company that features filthy rest rooms on its equipment? Although I imagine it has happened somewhere, in 30 years of flying I have NEVER seen a rest room on any airplane I've ridden on as filthy as the ones on Amtraks NEC trains. And some of those planes held 300 passengers and had maybe 6 restrooms so they got a lot of use. But someone kept them clean.

And to AlanB - Appreciate your Acela advice. Thanks. But.....I also **especially** don't buy the excuse that it was Thanksgiving or Christmas and I should expect filthy restrooms because of heavy ridership (you are not the first person to suggest that). Sorry but that is LOSER thinking. What is WINNER thiking? It is **exactly** at that time of the year that Amtrak gets a whole lot of customers who may never think of riding trains any other time of the year. This is the IDEAL time to show off what great service Amtrak could provide to lure them back for some off-season or other pleasure or business travel. Amtrak's Marketing Department (yes they do have one) should be on top of this but....I guess they are getting their taxpayer-funded paychecks so, like the unionized conductors and so many government workers, they just don't care to do an ounce more than necessary to get by.


----------



## GB Bari (Jan 5, 2008)

Apologies to the forum -I had not intended this to get into a back-and-forth; just reporting on my travel experiences. But as you can guess I am passionate about customer service. As you may guess, I work in a service capacity and take pride in providing the best to my customers to keep them coming back. If it was MY train ( I was the Conductor), I would certainly keep pressing management to provide some means to periodically clean the restrooms so that they never got as bad as what I have seen.

What are other riders' experience with NEC trains?


----------



## AlanB (Jan 6, 2008)

GB Bari said:


> 1. My wife was not asking the conductor to actually clean the rest room himself. My wife simply tried to ask if there was anyone who could maintain the rest room to usable condition...and was told "I can't do anything about it". That's a cop-out. The conductor can certainly call the problem in and have it fixed somewhere up line. He should have shown a little empathy, but didn't. It made a bad situation even worse.


There is no one that the conductor can call to fix the problem. The only cleaning crews that Amtrak has are all asigned to either the yards or the end point stations. There simply isn't someone say at Metropark that the conductor can have run out and quickly clean the bathroom. In fact there aren't any Amtrak employees at all in Metropark. At most other stations, the only employees are ticket agents.

And then there is the problem that the train never stops anywhere, with the exception of New York City, long enough for someone to actually clean the bathroom. And even in NY the amount of time is very limited. And you can't just ask the guy who happens to clean the bathrooms at Penn Station to run down to the train and clean the bathrooms there. Forget for a moment contract/work rules issues, the bathrooms on the train are not normal bathrooms so you need to have a bit of training in how to clean them. Then there is the issue of lack of time. You can't force the employee to get on the train and ride it to the next stop and then get off and return, because now you are getting into insurance issues and many other issues, including safety training.

Now all that said, I don't disagree that he couldn't have been a bit nicer and more sympathetic to your wife, but there really isn't a lot that he can do to fix the problem.



GB Bari said:


> 2. Bad analogy. The conductor is not driving the train. The conductor is Amtrak's agent on the train who is paid to interface with the paying customers. Before Amtrak there were porters on the B&O trains that I rode who did just such work. You'd better believe I would ask **ANY** company employee on a plane, train, or boat, to see to it that equipment which is supposed to be working for the comfort and health safety of the passengers is working.


He may not be driving the train, but just for the record the conductor is in charge of the train. He is the Captian of the train. The engineer cannot move the train without the conductor's permission. If he does, he won't be an engineer for very long. The FRA (Federal Railroad Administration), not Amtrak, will pull his license to drive trains if he doesn't follow the conductor's instructions.

And all those porters are one of the reasons that the freight companies don't run passenger service anymore and why we now have Amtrak.

I don't disagree with you however that as the person in charge, the conductor is therefore someone to lodge a complaint with.



GB Bari said:


> I don't buy the argument for one minute that is was an insult to the conductor. It is actually a MAJOR insult to the paying customer that the crew and company does not give a da-- about the customer's comfort. The conductor represents the company, like it or not. So does the Ship captain if there are no other crew, and so does the Airline pilot if there are no other crew. Would YOU run a transportation company that features filthy rest rooms on its equipment? Although I imagine it has happened somewhere, in 30 years of flying I have NEVER seen a rest room on any airplane I've ridden on as filthy as the ones on Amtraks NEC trains. And some of those planes held 300 passengers and had maybe 6 restrooms so they got a lot of use. But someone kept them clean.


I can't speak to the condition of the bathrooms on planes, because I've never taken a flight long enough that I actually needed to use the bathroom on one. That said, and this isn't an excuse, but the dynamics are a bit different between a train when compared to a plane or a boat. There is a whole lot more bouncing going on when riding a train, by comparison to other modes of transportation. This does unfortunately cause more accidents within the bathrooms.

I disagree however that the company doesn't care about the customer's comfort. The problem is that Congress is simply not providing the monies needed to pay for the number of employees that would be needed to patrol every train, every day of the week. Instead Congress continues to press Amtrak to reduce its operating expenses. In that climate, there is no way that management can even begin to consider such a suggestion.



GB Bari said:


> And to AlanB - Appreciate your Acela advice. Thanks. But.....I also **especially** don't buy the excuse that it was Thanksgiving or Christmas and I should expect filthy restrooms because of heavy ridership (you are not the first person to suggest that). Sorry but that is LOSER thinking. What is WINNER thiking? It is **exactly** at that time of the year that Amtrak gets a whole lot of customers who may never think of riding trains any other time of the year. This is the IDEAL time to show off what great service Amtrak could provide to lure them back for some off-season or other pleasure or business travel. Amtrak's Marketing Department (yes they do have one) should be on top of this but....I guess they are getting their taxpayer-funded paychecks so, like the unionized conductors and so many government workers, they just don't care to do an ounce more than necessary to get by.


That wasn't intended as an excuse, simply a statement of fact. But as I've pointed out, this isn't a failure of management, the marketing department, unionized conductors, or even other government workers just getting buy. This is a failure caused by Congress and their constant nicking and diming Amtrak almost to death. I just did a very quick count of things with a few calculations. Amtrak would have to hire 36 workers, just to clean the weekday trains that run between DC and NY only. That doesn't include Keystone trains, nor any trains that run north of NY. It also doesn't include any workers to clean the weekend trains, nor does that number include any extra workers to cover vacations, sick days, or personel days.

Now, if we assume that Amtrak could actually get away with paying them $12 an hour, something that I rather doubt. Most likely they will have to start them out at a higher rate than that. But again for the sake of arguement let's just say that they can get them started at $12 an hour. That will cost Amtrak $900,000 a year, just to clean those weekday trains. And that $900K doesn't include any benefit pay, training, retirement pay, possible overtime due to late trains, or future raises. Nor does it include all the trains on the corridor as I mentiond above and it doesn't include the weekend trains. And it doesn't include the costs of portable cleaning supplies either.

So I'd say that we're easily approaching $2 million a year, just to be able to clean the bathrooms enroute of all the corridor trains. And that's in the face of a Congress that just two years ago ordered Amtrak to cut its looses in the food service areas of Amtrak. We haven't even talked about the bathrooms on short haul trains out Chicago, the California short haul trains, and the Pacific Northwest corridor trains.

And again, I'm not suggesting that dirty bathrooms isn't a problem. But when you have Congress micro-managing everything at Amtrak and a President that submits a budget with zero dollars in funding for Amtrak, no manager is going to suddenly suggest "hey, let's start spending an extra $2M a year to clean the bathrooms while enroute.


----------



## AlanB (Jan 6, 2008)

GB Bari said:


> Apologies to the forum -I had not intended this to get into a back-and-forth; just reporting on my travel experiences. But as you can guess I am passionate about customer service. As you may guess, I work in a service capacity and take pride in providing the best to my customers to keep them coming back. If it was MY train ( I was the Conductor), I would certainly keep pressing management to provide some means to periodically clean the restrooms so that they never got as bad as what I have seen.
> What are other riders' experience with NEC trains?


GB,

No worries, that's what this forum is intended for, back and forth, asking questions, reporting experiences and observations, and making comments.  As long as things remain civil, we'll permit just about anything. Just know that we aren't Amtrak either and have no input to Amtrak.

As for me personally, I ride almost exclusively Acela and even then I'm usually in First Class. So it's far less of a problem there, since the capcity of the FC car is only 26. Even with passengers coming and going during the ride, it's pretty rare for more than 50 to 60 people to use the bathroom in that car.

On the one or two trips that I have done on a regional in the past year, I think that I only visited the bathrom once and it was so so, but even then I was in the Business Class car which is usually a bit better than the rest of the train.


----------



## battalion51 (Jan 6, 2008)

IIRC Amtrak has done a pilot with the Acelas to have someone come on the Boston trains at Philly, go up to New York cleaning, and then do a return trip. Now this is just a Pilot that I've heard about, I don't know what, if any success it has had. Unfortunately with the dynamics of the NEC the passengers are very well versed at what they do, they know how things work and don't need a TA to hold their hand like Long Distance services do. With this you do lose some things like someone to tend to the resetrooms, but that's the nature of the beast.

I too am a child of the hospitality industry, the customer service you received from the Conductor is not condoned, but at the same time not unexpected. Their job is to move from Point A to Point B safely and efficiently. The term "guest" is still widely hated throughout the railroad, there are passengers, not guests. I do wish there would be reform, but the company simply does not have the resources to do this thanks to the continued low budget it receives from Congress.


----------



## MrEd (Jan 6, 2008)

Most times we have found the restrooms working on the NEC trains, sometimes we have to go back one car though if they take restroom out of service. It has been my experience they are not cleaned, but sometimes closed because of the conditions within.


----------



## GB Bari (Jan 6, 2008)

AlanB said:


> There is no one that the conductor can call to fix the problem. The only cleaning crews that Amtrak has are all assigned to either the yards or the end point stations. (SNIP)
> 
> You can't force the employee to get on the train and ride it to the next stop and then get off and return, because now you are getting into insurance issues and many other issues, including safety training.


Of course Amtrak should deal with all of these issues, hiring the crew, training them, and having the equipment available at least once along the route to re-fresh the restrooms (see my example below). Insurance, safety training cannot be thrown up as excuses not to provide clean rest rooms. I would wager that if I got to look at Amtrak's books, I could find $2M of wasted expenditures that could be diverted to begin to improve this situation. But this is all conjecture. I just do not accept excuses for poor service - whatever that "facts" are. And it starts with Amtrak management, not Congress. Positive, pro-customer attitude costs nothing; it can even save money AND generate more revenue. 


AlanB said:


> .....the conductor is in charge of the train. He is the Captian of the train. The engineer cannot move the train without the conductor's permission. If he does, he won't be an engineer for very long. The FRA (Federal Railroad Administration), not Amtrak, will pull his license to drive trains if he doesn't follow the conductor's instructions. And all those porters are one of the reasons that the freight companies don't run passenger service anymore and why we now have Amtrak. I don't disagree with you however that as the person in charge, the conductor is therefore someone to lodge a complaint with.


I want to see the Conductor Instruction Manual where it says to ignore complaints from passengers when restrooms have human waste on the seats, and urine and used toilet paper sloshing around the floors.
OK, I'll take a moment here- I have been pretty hard on the conductors because of a few bad experiences. I will concede that there are probably many good ones. Its just that in about 8 trips on the NEC last year, we only met one good one (who seemed to genuinely care).

The porters are NOT any of the reason the railroads got out of the passenger business as has been well-documented. The government almost ran the railroads into the ground by denying them any subsidy funding proportionate to the funding it provided the airline industry and the federal highway system beginning in the 1950s. The Big Three (auto mfrs) lured the American populace into believing that automobiles were the “end-all”. Passenger ridership dropped not because of too many porters, but because of slick marketing and a naive public who could not see the house of cards that automobile dependency would eventually become. The airlines would never have been able to expand as quickly as they did and offer the cheap fares if they had to invest capital to build their airports and maintenance facilities and fund their fair share of the air traffic control system. Congress, fattened by auto and airline industry perks and gratuities, made sure it was not a balanced competition. To be fair, railroad management in the 1960s also was not performing at its zenith, either.

Now the railroads are booming with freight business because trucks simply cannot handle the bulk and the highways have become too congested for reliable delivery schedules. I re-state what I wrote earlier - if Amtrak would spend the money on train attendants who are selected and retained for good attitude and work ethic, and conductors would be reviewed and rated as to their courtesy and management abilities (you say they are in charge of the train; I say therefore they ARE the train manager and the buck stops with them), they would see their ridership increase significantly.

For the next 30 years or so, Baby Boomers like me are getting old and would gladly patronize the trains more if they are clean and service is courteous. Driving on the roads is not pleasant anymore and trains represent a far better and more gentile choice of transportation than the airlines with the dehumanizing "strip searches" at the airports, delays while sitting on taxiways in crowded, cramped airplanes, and the constant danger of fatal sabotage or mechanical failure while airborne. Younger generations may accept rudeness and unclean conditions on trains as a de facto standard, but they shouldn't...it wasn't always so.



AlanB said:


> I can't speak to the condition of the bathrooms on planes, because I've never taken a flight long enough that I actually needed to use the bathroom on one. That said, and this isn't an excuse, but the dynamics are a bit different between a train when compared to a plane or a boat. There is a whole lot more bouncing going on when riding a train, by comparison to other modes of transportation. This does unfortunately cause more accidents within the bathrooms.


OK, you must be telling the truth here about your limited flying experience because airplanes are, on the average, MUCH "bouncier" than the trains on the welded-rail NEC. A train doesn't hit an air pocket and suddenly drop 100 or 2,000 feet. I have been on a plane and in the restroom when just that happened. Some fluid came up and out of the bowl. I finished, wiped up what I could, exited and told a nearby flight attendant, who promptly cleaned it up. I don't know what their job descriptions are but they didn't get insulted. Instead they put the passengers first. I have ridden many flights that had the seatbelt lights on most of the way because of turbulence or "uneven air" which is like riding over a rural dirt road with a lot of potholes. By comparison, and with a few exceptions, the ride up and down the NEC is rather tame. And the reason I flew most of the time was because Amtrak offered no or poorly scheduled service to my destination.


AlanB said:


> I disagree however that the company doesn't care about the customer's comfort. The problem is that Congress is simply not providing the monies needed to pay for the number of employees that would be needed to patrol every train, every day of the week. Instead Congress continues to press Amtrak to reduce its operating expenses. In that climate, there is no way that management can even begin to consider such a suggestion.(SNIP)
> 
> But as I've pointed out, this isn't a failure of management, the marketing department, unionized conductors, or even other government workers just getting buy. This is a failure caused by Congress and their constant nicking and diming Amtrak almost to death.
> 
> ...


I'm hearing a common theme. "It's not Amtrak's fault. It's all Congress' fault. Not enough money. Amtrak can't do this and they can't do that." Nowhere do I read that Amtrak management shares in any responsibility for any of this - especially their attitude. Amtrak management can seek ways to remedy the problem within the budget they have been given. No matter how meager. It's called creativity - out of the box thinking. It's the way winning organizations get ahead and gain more market share. Apparently someone has given this some thought per Battalion51’s mention of the Acela cleaning experiment.
Battalion51, I sure would like to read more on that 'experiment' with cleaning the Acela cars halfway. If true, it's a good move for Amtrak management (maybe there is some hope?) I hope it produces positive results and they expand that to the more heavily-ridden conventional trains as well. A positive attitude costs nothing but takes some effort to affect cultural change down through the organization.

Mr. Ed - You have been lucky.

Happy New Year to all. 

GB


----------



## AlanB (Jan 6, 2008)

GB Bari said:


> AlanB said:
> 
> 
> > There is no one that the conductor can call to fix the problem. The only cleaning crews that Amtrak has are all assigned to either the yards or the end point stations. (SNIP)
> ...


You’re thinking long term down the road. My statement was only intended for the here and now. Sure if Amtrak went out and hired people and properly trained them, then things can be done to fix the problem in the future. But on that day, at the time your wife was speaking with the conductor, there was nothing in place within Amtrak that could have allowed that conductor to rectify the problem.



GB Bari said:


> I would wager that if I got to look at Amtrak's books, I could find $2M of wasted expenditures that could be diverted to begin to improve this situation. But this is all conjecture. I just do not accept excuses for poor service - whatever that "facts" are. And it starts with Amtrak management, not Congress. Positive, pro-customer attitude costs nothing; it can even save money AND generate more revenue.


I’m sure that if anyone seriously looked at Amtrak’s books and understood things that they could find $2M in wasted money. But I can pretty much assure you that if someone does go looking and finds $2M in wasted money, that they will just stop the waste and will not in the face of demands by Congress and the White House to cut expenses turn around an use it to develop a program to clean the restrooms enroute.

I’m not trying to be a hardhead here; in fact I agree with you that there really should be a program in place. I sure hope that B51 is correct, although I have to say that I haven’t heard about that program. I’m just stating the facts as they are, and the reality is that under pressure from those inside the capital beltway, that management is always going to look for ways to reduce expenses and that typically means cutting staff, not adding staff.

Please remember that while Amtrak is considered a private corporation, it is only in name. The only stockholder with voting rights is the US Government; they own and control 100% of the preferred voting stock. The Fed has created the environment under which Amtrak operates and until they change how they handle Amtrak, and I’m not just talking about throwing more money at Amtrak, things will not change at Amtrak.

Two years ago, Congress ordered Amtrak to cut food service losses. They were micro-managing things once again. Now I ask you what manager is going to want to go looking for ways to improve food service, when he just got ordered by Congress to cut his staff in half and reduce the quality of the product offered. I will grant you that Congress didn’t specifically say to Amtrak that they had to cut the staffing, but there aren’t too many ways to cut $100 M out of the expenses associated with food service without at least reducing staffing as part of the equation.



GB Bari said:


> AlanB said:
> 
> 
> > .....the conductor is in charge of the train. He is the Captian of the train. The engineer cannot move the train without the conductor's permission. If he does, he won't be an engineer for very long. The FRA (Federal Railroad Administration), not Amtrak, will pull his license to drive trains if he doesn't follow the conductor's instructions. And all those porters are one of the reasons that the freight companies don't run passenger service anymore and why we now have Amtrak. *I don't disagree with you however that as the person in charge, the conductor is therefore someone to lodge a complaint with.*
> ...


Please reread my statement now in bold. I never said that the conductor should ignore complaints; in fact I specifically stated that he is someone to lodge a complaint with. All I ever said to the contrary was that there was little that he could do at that moment in time to fix the problem being complained about. But there is absolutely no reason why he couldn’t have politely listened to the complaint, commiserated a bit; before stating that there is nothing that he can do about it, beyond reporting it to higher ups.



GB Bari said:


> The porters are NOT any of the reason the railroads got out of the passenger business as has been well-documented. The government almost ran the railroads into the ground by denying them any subsidy funding proportionate to the funding it provided the airline industry and the federal highway system beginning in the 1950s. The Big Three (auto mfrs) lured the American populace into believing that automobiles were the “end-all”. Passenger ridership dropped not because of too many porters, but because of slick marketing and a naive public who could not see the house of cards that automobile dependency would eventually become. The airlines would never have been able to expand as quickly as they did and offer the cheap fares if they had to invest capital to build their airports and maintenance facilities and fund their fair share of the air traffic control system. Congress, fattened by auto and airline industry perks and gratuities, made sure it was not a balanced competition. To be fair, railroad management in the 1960s also was not performing at its zenith, either.


Porters, and by the way please don’t call them that when you’re on the train as some will take that as an insult these days, are indeed at least a very small part of the reason that helped lead to the demise of freight RR passenger service. Every employee hired represents an expense for the company, that’s why where ever possible that position has been eliminated by Amtrak. Passenger railroading was on its way out long before the 50’s, in fact but for WWII, the issue probably would have come to a head much earlier than it did. The gas rationing, as well as the troop movements by trains, actually went a very long way to keeping things going much longer than they otherwise would have.

But the simple reality is that passenger railroading was a money loosing proposition for years. It only continued because the freight RR’s saw it as a matter of pride, they saw it as a way to get company executives to remember their name when they needed to ship something, and because they could cover the losses from freight revenues.

From about the mid 50’s or so, when the Fed started helping airlines (which further reduced passenger loads), building highways that opened up things for trucks and cut into the freight RR’s profits, only the laws and regulations in place at the time kept most freight companies from cutting passenger service. But even then most, not all, but most drastically cut out trains whenever they could and for trains that they couldn’t cut, they cut staffing, they stopped making repairs and refurbishments, some even went to great lengths to discourage passengers from riding the trains.



GB Bari said:


> I re-state what I wrote earlier - if Amtrak would spend the money on train attendants who are selected and retained for good attitude and work ethic, and conductors would be reviewed and rated as to their courtesy and management abilities (you say they are in charge of the train; I say therefore they ARE the train manager and the buck stops with them), they would see their ridership increase significantly.


Actually Amtrak has been trying to hire attendants for the long distance trains that are courteous, have a good attitude and work ethic. But it’s not exactly easy to spot the good apples from the bad apples during an interview. And then some turn sour after years on the job. Amtrak does try to weed out those bad apples, but that isn’t easy either. They can’t just fire someone on the spot. There are procedures and rules that must be followed, and even then the union will step in and try to prevent the firing.

One of the reasons for the customer satisfaction survey that has been running for close to a year now, is to make it easy for the passenger to give feed back. And something that many of us have repeated time and time again on this forum, take names and report the bad apples. Amtrak management needs to know where they have problems and they can’t be everywhere at once.

There are many signs though that current managment is actually trying to think outside the box and to do creative things within Amtrak. Great strides have been made of late in improving how quickly the cafe cars open after leaving the originating station, and towards staying open longer as the train approaches the terminating station. New things are being tried within the dining car area, even though they are things that I don't think are totally correct. But people are trying to improve things within the contraints of the budget.

However, much of the creativity is focused on things like how to keep an aging fleet of cars on the road, how to keep the infrastructure on the NEC from collapsing, and a myriad of other issues that have to be dealt with before the bathroom one. Yes, you're right they probably could boost ridership if things were better on board. Only problem, is that Amtrak doesn't have the capacity to handle a seriously boosted ridership. Things are stretched pretty thin right now in many places.


----------



## The Metropolitan (Jan 6, 2008)

I'm pretty sure that if you asked 10 different people familiar with Amtrak where to cut $2 from the budget and where to use it, you'll get 10 different answers.

I ride Regionals in CC pretty often, and thus have used the restrooms on occasion, and have rarely found one to be "unusable." On my last ride south from NYP on a 730pmish train, I did notice an overflowing waste receptacle, and some wet towels on the floor, but chalked this up to the train having run most of the way across the NEC (coming from BOS) by the time I used it near PHL. Most of the NYP-WAS trips tend to see servicing more often and are cleaner.

I personally, would NOT have wanted the train DELAYED 15-20 minutes to clean restroom(s) that I personally did not find too troubling.

Given that the BOS-WAS, BOS-RVR, and BOS-NPN trips spend a good bit of time between service turnarounds, I would probably suggest that Amtrak look into supplementing trash receptacles on these runs with something more, as the small units get filled pretty quickly.


----------



## AlanB (Jan 6, 2008)

The Metropolitan said:


> Given that the BOS-WAS, BOS-RVR, and BOS-NPN trips spend a good bit of time between service turnarounds, I would probably suggest that Amtrak look into supplementing trash receptacles on these runs with something more, as the small units get filled pretty quickly.


That's why Acela has larger trash cans in the restrooms, in addition to the hot air dryers that many prefer over paper towels.


----------



## GB Bari (Jan 6, 2008)

AlanB said:


> There are many signs though that current managment is actually trying to think outside the box and to do creative things within Amtrak. Great strides have been made of late in improving how quickly the cafe cars open after leaving the originating station, and towards staying open longer as the train approaches the terminating station.


 Is that important to a lot of people??? More important than having clean, functioning restrooms? Not trying to be sarcastic but if 'great strides' have been made in cafe access times, why haven't any 'great strides been made in the restroom maintenance arena? That's a rhetorical question; I already know your position on that.


AlanB said:


> New things are being tried within the dining car area, even though they are things that I don't think are totally correct.


 Read your comments in that regard on your 2006 trip log. What would you recommend they do instead of what they tried? You appear to be a veteran rail traveler. Last time I ate on Amtrak was once in 1991 on the Silver Star to Winter Haven FL. Previous to that, the last overnight train ride I was on was the B&O National Limited from Baltimore (Camden Sta) to St. Louis in 1960, then on the B&O Capital Limited from Chicago back to Baltimore on the return. (Took the Wabash Bluebird from St L to Chi).


AlanB said:


> ... Yes, you're right they probably could boost ridership if things were better on board. Only problem, is that Amtrak doesn't have the capacity to handle a seriously boosted ridership. Things are stretched pretty thin right now in many places.


 What, specifically, is currently limiting increased ridership? Station capacity? Lack of functioning equipment? Commercial RR's not granting enough schedule time over their trackage? Inability to keep the rest rooms clean?  Just kidding, that last one.


----------



## AlanB (Jan 7, 2008)

GB Bari said:


> AlanB said:
> 
> 
> > There are many signs though that current management is actually trying to think outside the box and to do creative things within Amtrak. Great strides have been made of late in improving how quickly the cafe cars open after leaving the originating station, and towards staying open longer as the train approaches the terminating station.
> ...


I honestly don't know just how many complaints Amtrak has received about late opening cafes, or for that matter dirty bathrooms I'm not privy to that info, although I'm sure that the number was high for both. It’s gone way down now for the cafe. I do know that over the years I've seen many complaints about a train leaving DC and the cafe not opening till Baltimore or later, and then shutting down at Trenton for inventory purposes and not reopening till the train was approaching Stamford.

And from a revenue point of view, one can't sell things if the cafe isn't open. So this was at least a reasonably serious problem, and one that didn't require hiring a whole new staff or increasing expenses. It just required better management, better training, better controls on inventory, and probably replacing a few bad apples.

I'm not suggesting that this is more important than clean restrooms, just that this was something serious that could be fixed far more easily. I also have no idea what priority Amtrak management has assigned to any of the many problems that they have that need fixing.

Finally, this is not my position. You came and spoke about a problem, I gave you an answer based upon what I see and read about Amtrak. It doesn’t mean that I agree or disagree with Amtrak or you. I understand that this is a very important issue to you and I respect that, but that doesn’t mean that Amtrak has a dozen other issues/problems that it considers to be a far higher priority than this one. Things like 60 year old dining cars that they can get parts for anymore, crew dorms that they can’t get parts for, baggage cars that are falling apart, the 30+ year old coaches that run on the corridor and will soon need replacement.

All of this has to be factored into the equation by Amtrak management. You are only focusing on the bathroom issue. And again I’m not saying that it’s not an important issue. It is! But if it’s a choice between having the wheels fall of a car that has clean bathrooms vs. dirty and keeping the wheels on, I know where I’d go. Someone at Amtrak has to decide on the priorities of things and we don’t know the whole big picture. We are both sitting here looking in the window.

I hope for your sake, my sake, and every other Amtrak passenger that Amtrak can eventually target this issue and the sooner the better. But not if it means that the wheels are going to fall off the train.



GB Bari said:


> AlanB said:
> 
> 
> > New things are being tried within the dining car area, even though they are things that I don't think are totally correct.
> ...


Personally if Amtrak had the right equipment or the money to get it, I would recommend that they do what they did with the Empire Builder. Since that train's make over, its ridership and revenue has gone way up and stayed up.

Since they don't have the equipment for that, I think that I would have tried a more minimized approach to what they did do. I would have gone with the new meals, but I wouldn't have cut the staffing or the amenities. As I showed in a topic pinned at the top of the Amtrak forum, by cutting the staff Amtrak more than cut in half the number of passengers that can be served in the dining car. That means that on a full train, they now rake in less than half the revenue that they used to pull in. The correct answer would have been to properly monitor staffing, such that trains that are full, have a full compliment of workers in the dining car. Trains that are running half full or less should have a reduced staff.

Instead we have what I saw last summer on the Zephyr, where the only way that the dining car could accommodate providing meals for all sleeping car passengers (and their meals are included, they have to be offered a meal), was to seat people for dinner at 9:45 PM. They didn't start eating until it was past 10 PM. Coach passengers never got into the dining car at all. And this was a sold out train!

I wouldn't be surprised if there weren't other alternatives that could have been tried too, but I would need to get much deeper into how things are run in order to see if there are other things that could be done. Instead I'm just a passenger looking in from the outside and observing things.



GB Bari said:


> AlanB said:
> 
> 
> > ... Yes, you're right they probably could boost ridership if things were better on board. Only problem, is that Amtrak doesn't have the capacity to handle a seriously boosted ridership. Things are stretched pretty thin right now in many places.
> ...


Lack of equipment is the primary problem. Amtrak just barely has enough equipment right now to meet peak demand periods, like the summer months and the holidays. In fact during the Thanksgiving holiday, they don't have enough equipment to meet the demand. So they actually borrow commuter trains from New Jersey Transit and MARC and run those trains as extras that have no cafe at all and seats that aren't nearly as comfortable as a regular Amtrak train. And even those Extras usually sell out or come close.

Even if they get past that problem, then there is the issue of the commercial RR's not granting access for additional trains in many areas. Some do allow it, like BNSF in the Northwest. But the simple reality is that ridership would probably permit Amtrak to run most long distance routes with two trains per day on each route, staggered by some 10 to 12 hours apart.

And yes, I'm quite sure that dirty restrooms are holding back the numbers too. I have no doubt of that. Yours is not the first complaint that I've seen on this topic. There have been many complaints over the years, mainly by coach passengers as those cars get the most traffic and other than long distance trains, don't have an attendant.


----------



## VentureForth (Jan 7, 2008)

There are way too many good comments up there to try and cut and paste quotes. I'm just going to toss my towel in the ring and see where it lands.

Alan, regrettably, I have typically seen Amtrak onboard personnel sitting at a dining table or in the cafe car doing paperwork (ie: reading the paper) more than I see them on task. Snack car folks are particularly bad about this.

In most 'service' jobs, you'll never see an employee sitting around. What's the first rule at McDonalds? If you have time to lean, you've got time to clean. When I worked at Disney, I was never permitted to sit in costume (uniform) in a public area. I was never permitted to say "It's not my job" - rather, I found the person who's job it was and had a physical handover of the concern to the relavent person if it were possible. If not, then I placated to the best of my ability.

I swear, Mavis, the BC attendant that I had on the Carolinian, probably worked 10 minutes out of every hour. I understand that her shift is 13 hours long and can be much longer with delays. But when she announces that she's only going to serve drinks after 5 stops and that if you miss her, you're SOL, then I see a problem.

Why couldn't Mavis wipe down a restroom? There is cleaning that can occur onboard. I'm not talking a full out bleach fest with a mop, but there can be some basic monitoring that can really make a difference. Not part of her job description? She's already 90 years old, so when she retires, make it the job description of the next person.

On LD trains, I believe that sleeping car attendants are responsible to maintain cleanliness of the restrooms and of the showers. The coach attendants should have that same responsibility. Maybe 15 minutes out of every 6 hours?

As for the role of a conductor on the train - well, any uniformed person on the train - listen to customer complaints seriously and then deal with it or defer it to the proper personnel. The travelling public ad hoc generally doesn't know the different roles of the different folks that stride up and down the aisle. Back in the old days when pilots used to roam the cabin during a flight, they've been known to be asked for drinks from the passengers. This is general of course and ymmv, but instead of saying "that's not my job, press the button," they would either tell the flight attendant what the passenger wanted or explain to the passenger what the service button did and go ahead and press it for them.

It's all about attitude.

Attitude.

A t t i t u d e.

This goes for both the service personnel and the passenger. But the bulk of that burden lays on the employee, not the passenger - even to the point that a well trained employee should be able to deflect most disgruntled passenger blows for the sake of everyone on board.


----------



## AlanB (Jan 7, 2008)

VentureForth said:


> Alan, regrettably, I have typically seen Amtrak onboard personnel sitting at a dining table or in the cafe car doing paperwork (ie: reading the paper) more than I see them on task. Snack car folks are particularly bad about this.


And this is one of the things that Amtrak is working on and targeting. They started with corridor trains, but the program is supposed to be expanding throughout the system.



VentureForth said:


> In most 'service' jobs, you'll never see an employee sitting around. What's the first rule at McDonalds? If you have time to lean, you've got time to clean. When I worked at Disney, I was never permitted to sit in costume (uniform) in a public area. I was never permitted to say "It's not my job" - rather, I found the person who's job it was and had a physical handover of the concern to the relavent person if it were possible. If not, then I placated to the best of my ability.


That's true, but then in most service jobs there is a manager (sometimes multiple managers) right there all the time to make sure that the workers aren't leaning. That's not the case with Amtrak, in part because it's very expensive to put managers on the train, in part because managers can't be doing the other parts of their jobs if they are on the train. Personally from what I've been seeing of late, I think that Amtrak may have finally found the right mix in on board management for the long distance trains. But it will still take them time to identify and weed out the bad apples. I'm not sure about management on the short haul trains, the type that prompted the start of this topic.

And before people start screaming that Amtrak should just hire more managers, let me remind everyone that many people already think that Amtrak has too many managers. We can't have it both ways!



VentureForth said:


> I swear, Mavis, the BC attendant that I had on the Carolinian, probably worked 10 minutes out of every hour. I understand that her shift is 13 hours long and can be much longer with delays. But when she announces that she's only going to serve drinks after 5 stops and that if you miss her, you're SOL, then I see a problem.


First, I hope that you reported Mavis. I can understand a bathroom break or two, I can understand a half hour lunch break and probably even a half hour dinner break, but otherwise Mavis should have been on duty. If she had no passengers wanting anything, then fine I can see allowing her to sit down, even read for a bit. Especially with a 13+ hour work day. But as soon as a passenger walks up wanting something, then it's time for her to be on her feet and working. That is the job she signed up for.



VentureForth said:


> Why couldn't Mavis wipe down a restroom? There is cleaning that can occur onboard. I'm not talking a full out bleach fest with a mop, but there can be some basic monitoring that can really make a difference. Not part of her job description? She's already 90 years old, so when she retires, make it the job description of the next person.


Unfortunately in our unionized world you can't change Mavis' job description when she retires, the union won't permit different job descriptions within the same craft. You must get that change made during contract negotiations for all employees in the same craft. And the unions typically fight any change that results in more work, but especially one that would in their minds have nothing to do with the official job, in this case running the cafe.



VentureForth said:


> On LD trains, I believe that sleeping car attendants are responsible to maintain cleanliness of the restrooms and of the showers. The coach attendants should have that same responsibility. Maybe 15 minutes out of every 6 hours?


I'm not sure at what frequency, if any, the coach attendants are supposed to check the bathrooms and try to neaten things up to the best of their ability, but it is already part of their responsibility to check on the restrooms. The problem seems to be that some do and some don't. Now Amtrak does have some customer service managers out riding the LD trains and I believe that this is probably one of the things that they are supposed to be checking on and enforcing. But if you're on a train that doesn't happen to have a manager, then all bets are off.


----------



## VentureForth (Jan 7, 2008)

AlanB said:


> That's true, but then in most service jobs there is a manager (sometimes multiple managers) right there all the time to make sure that the workers aren't leaning. That's not the case with Amtrak, in part because it's very expensive to put managers on the train, in part because managers can't be doing the other parts of their jobs if they are on the train. Personally from what I've been seeing of late, I think that Amtrak may have finally found the right mix in on board management for the long distance trains. But it will still take them time to identify and weed out the bad apples. I'm not sure about management on the short haul trains, the type that prompted the start of this topic.
> And before people start screaming that Amtrak should just hire more managers, let me remind everyone that many people already think that Amtrak has too many managers. We can't have it both ways!


Ha! Good point! 

That being said, though, I think that the crux of the thread that started this whole thing is that a conductor should be able to serve as that onboard manager. I know, I know - the conductor is already busy. How about a train-wide LSA? Perhaps not a _manager_ per se, but rather a competent _supervisor_.

As for job descriptions and unions, I really in my heart of heart believe that this is where the true core of the problem lies. I'm all for fair pay for fair work, but I am more for hard work and getting the job done rather than who does exactly what.


----------



## Guest_gbbari_* (Jan 7, 2008)

AlanB said:


> GB Bari said:
> 
> 
> > AlanB said:
> ...


Good substantive answers Alan, thanks for the information. I am curious, where do you get your information as to the inner workings of Amtrak - staffing issues, diner issues, equipment, etc.?

GB


----------



## GG-1 (Jan 7, 2008)

AlanB said:


> Unfortunately in our unionized world you can't change Mavis' job description when she retires, the union won't permit different job descriptions within the same craft. You must get that change made during contract negotiations for all employees in the same craft. And the unions typically fight any change that results in more work, but especially one that would in their minds have nothing to do with the official job, in this case running the cafe.


Aloha

Alan and I look at just this issue from different perspectives, yet we both agree that there is room for change, His statement above is critical this change needs to be done at the bargaining table.

.


The Cafe attendant should be responsible for everything in the Cafe

The Car Attendant Should Be responsible for everything in the car.

If this requirement places an individual in danger from safety, training, on need to ignore, or rush some things, then additional people be hired. 

Maintenance staff on the longer service stops should assist and inspect and/or maintain the restrooms how can they know they work properly without checking. 

the documentation of how things work from both sides must be included in the reports/negotiations!


An example of needs and changes to agreements since someone brought up Disney was the break requirement for certain character costumes, And Number one rule at Disney, supported by their unions is safe, clean work areas. Who and How did things were defined. Every month through our union rep. we were required to submit to the company anything we thought would benefit us or our company, we were treated as "CAST" important to the success of the show.


----------



## AlanB (Jan 7, 2008)

Guest_gbbari_* said:


> Good substantive answers Alan, thanks for the information. I am curious, where do you get your information as to the inner workings of Amtrak - staffing issues, diner issues, equipment, etc.?


Well for starters I do ride Amtrak a fair amount, over 10,000 miles this past year alone, and just about 85,000 miles in the past 7 years. And I tend to be very observant of things around me and whose doing what and why, I don't do it deliberately, it just seems to be in my nature. I see an accident happen at the corner outside my window, even as I'm looking to see if people are hurt, I'm also quickly looking at the license plates of each car just in case. And it paid off once, as I was able to give the police the plate number of someone who drove off leaving the other car heavily damaged, but thankfully with no injuries.

Beyond that, I help to moderate three different forums that cover Amtrak. Therefore I tend to read almost every story, news story, report, or whatever; that gets posted about Amtrak. Much of my equipment knowledge comes from On Track On Line, where they provide a list of cars and their capacities, coupled with simply having taken a ride in just about every type of car Amtrak has to offer presently. And I do have a friend who up until about three years ago used to work for Amtrak, so there were small little tidbits that I got from him. Finally I read the newsletter that Amtrak puts out to its employees, as there is often interesting things to learn in those newsletters.


----------



## GB Bari (Jan 7, 2008)

AlanB said:


> [Well for starters I do ride Amtrak a fair amount, over 10,000 miles this past year alone, and just about 85,000 miles in the past 7 years.


Good heavens, a professional Amtrak passenger.  I'd love to do that. I am guessing you know every trick in the book to minimize your fares. I am a neophyte to modern rail travel and would probably wind up paying "top bucket", I think you all call it.



AlanB said:


> Beyond that, I help to moderate three different forums that cover Amtrak. Therefore I tend to read almost every story, news story, report, or whatever; that gets posted about Amtrak. Much of my equipment knowledge comes from On Track On Line, where they provide a list of cars and their capacities, coupled with simply having taken a ride in just about every type of car Amtrak has to offer presently. And I do have a friend who up until about three years ago used to work for Amtrak, so there were small little tidbits that I got from him. Finally I read the newsletter that Amtrak puts out to its employees, as there is often interesting things to learn in those newsletters.


Impressive, thanks. I appreciate your candor. I suspect there are several other forum members who also travel frequently and share their experiences. I have browsed OTOL briefly but based on your comment, I will spend some more time there.

Thanks Again.

GB


----------



## Green Maned Lion (Jan 8, 2008)

Amtrak operates a national rail transportation system on a budget smaller than New Jersey Transit operates New Jersey's commuter rail. Think about that. For a quasi-private company micromanaged by moronic self-serving politicians, I think that is not only impressive, but something of a miracle. I would love to replace my wardrobe of warn out, holier-than-god sweatshirts. I'm sure in the long run doing so would save me a lot of money, and greatly improve public perception of me as a person- you know, to the status of "fellow human being" from "street rat". But the fact of the matter is, a cheap sweatshirt costs $10. And I don't have $10.

Amtrak doesn't have $10 worth of extra money, let alone $2 million.


----------



## PRR 60 (Jan 8, 2008)

Green Maned Lion said:


> ...Amtrak doesn't have $10 worth of extra money, let alone $2 million.


Amtrak ended FY07 with a budget surplus of about $200 million. Total revenue from all sources exceeded expenses by $200 million in the fiscal year. The FY07 budget called for an end-of-year cash reserve of about $150 million. They ended up with well over $300 million. That's Amtrak's best cash position in years. So, yes indeed, Amtrak does have $2 million extra money with about $198 million to spare.

Amtrak is not nearly as poor as they would like you to believe.


----------



## Sam Damon (Jan 8, 2008)

PRR 60 said:


> Amtrak ended FY07 with a budget surplus of about $200 million. Total revenue from all sources exceeded expenses by $200 million in the fiscal year. The FY07 budget called for an end-of-year cash reserve of about $150 million. They ended up with well over $300 million. That's Amtrak's best cash position in years. So, yes indeed, Amtrak does have $2 million extra money with about $198 million to spare.
> Amtrak is not nearly as poor as they would like you to believe.


PRR60,

So what is the approximate cost of running the Sunset over its suspended portion from Orlando, FL to New Orleans, LA?

Just curious.


----------



## had8ley (Jan 9, 2008)

Sam Damon said:


> PRR 60 said:
> 
> 
> > Amtrak ended FY07 with a budget surplus of about $200 million. Total revenue from all sources exceeded expenses by $200 million in the fiscal year. The FY07 budget called for an end-of-year cash reserve of about $150 million. They ended up with well over $300 million. That's Amtrak's best cash position in years. So, yes indeed, Amtrak does have $2 million extra money with about $198 million to spare.
> ...


Somewhere on this site the passenger subsidy WEST of New Orleans was 62 cents per passenger mile after the revenue fare was lifted. Amtrak will probably want a new depot in Mobile along the lines of Meridian in order to start service over again. My money is on the Crescent hitting the Huey Long bridge and heading west to San Antonio. You'll probably never get an Amtrak official to admit that they ever had service between New Orleans and Jacksonville once that happens.


----------

