# Excess Carry-on Baggage Fee Began October 1, 2015



## AmtrakLKL (Aug 3, 2015)

Amtrak will begin charging at stations and onboard trains for excess carry on bags effective October 1. The carry on bag policy is two small personal items measuring 14x11x7 and under 25lbs each and two carry on items measuring 28x22x15 and under 50 pounds. $20 will be charged for each bag over the quantity or size limit up to a maximum of two excess bags per passenger.

It seems stations are being trained to be the front line enforcers and assess the charge before boarding, but if the origin station is unstaffed or misses the excess bags the passenger can be charged at any time enroute. Training is rolling out across the country over the next two months prior to the October 1 implementation. It sounds like the fee will be last resort after encouraging passengers to check two bags for free.


----------



## greatcats (Aug 3, 2015)

This should certainly solve Amtrak's financial problems.


----------



## jis (Aug 3, 2015)

I think it may be a bit of a logistical nightmare in some cases. It should be implementable for LD trains possibly involving some additional dwell times at stations, specially unstaffed ones.

OTOH, it may become quite a challenge on heavily used corridors, though one could argue that it is relatively few and far between on heavily used corridors that actually do bring their kitchen sink along.


----------



## jebr (Aug 3, 2015)

It would be nice if this came with some sort of trainside checked baggage service at unstaffed stations, or a policy allowing excess baggage from an unstaffed station to the nearest staffed station (where it can then be checked.)

That being said, the baggage allotment, even considering carry-on only, still seems fairly generous. A person probably could not easily carry on more than that in one trip.


----------



## the_traveler (Aug 3, 2015)

I still think it's unfair for many travelers. How about if one or both of your stations do not offer checked baggage service? :huh:

Examples are you can check 2 bags and carry on the allowed limit if you go NYP-DEN, WAS-ORL, PHL-SLC or BOS-LAX, but how about if you start or end at KIN, FED, OLW OR BWI? :huh: You're only allowed the carry on amount! How do you get those extra bags to your connection point at NYP, WAS or CHI so you can check your other 2 bags? :huh:


----------



## seat38a (Aug 3, 2015)

I like this plan! I'm guessing this plan is being implemented to deal with people who keep putting their stuff on the seat of busy trains. Some sort of financial weapon to get them to remove the luggage from the seats. I see this being implemented on the train in situations where luggage racks or the overhead racks aren't being used.


----------



## jis (Aug 3, 2015)

the_traveler said:


> I still think it's unfair for many travelers. How about if one or both of your stations do not offer checked baggage service? :huh:
> 
> Examples are you can check 2 bags and carry on the allowed limit if you go NYP-DEN, WAS-ORL, PHL-SLC or BOS-LAX, but how about if you start or end at KIN, FED, OLW OR BWI? :huh: You're only allowed the carry on amount! How do you get those extra bags to your connection point at NYP, WAS or CHI so you can check your other 2 bags? :huh:


It is slightly less unfair than for those people in Amarillo TX or Melbourne FL who can't even get themselves on a train without driving many many miles, let alone worry about whether they can fail to get on the train two bags or four bags. People who are traveling between two unstaffed stations should be notified that they face certain realistic baggage restrictions due to thei choice of origin and destination. They should be allowed to make an informed choice as to whether they wish to start their journey in KIN or in PVD. As usual getting oneself to the station of ones choice is something that the traveler has to deal with.


----------



## Triley (Aug 3, 2015)

the_traveler said:


> I still think it's unfair for many travelers. How about if one or both of your stations do not offer checked baggage service? :huh:
> 
> Examples are you can check 2 bags and carry on the allowed limit if you go NYP-DEN, WAS-ORL, PHL-SLC or BOS-LAX, but how about if you start or end at KIN, FED, OLW OR BWI? :huh: You're only allowed the carry on amount! How do you get those extra bags to your connection point at NYP, WAS or CHI so you can check your other 2 bags? :huh:


Excuse me if I'm wrong, but hasn't this always been the policy, minus the $20 for each additional bag brought onboard? Prior to this, people will bring a million and one bags, and the luggage areas would become chuck full, and then start spilling over in to ADA seating areas, and it would just cause a huge hassle because all conductors I have met would just look the other way.

I say it's going to be a good move financially, and will make conditions easier onboard, if the policy is followed through with.


----------



## Orangesaint (Aug 3, 2015)

Very generous allotment. If you're carrying more then this onboard, then you should be charged.


----------



## Bob Dylan (Aug 3, 2015)

I agree that this is a much needed policy, but also with Dave that its unfair to those that board @ unstaffed stations. Also it can become a Logistical and Operational nightmare!

My biggest concern for is for the OBS that have to enforce the policy and collect the fees.

Since only LSAs and Conductors can handle cash are they supposed to delay the train or leave the Cafe or Diner @ each stop to perform this additional duty.

And on the corridor trains with frequent stops, large amounts of boardings and detrainings and only Conductors, the delays can become a problem! (It's bad enough already where the Conductors pull tickets before boarding instead of on the train!) There's also the many stops in the wee hours where the Conductors are the only ones awake!

Since its Amtrak, guess it'll be the old mantra of YMMV!


----------



## OBS (Aug 3, 2015)

AFAIK, from reading the initial memo, it will not involve OBS. Conductors are attending a training briefing, starting this week. No additional info is outlined for OBS folks, other than the policy change.


----------



## jis (Aug 3, 2015)

OBS said:


> AFAIK, from reading the initial memo, it will not involve OBS. Conductors are attending a training briefing, starting this week. No additional info is outlined for OBS folks, other than the policy change.


That would be consistent with the general responsibility of the Conductors to enforce transport(tariff) revenue collection and compliance.


----------



## Devil's Advocate (Aug 3, 2015)

The _specifics_ don't bother me that much. It's the_ trend_ that concerns me. But try explaining nuance to the "who cares" crowd.


----------



## Hal (Aug 3, 2015)

OBS said:


> AFAIK, from reading the initial memo, it will not involve OBS. Conductors are attending a training briefing, starting this week. No additional info is outlined for OBS folks, other than the policy change.


Yes, it won't involve OBS. Conductors are somehow supposed to screen baggage on high level platforms where hundreds may be boarding without delaying the train.


----------



## Devil's Advocate (Aug 3, 2015)

Who cares if it delays the train? Amtrak doesn't promise departure or arrival at a specific time and doesn't bother with refunds. Money is money and Amtrak needs to reduce costs on their way to earning a profit.


----------



## PVD (Aug 3, 2015)

This potentially raises revenue, but I don't see how it reduces costs. Making a profit it not a sensible goal for Amtrak, , reducing losses is.


----------



## jis (Aug 3, 2015)

PVD said:


> This potentially raises revenue, but I don't see how it reduces costs. Making a profit it not a sensible goal for Amtrak, , reducing losses is.


Making statements about what is or is not reasonable for Amtrak on this board does not count for a hill of beans. We have to somehow elect the actual managers of Amtrak who feel this way. I don;t see how we can achieve that at the present time. Any ideas?


----------



## Phil S (Aug 3, 2015)

Any idea if this applies to sleeper passengers?

A pretty generous amount.but I travel with a rollie, a knapsack, a leather office satchel, and a small musical instrument that's still a lot longer than 14", all of which I really do use during the trip (quietly). The satchell might fit in the rollie but it seems like a pretty silly hting to have to do.

All that said, it seems like a completely unworkable policy that will be only randomly enforced and will end up causing more trouble than good.


----------



## jis (Aug 3, 2015)

AFAIR the baggage allowance is the same for all passengers.

http://www.amtrak.com/baggage-policy

the policy already exists and has existed for a long time. It is only the enforcement thereof that is being discussed. The policy continues to be as workable or unworkable as it has ever been.


----------



## xyzzy (Aug 3, 2015)

I don't object to it.


----------



## jebr (Aug 3, 2015)

I do see that they changed the policy a bit sometime between March and now.

Here's a screenshot from March 20, 2015, courtesy of the Wayback machine:







Now the Amtrak website has removed the general "things exempt" verbiage and replaced it with "two personal items":






I don't think it's unreasonable to charge for excess luggage above and beyond that allotment, though I hope they follow through when they say the fee will be collected on-board. Delaying the train for it would be crazy (though someone bringing on that much luggage is likely delaying the train anyways by taking more than one trip to get them and their belonging on board.) I don't think it's completely unfair to those boarding at unstaffed locations to not get the baggage allotment, though I would be happier if they had actually pared this with an improvement in service in checked baggage to/from unstaffed stations.

This change may be one to generate more revenue, though it's possible a large part of the rationale is also to keep the boarding process quick; $20/item may be enough to discourage most people from bringing so much luggage on board that it's impossible for them to bring it on in a reasonable fashion (without delaying the boarding process.) I would argue that there's very few people that could bring on more than two personal items (e.g. a backpack and purse/laptop bag) and two carry-on items (carry-on to full-size checked on an airline luggage bags) in one trip.

I do wish they'd put back the exemption for medical items, simply because that could cause ADA issues (or related) if they don't, and it's not really fair to count those against the allotment (which is almost always maybe one additional bag anyways.)


----------



## Alice (Aug 3, 2015)

Some medical items are excluded from the count. It looks like this applies to medical items belonging to a person using the disability discount. That means seniors who are also disabled, who often take the senior discount because it is more convenient, may want to put their disability documentation in order.

Special Items Page

Although it doesn't say it anywhere, Amtrak seems to be generally tightening their policy enforcement, and I could see that they might start asking for disability documentation one of these days. Even if they only want the documentation regarding non-visible disabilities, it could be discriminatory unless they also ask for obvious disabilities.


----------



## Hal (Aug 3, 2015)

Devil's Advocate said:


> Who cares if it delays the train? Amtrak doesn't promise departure or arrival at a specific time and doesn't bother with refunds. Money is money and Amtrak needs to reduce costs on their way to earning a profit.


On the NEC there is the delay desk. That desk has the dispatcher call the Conductor to explain any delay from the timetable. As long as management doesn't take any action against the Conductor for delaying the train to enforce the policy then it won't matter.

Also in the past management would not back up Conductors who enforced the carry on baggage limits on the NEC if the passenger complained. So most conductors took took the attitude that if the passenger boarded at a staffed stations and got thru the gate they were not going to challenge them. Often passengers at staffed stations who board with more carry on baggage than allowed get a red cap to put it on. If the conductor does anything the red caps complains to management.

So in October management has to back up the conductors enforcing the policy if it is to work. In the past management they have not had the backbone to do that as soon as passengers complianed.


----------



## BCL (Aug 3, 2015)

How will onboard Amtrak personnel know whose items belong whom? May be if they notice when boarding or exiting, but would they really have the time?

That being said, on my recent LD trip I mentioned to someone I knew that I was bringing a large item. He looked at me like I was crazy - basically that he thought I'd have to carry it on board myself. He had no concept of check in baggage service on a train, since he was from a country where such baggage service didn't exist for their trains.


----------



## PVD (Aug 3, 2015)

You are required to tag them with your name and address.


----------



## OBS (Aug 3, 2015)

Also, stations are going to install those "luggage sizer" boxes you see in airports...If it doesn't fit, it is too large to carry on...


----------



## Devil's Advocate (Aug 3, 2015)

I wonder if the folks who joined Amtrak to get away from the airport obstacle course will eventually return to the airlines or simply drive as the trickle down process continues. I can imagine Mica saying "I'm not satisfied until you're not satisfied."


----------



## Hal (Aug 3, 2015)

PVD said:


> This potentially raises revenue, but I don't see how it reduces costs. Making a profit it not a sensible goal for Amtrak, , reducing losses is.


Revenue from baggage fees is currently at $693,000 a year. They are projecting increasing that. They see a potential of from $8,000,000 to $20,000,000.


----------



## jis (Aug 3, 2015)

I wonder what percentage of Amtrak customers will actually run afoul of any of the baggage policy. If my cursory eyeballing of what passengers generally seem to bring along as baggage is any indication, specially on the corridor trains, it will probably be a rather small percentage of the Amtrak customers who will run into any issues at all.

But I still wonder if someone has actually looked into doing such a projection within Amtrak or otherwise.


----------



## Train2104 (Aug 3, 2015)

OBS said:


> Also, stations are going to install those "luggage sizer" boxes you see in airports...If it doesn't fit, it is too large to carry on...


NYP and PGH, among other stations, already have them.


----------



## OBS (Aug 3, 2015)

8M to 20M in revenue from baggage fees? I think they are crazy. Maybe an extra $400-500,000, but 8-20M? No way.


----------



## jis (Aug 3, 2015)

It depends. If you look at the baggage fees that the airlines are managing to collect, it almost makes you a believer of any random number.


----------



## BCL (Aug 3, 2015)

PVD said:


> You are required to tag them with your name and address.


I have never seen that on Capitol Corridor unless it was a bag that had already been used as an airline carry on. It sort of defies normal logic when it's a primarily commuter line like corridor services. In fact few bring large carry on, except maybe college students or those commuting only once a week between home and work.

Heck, on the CS I didn't mark anything I bought on board. It was just a computer bag and a small cooler.


----------



## Devil's Advocate (Aug 3, 2015)

US airlines are pocketing around 3.5 Billion each year on luggage fees alone. All you have to do to drive the revenue up is keep shrinking the acceptable size and weight. Eventually everyone will be paying excess baggage fees. The point in time specifics are irrelevant. It's the trend that tells the story.


----------



## jis (Aug 3, 2015)

BCL said:


> PVD said:
> 
> 
> > You are required to tag them with your name and address.
> ...


Oddly enough the baggage tagging thing comes from your friendly DHS as a requirement to follow to keep the TSA and VIPER off Amtrak, at least for the moment. So if it is not being followed and enforced that gives the DHS gang a path back onto Amtrak. So be careful. Don;t publicise your exploits too much in this area.


----------



## PVD (Aug 3, 2015)

I only stated the policy as published on the website, I never said anyone looks. What percentage of IDs are verified? I believe jis to be correct.


----------



## neroden (Aug 3, 2015)

ADA required medical stuff is still exempt from excess-baggage charges, *regardless* of whether you have a "mobility impaired fare". By federal law; anything else would constitute illegal discrimination.

I assume Amtrak is still trying to comply with the ADA, and if they aren't, it would be a fun and easy-to-win lawsuit.

This includes, for instance, a CPAP machine when travelling overnight.

Or my food supply, since Amtrak refuses to reliably provide food I am not allergic to onboard.

On my next trip, we'll be taking a CPAP and a bag of food in addition to our regular carry-ons, and neither will count as "excess" because they're both ADA-required. We'll see whether Amtrak decides to invite a lawsuit. I'm guessing they will not decide to invite a lawsuit.


----------



## justinslot (Aug 3, 2015)

I don't mind paying a fee myself...I tend to bring one large bag onboard with clothes and snacks and booze (on a sleeper car obviously.) I'd rather pay a fee than not be allowed to bring on the stuff that makes my LD trip more pleasant.


----------



## neroden (Aug 3, 2015)

Alice said:


> Although it doesn't say it anywhere, Amtrak seems to be generally tightening their policy enforcement, and I could see that they might start asking for disability documentation one of these days. Even if they only want the documentation regarding non-visible disabilities, it could be discriminatory unless they also ask for obvious disabilities.


It's discriminatory to even ask for documentation. That's actually established law now...

They're allowed to ask you what accomodation you require and why. (For instance, I require the accomodation of bringing enough of my own food to cover the entire trip, at no extra "baggage" charge, because Amtrak refuses to provide food on board which I can verify that I am not allergic to. Anyone with a CPAP prescription requires the accomodation of carrying the CPAP without any extra "baggage charge". Et cetera.)

I would like to assume that Amtrak is actually NOT trying to be idiotic and lawbreaking about this, but is really just trying to deal with the "take seventy suitcases" folks. I've watched people blatantly exceeding the luggage limits -- trying to carry on two tandem strollers, in one memorable example -- with no medical or disability reason whatsoever and no attempt to claim one.


----------



## Anderson (Aug 3, 2015)

Devil's Advocate said:


> US airlines are pocketing around 3.5 Billion each year on luggage fees alone. All you have to do to drive the revenue up is keep shrinking the acceptable size and weight. Eventually everyone will be paying excess baggage fees. The point in time specifics are irrelevant. It's the trend that tells the story.


Yes, but there's also sheer volume on the airline industry side. I think $3.5bn equals an average of about $4/passenger. Granted, on Amtrak that would be $120m (30m pax), but Amtrak has a huge number of commuter passengers (basically toss this for the Keystones, Shuttles, etc.).

While I understand the point of this in coach, the idea of being charged for a bag that is _in _my room gets _way_ under my skin.

(Also at issue: Does this apply on a per-leg basis or a per-one-way-trip basis? $20 once on a trip is one thing; having that add up to $60-80 for a single bag over several legs? That's a problem.)


----------



## Devil's Advocate (Aug 3, 2015)

Another aspect to remember is that baggage fees can be applied to point redemptions just as easily as they are to tickets purchased with cash. As the luggage rules tighten Amtrak can increase their reach dramatically and help ensure that nearly everyone is forking over at least a little cash, regardless of how they got there. Avoiding ever more restrictive luggage rules will eventually become a major selling point for maintaining status.


----------



## jebr (Aug 3, 2015)

Devil's Advocate said:


> I wonder if the folks who joined Amtrak to get away from the airport obstacle course will eventually return to the airlines or simply drive as the trickle down process continues. I can imagine Mica saying "I'm not satisfied until you're not satisfied."


Why would Mica care so much about Amtrak's baggage fees? Far as I could tell, he was focusing on F&B services, not Amtrak as a whole. Furthermore, Mica isn't really in a position of power like he used to be over Amtrak (unless something has changed or I've heard/understood wrong.)

I don't see Amtrak getting as strict as the legacy airlines on baggage fees. Even $20 million in revenue would be only 66 cents per trip. Considering this can include an excess checked baggage fee, excess carry-on baggage fee, carry-on bike fee (if they charge that,) carry on pet fee, and other specialty luggage fees, I would not be surprised if one out of every 30 trips has some sort of baggage fee (and the average would be $20.) The low end of $8 million is very believable, especially if Amtrak can ever figure out trainside checked baggage service and carry-on or roll-on bicycle service.


----------



## Bob Dylan (Aug 3, 2015)

OBS said:


> 8M to 20M in revenue from baggage fees? I think they are crazy. Maybe an extra $400-500,000, but 8-20M? No way.


Did they legalize pot in DC? 
The suits must be toking up @ 60 Mass to float numbers like that! No way Jose!

These are the same folks who promised the Mica Managers in Congress that Amtrak would cease to lose money on Food and Beverages within 4 years!


----------



## MattW (Aug 3, 2015)

If they're really going to use those moronic luggage sizers for carryons then maybe it IS time for Amtrak to go away, or at least their management. One inch out disqualifying may make sense on an airplane, but not on a train.


----------



## Kimbik (Aug 3, 2015)

Tomorrow We will be boarding train 66 from NPN to BOS. Our carry on items include : small roll on suitcase that I have used on an airplane, an LL Bean canvas tote bag for snacks and drinks, a small backpack instead of a purse, a small duffel bag ( within posted size limits, a computer bag, a CPAP bag, and a small suit bag. Do you think that we will be able to board with these items? We could check the suit bag.


----------



## jebr (Aug 3, 2015)

Kimbik said:


> Tomorrow We will be boarding train 66 from NPN to BOS. Our carry on items include : small roll on suitcase that I have used on an airplane, an LL Bean canvas tote bag for snacks and drinks, a small backpack instead of a purse, a small duffel bag ( within posted size limits, a computer bag, a CPAP bag, and a small suit bag. Do you think that we will be able to board with these items? We could check the suit bag.


If there's at least two people, there should be no problems with that. CPAP wouldn't count anyways, and it looks like you're under the "4 bags per person" rule.


----------



## Alexandria Nick (Aug 3, 2015)

MattW said:


> If they're really going to use those moronic luggage sizers for carryons then maybe it IS time for Amtrak to go away, or at least their management. One inch out disqualifying may make sense on an airplane, but not on a train.


They've been using them for years already.

For instance, here's Pittsburgh's waiting room. Its partially cut off on the right side of the image, just to the right of the ticket machine. Its been there at least five years.







At least I think that's it. Its right next to the Quik Trak machine and about ten feet from baggage check, from memory.


----------



## Kimbik (Aug 3, 2015)

Thank you jebr. There are two of us, so I am not worried now. I appreciate your thoughts.


----------



## Devil's Advocate (Aug 4, 2015)

jebr said:


> Why would Mica care so much about Amtrak's baggage fees? Far as I could tell, he was focusing on F&B services, not Amtrak as a whole.


In reality Mica doesn't really care about food, or beverages, or luggage. Those complaints are nothing more than a means to an end. What Mica really cares about it defunding the bulk of the national network and handing the NEC over to a private entity. This has been Mica's official position for years now but just in case it's still not clear here is one of Mica's quotes from a couple months ago.



> "Congress is not going to give Amtrak any more money," Mica said. "It's time to stop the Amtrak Soviet-style monopoly, open passenger rail to private-sector competition, improve those lines where we don't have curves and poorly-operated systems and bring us into the 21st century of passenger rail."


Link: http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/amtrak-train-crash-john-mica/2015/05/14/id/644744/



jebr said:


> Furthermore, Mica isn't really in a position of power like he used to be over Amtrak (unless something has changed or I've heard/understood wrong.)


Mica by himself is relatively harmless. Mica as a booster among several similarly minded politicians is potentially dangerous to Amtrak.



jebr said:


> I don't see Amtrak getting as strict as the legacy airlines on baggage fees. Even $20 million in revenue would be only 66 cents per trip.


Logically, once you start down this path there is no obvious disincentive to continue raising the fee unless and until the act of increasing the fee any further begins to overwhelm the ability or willingness of the customer to pay. In that sense Amtrak would face a situation that is very similar to what the airlines have already experienced. Over a long enough timeline Amtrak would logically be expected to eventually reach similar pricing levels. It's really no different than how Amtrak have continued to raise the fare buckets for many years now. The only difference is that the airlines have discovered you can charge more overall by dividing the total cost among multiple transactions separated by time.


----------



## ToniCounter (Aug 4, 2015)

Devil's Advocate said:


> Who cares if it delays the train? Amtrak doesn't promise departure or arrival at a specific time and doesn't bother with refunds. Money is money and Amtrak needs to reduce costs on their way to earning a profit.



Amtrak has paid for my hotel stays in DC and Chicago 3 times

already this year. The main reason was delayed trains causing

me to miss my connecting Amtrak train. More delays means

more passengers missing their connections.

I'm sure it costs Amtrak money to pay for my hotel rooms. In

Chicago, they had to put me up at the Hyatt Regency in June.

They also paid for the taxi ride and dinner/breakfast.


----------



## Anderson (Aug 4, 2015)

I just thought this through, and I see a few issues:
(1) For the most part, airlines do seem to allow you to reserve a baggage allowance in advance. Amtrak not doing this on the website is going to trigger problems, especially if someone doesn't have the cash at the moment (based on what I've seen, you have a reasonable number of passengers who might simply not have the resources to pay a "surprise" $40).

(2) There's an obvious issue with respect to, for example, 48/448 and 49/449 (or indeed Shuttle-Regional-LD connections...though the LSL is more obvious): Does someone get dinged at BOS and again at ALB?

(2b) Also with #2, what happens with a change-of-crew?

(3) Even if the policy doesn't dictate that CPAP bags and the like are exempt, I fully expect to see them be deemed exempt. If nothing else, failing to do so would invite an ADA class action suit.

(4) Back to the revenue estimate, Amtrak seems to be expecting that revenue will, on LD trains, roughly fall in line with airline per-passenger revenue. That would kick out up to about $20m on the high end. Lower estimates would probably be accounting for the fact that (1) most pax don't violate this limit and (2) many LD pax are actually short(er)-distance rides not prone to this.

(4b) An interesting question does emerge about this popping up on state-sponsored trains (or, indeed, on 850/851 since that is now not an Amtrak train). This is interesting because of an implied element of such a policy (namely, that you can now carry on additional bags _period_). I can _definitely _see this backfiring in some cases.

(5) And of course, as noted above there's the question of "oversize" baggage...


----------



## BCL (Aug 4, 2015)

MattW said:


> If they're really going to use those moronic luggage sizers for carryons then maybe it IS time for Amtrak to go away, or at least their management. One inch out disqualifying may make sense on an airplane, but not on a train.


Many stations have Amtrak luggage sizers. At least some of the ones Amtrak uses are made by a company called Visiontron. This looks like the one I've seen at the Emeryville station.







This one is a model BSOESC22149-ST, open-ended sizer with scale.

http://www.visiontron.com/prod-airline-baggage-sizer.asp


----------



## Anderson (Aug 4, 2015)

RVR does, IIRC, have a sizer. I _know _they have a scale there...this was the object of an absurd luggage fiasco on a trip with a friend about five years ago: He was traveling home from college and the station agent first forced him to repack bags to get under the 50 lbs limit [ok, that's fine] and sold him a box to help redistribute the weight...but she also made a rather stupendous stink about where he could or couldn't pack his books, notes, etc. and what could/couldn't go in checked luggage versus onboard [which was just absurd]. The fact that we ran into an author who was longtime friends with one of _his_ favorite authors (and who is one of mine) saved Amtrak's arse on that trip.


----------



## jis (Aug 4, 2015)

Isn't it the case that Amtrak is not proposing to charge for any of the basic baggage allowance? All it is talking of is more systematically charging for excess baggage that is beyond the rather generous basic baggage allowance. So this is not at all like the airlines charging for anything that is checked in, or charging for all hand baggage or any such.

Airlines have charged heftily for excess baggage since the early days of commercial aviation. That is nothing new.

So a question for those that are up in arms.... Is it your position then that Amtrak should not charge for excess baggage but simply ban excess baggage? Or is it your position that Amtrak should not have any baggage policy at all and let anyone bring on whatever they want to without any hindrance? Afterall, what is the point of having a baggage policy if it is not going to be enforced in any way.

The concept of baggage tickets stating how much excess baggage has been charged for how many pieces of what weight for what itinerary is a well known one that has been used by airlines for ever. Why would it be so difficult for Amtrak to do the same - just for the excess baggage mind you. Not for the basic allowance, which is quite generous.

Methinks some people here are going a bit off the rails on this one. just IMHO.


----------



## CelticWhisper (Aug 4, 2015)

So I'm a little fuzzy on how this is going to play out. I live in Chicago and commonly travel to various destinations along the NEC. This means the Cap to DC and then a NER or Acela up 'n' over to wherever I'm headed.

If I'm sporting a backpack and a 30" roller case, I figure I'll have no trouble on the Cap since I'll be in a sleeper. However, is the 30" roller case going to be a problem on the Acela? Will I get charged for that?


----------



## jis (Aug 4, 2015)

30" roller Case could be a problem on Acela since it is over the permitted size of 28x22x11.

Strictly speaking, there is no exception to the baggage rule for Sleepers either, so it could be a problem as a carry on on the Cap too.

OK guys, dion't chew me out. I am just quoting the rules such as they are.

I am actually curious on whether you can pay a single excess baggage fee to cover both legs of the itinerary. Typically on airlines you can for checked baggage, and I have no experience with airlines that charge for carry ons in any form. I have not found this matter exactly spelled out in the new policy.


----------



## Devil's Advocate (Aug 4, 2015)

jis said:


> So a question for those that are up in arms....


Looks like a calm and reasonable discussion to me. *Which "up in arms" posts are you referring to?*



jis said:


> Is it your position then that Amtrak should not charge for excess baggage but simply ban excess baggage? Or is it your position that Amtrak should not have any baggage policy at all and let anyone bring on whatever they want to without any hindrance? Afterall, what is the point of having a baggage policy if it is not going to be enforced in any way.


_My_ position is that...

Many Amtrak passengers have benefited from Amtrak's lax enforcement of luggage rules for many years now.

Many Amtrak passengers greatly appreciate the ability to bring whatever they want so long as they can carry it.

Many Amtrak passengers have been conditioned over the years to see this lax enforcement as a perk over other travel.

Amtrak's costs are not seriously impacted by a few extra bags here so long as they don't hinder or prevent normal operation.

If Amtrak chooses to assimilate the airline business model it will become harder for them to leverage their inherent strengths.


----------



## amamba (Aug 4, 2015)

I am just wondering how this is going to be practically enforced on the NEC.

Do the conductors even have credit card scanners any more? My understanding is that the iPhone scanners no longer have the capability to process payments as they tell people to call 1800 USA RAIL if there is an issue with the tickets and don't process upgrades/ticket purchases on board.

I'm also thinking about the folks who utilize red caps in NYP and other stations, like WAS, etc. So you have a person riding from WAS to KIN for example. They can't check baggage because KIN does not have checked baggage. Or someone riding KIN to PVD. PVD has checked baggage but only on the 66/67 so for all intents and purposes it doesn't really make sense to check bags if you are taking a daytime regional or acela. The redcap loads you up with one bag over the limit. Is the redcap charging you for the excess bag? is the conductor going to charge for the excess bag? How do they even know that you have an excess bag when they see the pile of suitcases that the end of the FC car becomes on some sunday afternoons?

I personally don't see it being actively enforced on parts of the NEC as a practical matter.

I also have an issue with the fact that it is not something that can be applied fairly across the entire amtrak universe since many stations do not offer checked baggage and it seems like a tax on those stations too small to offer it.


----------



## Ispolkom (Aug 4, 2015)

I'm confused by *Devil's Advocate*'s post. Either "many Amtrak passengers" carry excess luggage, so there are lots of extra bags, or there are "a few extra bags," in which case the new policy won't affect many people. I don't see how you can have it both ways.

Me, I don't think that many people now actually carry on more than the new luggage limits. Sure, I've seen it happen, but the fact that I remember it showed that it's an unusual occurrence.

Two suitcases plus two carry-on bags totaling 150 lbs. per person seems pretty generous to me, and I personally would be hard put to carry more than four pieces of luggage myself.


----------



## amamba (Aug 4, 2015)

Ispolkom said:


> I'm confused by *Devil's Advocate*'s post. Either "many Amtrak passengers" carry excess luggage, so there are lots of extra bags, or there are "a few extra bags," in which case the new policy won't affect many people. I don't see how you can have it both ways.
> 
> Me, I don't think that many people now actually carry on more than the new luggage limits. Sure, I've seen it happen, but the fact that I remember it showed that it's an unusual occurrence.
> 
> *Two suitcases plus two carry-on bags totaling 150 lbs. per person seems pretty generous to me, and I personally would be hard put to carry more than four pieces of luggage myself. *


You are assuming everyone has checked baggage access.


----------



## PVD (Aug 4, 2015)

On a non checked baggage train (or stations) it would only be 2 carry-ons, and 2 personal items.


----------



## Ispolkom (Aug 4, 2015)

According to post #21, the maximum dimensions for a "carry-on" are 28" x 22" x 14" and can weigh 50 lbs. I'm reasonably certain that's larger than any suitcase I own, and at 61 linear inches, it's not much smaller than the maximum size "bag" you can check (75 linear inches).

So you can carry on two suitcase-sized "carry-on" items, and two "personal items," each of which are about as large as the largest carry-on bag I own. If you are at a station with checked luggage, you get another two suitcases "checked bags."

I still think that if you're carrying on more than 150 lbs. of luggage per person, you probably need to re-think your packing strategy. YMMV, of course.


----------



## jis (Aug 4, 2015)

In response to amamba, how many people actually try to carry on two almost full size suitcases and two hand baggages on an NEC Regional anyway? Even if they are being daft enough to try to go to KIN to visit the traveler? 

The carry on allowance is pretty much an amount of baggage that at least I could not reasonably drag along myself.

I think the issues will be more with nitpicks like a bag 30" long not meeting 28", which will probably be ignored in many cases, rather than one involving 3 carry-ons and 3 personal items instead of 2+2 and such. How many people really bring on more than 4 pieces anyway? Even on the NEC? For the few that do I don't think it will be that hard to manage.

Clearly if the Conductors are made in charge of enforcing this they will carry some means of effecting the charge, whether it be through some sort of POS device or by simply scanning/typing in the details of the credit card on their iPhone device and having the charge handled at the backend. We don;t know enough about how this will be done, but it does not appear to be an insurmountable problem since they do carry an extremely capable device these days to scan tickets anyway.


----------



## neroden (Aug 4, 2015)

I certainly wouldn't be bringing on extra luggage if I wasn't absolutely forced to for medical reasons.


----------



## PVD (Aug 4, 2015)

Typical airline carry-on restriction would be around 22 inches, 45 total linear, so the allowance is somewhat more generous. It would be nice to see baggage handling on some of the long day trips where someone may be going on vacation, and it will put a crimp on some of the "stock up the college dorm" crowd, but the limits themselves are not out of line. Implementation, enforcement, and consistency will be were Amtrak will likely struggle. But consistency on many fronts seems to be a constant topic on this board.


----------



## BCL (Aug 4, 2015)

PVD said:


> Typical airline carry-on restriction would be around 22 inches, 45 total linear, so the allowance is somewhat more generous. It would be nice to see baggage handling on some of the long day trips where someone may be going on vacation, and it will put a crimp on some of the "stock up the college dorm" crowd, but the limits themselves are not out of line. Implementation, enforcement, and consistency will be were Amtrak will likely struggle. But consistency on many fronts seems to be a constant topic on this board.


However, the airline restrictions are supposed to be with wheels, and the common "carry on" sized luggage from just a few years ago won't fit in the typical luggage sizers for most of the legacy carriers. Southwest and Alaska have a more generous size (24"). I haven't seen anyone turned away though, unless it's an absolutely full flight. Typically they'll gate check something after a cursory eyeball check of the size. Most of the airline personnel seem to think it's crazy that the sizes are so small now, even though the overhead bin sizes haven't really gone down.

I have one piece of luggage that might barely fit into Amtrak's maximum carry on size. However, I'll almost always check that one in.


----------



## the_traveler (Aug 4, 2015)

jis said:


> In response to amamba, how many people actually try to carry on two almost full size suitcases and two hand baggages on an NEC Regional anyway? Even if they are being daft enough to try to go to KIN to visit the traveler?


How about the_traveler making his pilgrimage from KIN to PDX for a month? :huh: Going out, he can check his bags from NYP on the LSL, SWC and CS, but he can't carry the extra 2 bags (that someone from NYC can check) on the Regional from KIN to NYP. Returning back east, he can check the 2 extra bags in PDX to WAS (on the CS, CZ and CL) but can not get them on the Regional from WAS to KIN without paying the fee (something others on the SAME Regional riding to BAL, WIL, PHL, NYP, PVD or BOS do not have to pay). I do not see how that is fair!


----------



## CelticWhisper (Aug 4, 2015)

jis said:


> 30" roller Case could be a problem on Acela since it is over the permitted size of 28x22x11.
> 
> Strictly speaking, there is no exception to the baggage rule for Sleepers either, so it could be a problem as a carry on on the Cap too.
> 
> ...


Both good points. I did call Amtrak customer service and verify that at least for my upcoming trip on 8/17, it wouldn't be an issue, so I'm not worried yet.

That said, what do they do on multiple-leg trips where some have checked baggage and others do not? Even if I checked it on the Cap, the only way to PVD from WAS is either a NER or an Acela, neither of which offer checked baggage service, so I'd be hosed.


----------



## PVD (Aug 4, 2015)

The airlines (except Southwest) are charging regular coach (non elite or special credit card) customers for checked bags. They have also been getting stricter on charging for gate checks on carry-ons that are out of spec. It is a huge revenue source for them. JetBlue, long a first checked bag free airline has bellied up to the trough. Why shouldn't they? I don't want to pay for something I don't have to, but who ever thought "fairness" has anything to do with business.


----------



## PVD (Aug 4, 2015)

The connecting to a non baggage train from a baggage handling train is an area where they will need to work things out. If I go Chicago to NY on the CL, the normal connection is to a NER, but baggage can be checked through on 66/67, but inconveniently. If I go LSL its checked bag.


----------



## jebr (Aug 4, 2015)

the_traveler said:


> jis said:
> 
> 
> > In response to amamba, how many people actually try to carry on two almost full size suitcases and two hand baggages on an NEC Regional anyway? Even if they are being daft enough to try to go to KIN to visit the traveler?
> ...


Then, as the policies are written, the new policy is actually _better_. The current policy leaves it where you only get the 2 carry-on bags and 2 personal items, and earlier this year it was 2 carry-on bags and unlimited personal items within a certain (smaller) range of items. Under the new policy the passenger still gets the 2 carry-on items and 2 personal items for free, along with any required medical devices (per ADA.) But now, if they want to carry on more, instead of having to worry about whether the attendant or conductor will allow the extra bags or not (even if they almost always would,) they know that they can bring them on, just for a fee.

Now, that being said, there is a difference in baggage policies between stations without checked bag service and those with checked baggage service. However, it's not the only difference between stations. Some have first class waiting areas, but most don't. Some are very nice stations with plenty of comfortable seating, where some are nothing more than a bus shelter (and anything in between.) Passengers boarding at an unstaffed station can't pay with cash without being hit with a penalty, where passengers at a staffed station can (by using the ticket counter instead of paying on board.) Even on an airline, if I take certain planes I have to gate check my luggage instead of bringing it on-board, even if it meets the carry-on size requirement. I don't know if there's small airports where there's a limited set of amenities for passengers (I've never used one), but there may be differences there. I don't think it's particularly unfair to say that certain stations don't have checked baggage service and just leave it at that (instead of making rules of exemptions for carry on items for certain passengers boarding at certain stations.) Of course, ideally trainside baggage check (which they trialed and when I used it at MTP seemed to be very nice) would be offered at most, if not all, stations. But until that happens, passengers boarding at stations without checked baggage service will be limited to the same baggage rules as they always have been (or, at least, since the last change on the website.) They now will also have the guaranteed option of bringing up to two additional bags on board (for a fee) instead of having to hope that the conductor or attendant would let them (after all, the website has said for some time that the carry-on luggage policy is "strictly enforced," which to a first-time rider means that they shouldn't expect to bring more than what the official allotment is on board.)


----------



## JoeBas (Aug 4, 2015)

amamba said:


> Ispolkom said:
> 
> 
> > I'm confused by *Devil's Advocate*'s post. Either "many Amtrak passengers" carry excess luggage, so there are lots of extra bags, or there are "a few extra bags," in which case the new policy won't affect many people. I don't see how you can have it both ways.
> ...


Furthermore, you're assuming that everyone has put their bags into the sizer and come out clean on the other side.

That viewliner cubbyhole carries a HECK of a lot more space than what goes into the sizer.


----------



## jis (Aug 4, 2015)

But the policy is the sizer. So either the policy can be changed special casing Viewliners or Sleepers or some such, or it can be left as is and enforced. there is no point in having a policy that is mostly ignored.

As for stations with no checked baggage service, they are already doing much better than the zillions of communities with no station at all to board themselves or thei luggage onto a train. So they get to carry a few fewer bags, so what? Amtrak journeys are not meant to be a substitute for Allied Van lines anyway.


----------



## BCL (Aug 4, 2015)

jebr said:


> Passengers boarding at an unstaffed station can't pay with cash without being hit with a penalty, where passengers at a staffed station can (by using the ticket counter instead of paying on board.)


Not exactly. The policy is that if there's no means to buy a ticket at a station (ticket office or Quik-Trak) then a ticket can be purchased from a conductor with no surcharge. On my Capitol Corridor route there are at least three stations where this can be done (OAC, HAY, SCC), and I did it once myself to see if it could be done. There's no penalty for cash to my knowledge.

Now I suppose if there's only Quik-Trak at a station, then there's no means to pay cash without a penalty. The machines don't take cash and there will be the penalty for buying tickets on board.


----------



## Devil's Advocate (Aug 4, 2015)

JoeBas said:


> amamba said:
> 
> 
> > Ispolkom said:
> ...


Even further still, you're apparently assuming this is a one time event that ends precisely where it began. My money is on size and weight restrictions becoming stricter over time with more and more people eventually running afoul of rules and having to pay increasingly severe surcharges. It's possible that Amtrak will not take this any further than already described, but if the airlines are any indication then Amtrak customers are likely to have several rounds of additional revenue squeezing ahead of them.


----------



## jebr (Aug 4, 2015)

BCL said:


> jebr said:
> 
> 
> > Passengers boarding at an unstaffed station can't pay with cash without being hit with a penalty, where passengers at a staffed station can (by using the ticket counter instead of paying on board.)
> ...


The Capitol Corridor only has one "bucket" that's the same whether you buy online or at the station (excepting any discounts.) The Amtrak website doesn't mention any specific penalty, but it appears that only the flexible fare would be available (as it states only a full, undiscounted, unrestricted fare can be purchased, and I don't think the Value would count as full or unrestricted.)



> Onboard
> 
> On most Amtrak trains, only the full, undiscounted, unrestricted fare will be available for purchase onboard the train. This is regardless of reservations made or fares previously quoted by ticket agents, Amtrak.com or elsewhere. Higher fares usually apply when purchasing tickets onboard the train. To secure the best available fare, passengers should purchase tickets prior to boarding the train.


----------



## PRR 60 (Aug 4, 2015)

Capitol Corridor buy-on-board fares are the what the website lists as the Value fares. This is also true for the Keystone unreserved service between Philadelphia and Harrisburg.


----------



## BCL (Aug 4, 2015)

jebr said:


> BCL said:
> 
> 
> > jebr said:
> ...


"Value" fare is the only option at the unstaffed stations without QT. When I bought my ticket on board a train OAC-GAC, it was the same $15 I would have gotten purchasing online or through the Amtrak app. I don't even know who in their right mind would purchase a "flexible" fare on Capitol Corridor anyways.

I just checked online for OAC-GAC, HAY-GAC, and SCC-GAC. All that's available is a "Value" fare at $15/$13/$6. The "Flexible" fare only seems to come up if both departure/arrival stations are staffed.


----------



## jebr (Aug 4, 2015)

I think those would be exceptions, though, since there is no flexible fare. I would be curious what the cost would be on a reserved train.


----------



## jis (Aug 4, 2015)

First you have to find a reserved train that stops at OAC though!


----------



## jebr (Aug 4, 2015)

Hah! I suppose I could try it myself at SPL instead (long distance train, so multiple buckets and both value and flexible fare, along with saver sometimes,) but I like getting the 10% discount for AAA, Student Advantage, or NARP (yes, I have all three at this time) or a promo saver fare when available. My curiosity isn't worth enough to pay extra for a ticket.


----------



## jis (Aug 4, 2015)

I just became eligible for the Senior discount last year, which beats all


----------



## BCL (Aug 4, 2015)

jis said:


> I just became eligible for the Senior discount last year, which beats all


My kid is eligible for a 50% off fare any time, but that does require an adult on the same ride.


----------



## Devil's Advocate (Aug 4, 2015)

I'd still take peak earning years over an age based discount.


----------



## jis (Aug 4, 2015)

Ones current age is not ones to choose. It is kinda pre-determined by past events  You just make the best of what you got. The whole thing is pretty inevitable, unless one manages to pre-depart.


----------



## Anderson (Aug 4, 2015)

jis said:


> In response to amamba, how many people actually try to carry on two almost full size suitcases and two hand baggages on an NEC Regional anyway? Even if they are being daft enough to try to go to KIN to visit the traveler?
> 
> The carry on allowance is pretty much an amount of baggage that at least I could not reasonably drag along myself.
> 
> ...


True, though what if someone paid cash (i.e. the green stuff) for their ticket (or paid with a now-invalid credit card...for example, I've had to have my AGR card swapped three times over the years: Once for standard expiration, twice for fraud issues)? I _really_ don't envy the conductor who gets into that position and _then _has to break a $100 bill because the traveler only has $15 in small bills for food.

Another thing to consider is that on the station side of things, you're going to have a lot of station agents who won't pursue this as not being worth the hassle and others who (as noted) decide to play the nitpick game _because they can_.

I'd also point out that with the airlines, there's at least a nominal justification for the charges insofar as weight on the plane _is_ a significant restriction. On Amtrak? Space limits are a thing, yes, and reducing the limit a few years ago from three bags to two (checked and carry-on) likely had at least something to do with higher load factors (and borderline overloaded baggage cars...look inside the baggage car on a peak-season Silver Service train at SAV sometime and you'll see what I mean)...but it isn't like Amtrak

FWIW, the real danger is triggering a bunch of "never again" situations (either with a station agent being a pain or repeated on-board "surprises").


----------



## jebr (Aug 4, 2015)

True, though in theory (though not in practice in most cases) the current policy is more likely to generate "never again" passengers. There is no reduction in the official allotment of carry-on items from Sept. 30 to Oct. 1. What is happening is that instead of an unofficial "turn the other way" when it happens most of the time there's now an official "it's allowed for a fee" policy for additional carry-on baggage. I would think that, if the policy was simply just enforced more strictly, there'd be a lot more "never again" from being turned away at the platform from boarding for too much luggage (or having to abandon luggage) than having to pay $20-$40 for that luggage but still bring it with you.


----------



## Anderson (Aug 4, 2015)

jebr said:


> True, though in theory (though not in practice in most cases) the current policy is more likely to generate "never again" passengers. There is no reduction in the official allotment of carry-on items from Sept. 30 to Oct. 1. What is happening is that instead of an unofficial "turn the other way" when it happens most of the time there's now an official "it's allowed for a fee" policy for additional carry-on baggage. I would think that, if the policy was simply just enforced more strictly, there'd be a lot more "never again" from being turned away at the platform from boarding for too much luggage (or having to abandon luggage) than having to pay $20-$40 for that luggage but still bring it with you.


Granted that I'm usually in a sleeper, but I don't think I've ever seen or heard of someone being turned away for too much baggage at trainside. The strange situation in RVR I mentioned is the closest I've seen.

And of course, as I've said...there's a risk that this makes for a worse baggage situation in coach (since policy is now to take any baggage people bring on).


----------



## jis (Aug 4, 2015)

Anderson said:


> True, though what if someone paid cash (i.e. the green stuff) for their ticket (or paid with a now-invalid credit card...for example, I've had to have my AGR card swapped three times over the years: Once for standard expiration, twice for fraud issues)? I _really_ don't envy the conductor who gets into that position and _then _has to break a $100 bill because the traveler only has $15 in small bills for food.


What does how the original ticket was paid for have anything to do with how a surcharge is to be paid? I am afraid I am missing something. Yeah, paying by cash raise the usual paying by cash problems. That's life. Presumably there will be some policy to handle situations involving inability to pay.



> Another thing to consider is that on the station side of things, you're going to have a lot of station agents who won't pursue this as not being worth the hassle and others who (as noted) decide to play the nitpick game _because they can_.


I can't even fathom how a station agent should go about handling this except in cases with observable huge piles of baggage. I would not expect them to do anything unless checking baggage is involved. If they have a personality disorder they will find some reason or the other to hassle passengers anyway. There is nothing stopping them now.



> I'd also point out that with the airlines, there's at least a nominal justification for the charges insofar as weight on the plane _is_ a significant restriction. On Amtrak? Space limits are a thing, yes, and reducing the limit a few years ago from three bags to two (checked and carry-on) likely had at least something to do with higher load factors (and borderline overloaded baggage cars...look inside the baggage car on a peak-season Silver Service train at SAV sometime and you'll see what I mean)...but it isn't like Amtrak


The amount of space on trains is not infinite either, so there is a similar justification except that the limits are higher as is the case already. One could quibble about what the limit should be, but there should be a limit and it should be enforced.



> FWIW, the real danger is triggering a bunch of "never again" situations (either with a station agent being a pain or repeated on-board "surprises").


You can't satisfy everyone. For simply breathing air you would find a few "never agains". They are worthy of being let go. Why would anything on board be a surprise if they bother to understand the baggage rules? If they do not bother then that is life. We don;t have to suddenly become nanny outfit to babysit people through their life's problems.

In reality, what proportion of people do actually bring baggage even half way upto their full quota anyway? Are we mostly talking about theoretical problems?


----------



## Peter KG6LSE (Aug 4, 2015)

the root of this is the stupid bag cars..... we need Roll on roll off bag cars .... and some one to man them at every station.

folks this is not 1937. its 2015. Crack down on carry on's Offer train side checked bags!

EG like a dome car's tri level floor plan....


----------



## Ispolkom (Aug 4, 2015)

Devil's Advocate said:


> JoeBas said:
> 
> 
> > Furthermore, you're assuming that everyone has put their bags into the sizer and come out clean on the other side.
> ...


*JoeBas,* I don't understand what you wrote. My suitcases (or bags, as I guess I must now call them) get filthy without sizers. Have you ever seen the inside of an old Amtrak baggage car? Or do you mean they get damaged?

*Devils Advocate*, I'm still trying to figure out if you think there are a lot of passengers affected by this new policy or a few. That completely exhausts my ability to worry about Amtrak's future policies.

I didn't care when Amtrak lowered the number of free checked bags from 3 to 2. I don't see how the present change in policy will affect any but a tiny proportion of travelers, that is those who carry more than 150 lbs. of luggage per person. After all, I traveled to the Soviet Union for ten months with two suitcases. That included suits, a winter coat, boots, even 10 or 12 lbs. peanut butter. If anyone needs to, by herself, take more luggage than that, that passenger should either ship something or go to a station with checked luggage service. They shouldn't be allowed to carry on that much luggage as it is. Amtrak isn't a moving company.

Now, if this policy concerned medical equipment (wheelchair, oxygen, medical devices etc.), there would be cause for concern, but I'm sure it doesn't.


----------



## jebr (Aug 4, 2015)

Anderson said:


> jebr said:
> 
> 
> > True, though in theory (though not in practice in most cases) the current policy is more likely to generate "never again" passengers. There is no reduction in the official allotment of carry-on items from Sept. 30 to Oct. 1. What is happening is that instead of an unofficial "turn the other way" when it happens most of the time there's now an official "it's allowed for a fee" policy for additional carry-on baggage. I would think that, if the policy was simply just enforced more strictly, there'd be a lot more "never again" from being turned away at the platform from boarding for too much luggage (or having to abandon luggage) than having to pay $20-$40 for that luggage but still bring it with you.
> ...


What written policy states that a customer is allowed to take any baggage people bring on? The public website states that the carry-on luggage policy is "strictly enforced." I double-checked the Service Standards Manual, and it even tells employees to refuse service if someone is clearly exceeding the policy.







Since all written policy that's publicly available suggests that people should not bring on excess baggage, and they may be turned away trainside if they clearly exceed the policy, the new policy is a better policy as written than the current policy. I'd rather have an enforced, written policy that allows excess baggage if I need it, even if it's for a fee, than a relatively unenforced policy where the general rule is "if you can carry it on you can bring it on" but a strict conductor or attendant could deny service if it exceeds the policy.

It bears repeating that this change does *not* include any reduction to the free baggage allotment. There was a minor change earlier this year in the written policy to solidify the personal items allotment (arguably with a reduction in that, though I'm not sure I'd buy that this would constitute any part of a trend) but the core substance of the carry-on allotment has not changed anytime in recent memory (I can't think of the last time it was changed.) Amtrak appears to simply be enforcing the current baggage allotment more strictly and allowing people an official way to bring more on board if they wish. To me, this is worlds better than simply enforcing it more strictly and turning people away trainside.


----------



## Alice (Aug 4, 2015)

I re-read the policy about medical equipment. This is the first listed requirement:

Required medical devices will not count towards a passenger's allowable baggage and will be accepted free of charge if accompanied by a ticket issued at a mobility impaired fare.

My interpretation of this is that non-disability medical supplies (say prescription pills or special food) have to satisfy the same requirements and limits as anyone else. In order to pack extra items for disability, you have to be disabled. And they are defining disabled as takes disabled discount. Elsewhere, there is a list of papers that allow a person to take the discount. Also elsewhere, the disabled discount is not limited to mobility disabilities, but H-room reservations are.

Obviously there are legal issues here as written. Perhaps the official rules are written in lawyer-speak and the person who translated it to customer-friendly language introduced some inaccuracies.

The Special Items page is pretty interesting, it also has fine print for other oversize items such as golf clubs, bikes, surf boards, etc.

Page about disability discount

Page about disability documentation


----------



## Anderson (Aug 4, 2015)

jis said:


> Anderson said:
> 
> 
> > True, though what if someone paid cash (i.e. the green stuff) for their ticket (or paid with a now-invalid credit card...for example, I've had to have my AGR card swapped three times over the years: Once for standard expiration, twice for fraud issues)? I _really_ don't envy the conductor who gets into that position and _then _has to break a $100 bill because the traveler only has $15 in small bills for food.
> ...


It's a mixed bag (no pun intended). The question of the status of bags of unusual shapes/sizes comes up, which is one possibility (packing a bag to over 50 lbs is doable as well). There's also the question of "what is a bag?" (e.g. multiple smaller shopping bags, a bag of food clipped onto a backpack, etc.) There have been times when I was nominally up to 4-5 "bags", but that's usually one suitcase, one backpack, a carry-out bag clipped to my backpack, and a shopping bag of some sort.

Edit: And with all due respect to the statement (which is to say with utter contempt for it), "Amtrak security standards" my arse.


----------



## BCL (Aug 4, 2015)

Anderson said:


> jis said:
> 
> 
> > Anderson said:
> ...


I think if it can fit into the sizer it's OK.

I've also seen some odd things in my travels. One was a family with a couple of overweight bags at an airline luggage counter. Each one was barely overweight. The agent suggested that they might redistribute some weight so they didn't need to pay for two overweight bags, but they declined and shelled out $100 instead of $50. I was about to say something like "Are you freaking stupid or something?" but then I figured it wasn't my money.

I've also been waiting as someone was told they about being over the one personal item limit, but was then told that they'd be OK if the smaller item was stowed in the larger item. I was in a similar situation (had a camera bag) and wasn't told to do anything.


----------



## Devil's Advocate (Aug 5, 2015)

Ispolkom said:


> *Devils Advocate*, I'm still trying to figure out if you think there are a lot of passengers affected by this new policy or a few.


My estimate is that very few will be impacted immediately while many more will be impacted in the future. It's entirely possible I'm completely wrong but the trend I'm sensing reminds me of the early days of the airline luggage wars.



Ispolkom said:


> I didn't care when Amtrak lowered the number of free checked bags from 3 to 2. I don't see how the present change in policy will affect any but a tiny proportion of travelers, that is those who carry more than 150 lbs. of luggage per person. After all, I traveled to the Soviet Union for ten months with two suitcases. That included suits, a winter coat, boots, even 10 or 12 lbs. peanut butter.


All of my personal travels have been with a single carefully packed rollaboard and a personal item. At first my bags were small enough that even the most restrictive airlines were perfectly fine with them. Over time the rules have changed over and over again so that now my luggage is technically too large for nearly every airline. At the moment the discrepancy is less than obvious so I have yet to be seriously impacted, but over a long enough timeline even my carefully chosen luggage will eventually become a problem.



jebr said:


> What written policy states that a customer is allowed to take any baggage people bring on? The public website states that the carry-on luggage policy is "strictly enforced." I double-checked the Service Standards Manual, and it even tells employees to refuse service if someone is clearly exceeding the policy.


Are you familiar with the concepts of _de facto_ and _de jure?_ While Amtrak's written rules have included all sorts of restrictions on luggage I've never actually seen anyone trying to measure and enforce such rules on more than a vague and superficial level.


----------



## andersone (Aug 5, 2015)

I think I need to go and photocopy my HC license plates,,,, I don't have a placard,


----------



## JoeBas (Aug 5, 2015)

Ispolkom said:


> *JoeBas,* I don't understand what you wrote. My suitcases (or bags, as I guess I must now call them) get filthy without sizers. Have you ever seen the inside of an old Amtrak baggage car? Or do you mean they get damaged?


It's a metaphorical figure of speech... not literally "Clean", but rather "Passes their arbitrary and inane sizer test".


----------



## Hal (Aug 5, 2015)

Devil's Advocate said:


> Are you familiar with the concepts of _de facto_ and _de jure?_ While Amtrak's written rules have included all sorts of restrictions on luggage I've never actually seen anyone trying to measure and enforce such rules on more than a vague and superficial level.


That is correct. As I mentioned if any worker tried to enforce the rules in the past, and there were instances where they needed to be enforced, usually management would never back up the enforcement. I think management was depending on passengers to read the rules and honor them without the crews doing it. Probably most passengers did abide by the written rules cause they didn't know they were not actually enforced. So the crews gave up trying to enforce the written rules. So now there is the idea of enforcing the rules to increase revenue. I don't think that it is crazy that revenue could come in from doing that or that the potential figures that I posted are crazy like some think. The problem they might have collecting revenue is that crews generally don't want to get in confrontations, and might be gun shy on collecting the revenue because of past experiences.


----------



## Mystic River Dragon (Aug 5, 2015)

jis said:


> I just became eligible for the Senior discount last year, which beats all


Me, too, and also for NJT, which is even better because it's half price!


----------



## Mystic River Dragon (Aug 5, 2015)

jis said:


> In response to amamba, how many people actually try to carry on two almost full size suitcases and two hand baggages on an NEC Regional anyway? Even if they are being daft enough to try to go to KIN to visit the traveler?


I do see people with lots of bags on the Regional, and unfortunately, on this route that might need it, I can't see them enforcing anything with the amount of turnover between stations and the need to keep to the schedule. Several years ago, on a full train from TRE to MYS, which the commuters are now using between PHL and NYP, there was a young person pretending to be asleep, with her feet up and luggage on the seat next to her. So I gently prodded her socks (she had at least taken off her shoes) with my umbrella and told her in a polite but no-nonsense voice that she would have to move her stuff because the train was full (which she did). After that, the mischievous Muppet that seemed to have taken me over started a conversation with her in a cheerful morning voice. She could hardly wait to get out of the train at New York. I had the seat to myself the rest of the trip, but I decided then that having to worry about getting a seat at TRE wasn't worth it and decided to start going business class (with points sometimes to make it not as expensive).


----------



## niemi24s (Aug 5, 2015)

This absolutely riveting thread brought a bizarre image to my warped brain (which is old enough to remember the days before colored TV):

• SCENE - some Amtrak station

• PLAYER - the late great comic Red Skelton in his role as (Klem Kadiddlehopper?) the traveling anvil salesman

• ACTION - Skelton trying to get his sample cases aboard the train.


----------



## Mystic River Dragon (Aug 5, 2015)

niemi24s said:


> This absolutely riveting thread brought a bizarre image to my warped brain (which is old enough to remember the days before colored TV):
> 
> • SCENE - some Amtrak station
> 
> ...


:giggle:


----------



## Devil's Advocate (Aug 5, 2015)

Funny.... https://screen.yahoo.com/airport-090000680.html

Not as Funny...


----------



## BCL (Aug 5, 2015)

Of course the issue is a balance between efficient operation and bringing in revenue.

The issue of excessive carry on baggage is of course on both sides of efficient operation. Arguing with passengers tends to eat up time, while using up every available space for carry on causes issues. They'll often let it slide.

Strangely enough, the airlines' moves for charging for baggage except carry on (and some airlines even do that) has created a situation where most passengers are bringing aboard carry on to avoid the charges. Amtrak specifically doesn't charge for a generous two pieces of check in baggage, but even then there are people who either can't check in (unstaffed station at either end) or don't want to. Another issue is that someone with three pieces of luggage and five pieces of "personal items" tends to slow the boarding and deboarding process.

It could get to the point where performance reviews may include how much baggage revenue is processed by conductors.


----------



## AmtrakLKL (Aug 5, 2015)

BCL said:


> jebr said:
> 
> 
> > Passengers boarding at an unstaffed station can't pay with cash without being hit with a penalty, where passengers at a staffed station can (by using the ticket counter instead of paying on board.)
> ...


Some state corridors aside, passengers paying cash onboard at unstaffed stations will be charged the highest YOFC regardless of fare reserved. So while there isn't the staffed station surcharge, the YOFC is still sort of a penalty if any lower fare was reserved.



Anderson said:


> jebr said:
> 
> 
> > True, though in theory (though not in practice in most cases) the current policy is more likely to generate "never again" passengers. There is no reduction in the official allotment of carry-on items from Sept. 30 to Oct. 1. What is happening is that instead of an unofficial "turn the other way" when it happens most of the time there's now an official "it's allowed for a fee" policy for additional carry-on baggage. I would think that, if the policy was simply just enforced more strictly, there'd be a lot more "never again" from being turned away at the platform from boarding for too much luggage (or having to abandon luggage) than having to pay $20-$40 for that luggage but still bring it with you.
> ...


I would say most passengers are within the carry-on limits or exceed it only slightly. Those that are over the limit are usually way over the limit and under the current policy must be denied boarding. Trouble is, once someone is train side with a large, 50lb suitcase (and especially traveling to an unstaffed station) it is easier to board them than have a drawn out denied boarding situation or trying to find station services to take the bag and check it the next day. Now we'll have a process to accept the additional baggage for a modest fee. Announcements on 800-USA-RAIL and the website detailing the change have already begun.



jebr said:


> What written policy states that a customer is allowed to take any baggage people bring on? The public website states that the carry-on luggage policy is "strictly enforced." I double-checked the Service Standards Manual, and it even tells employees to refuse service if someone is clearly exceeding the policy.
> 
> 
> Since all written policy that's publicly available suggests that people should not bring on excess baggage, and they may be turned away trainside if they clearly exceed the policy, the new policy is a better policy as written than the current policy. I'd rather have an enforced, written policy that allows excess baggage if I need it, even if it's for a fee, than a relatively unenforced policy where the general rule is "if you can carry it on you can bring it on" but a strict conductor or attendant could deny service if it exceeds the policy.
> ...


The trouble with the no exceptions policy is that enforcement is rare, despite "strictly enforced" language, for the reasons I mentioned above. Much easier to just put 'em on the train and advise them not to do it again. We even have nice little carry-on baggage handouts that state "you will be denied boarding next time." I really hope the excess fee charge is fully enforced and more successful in limiting carry on bags. Overweight bags (25+ lbs) are the worst as someone has to lug them up/down the steps on single level equipment and find limited floor/luggage rack space for them.


----------



## AmtrakLKL (Aug 5, 2015)

Some specific details are yet to come from the company, but here is what I've gathered from various sources: The fee will be assessed once per one-way trip with special tags identifying paid excess baggage. So if you have one or more connections, the fee would be paid once but can be assessed at any time during the trip.

For example, traveling Washington, DC to Denver would only result in one charge per excess bag. The charge should be collected in Washington and the bags appropriately tagged. If the passenger boards without paying, they can be charged at any point by a conductor on the Capitol Limited, Chicago during the connection or a conductor on the California Zephyr. When returning back to Washington, the charge would be collected again for the return trip.

I have no idea how conductors will collect payment onboard, but hope it won't be too complicated as that will greatly reduce onboard enforcement.


----------



## Bob Dylan (Aug 5, 2015)

Brilliant!

What could possibly go wrong with this scheme?


----------



## andersone (Aug 5, 2015)

Was it Max Bialystock who said "I love it when a plan comes together"? perhaps a bad source on my part but bliss form a management perspective


----------



## BCL (Aug 5, 2015)

andersone said:


> Was it Max Bialystock who said "I love it when a plan comes together"? perhaps a bad source on my part but bliss form a management perspective


Col. John "Hannibal" Smith from _The A-Team_.


----------



## Peter KG6LSE (Aug 5, 2015)

andersone said:


> I think I need to go and photocopy my HC license plates,,,, I don't have a placard,


25 years in to the ADA. and that bulky hang card is the best portable way of proof ....

perhaps I am a moron. but is there ANY state that just offers it as a wallet card?......

I dont own a car. so cards that hang are useless. plates are the same way.

Heck the hangcard I have the ink on the bottom for the exp date is darn near rubbed off from it being in my backpack ect .

I dare not touch it up or laminate it .


----------



## PVD (Aug 5, 2015)

At least the way it works in NY, the hang tag is intended for the individual, not a specific vehicle. My mom was legally blind due to macular degeneration, If I drove her somewhere, we were entitled to use her tag. Obviously she did not own a car or drive. If you are regularly in one car, you might want the plates. But here, they are only good for off street handicapped spaces, we have no reserved spaces on street. For on street privileges, you need a special dash placard, much harder to get, you have to be seen by their doctor.


----------



## BCL (Aug 5, 2015)

PVD said:


> At least the way it works in NY, the hang tag is intended for the individual, not a specific vehicle. My mom was legally blind due to macular degeneration, If I drove her somewhere, we were entitled to use her tag. Obviously she did not own a car or drive. If you are regularly in one car, you might want the plates. But here, they are only good for off street handicapped spaces, we have no reserved spaces on street. For on street privileges, you need a special dash placard, much harder to get, you have to be seen by their doctor.


There's some British company that provides an "Access Card" listing a person's particular needs. I don't know if it carries any official weight, but they claim that many organizations recognize it.

http://www.accesscard.org.uk

I don't know what all the symbols mean.







However, my understanding is that the ADA terms mean that some can't be asked for why they need a certain accommodation. I've also seen some crazy stuff. Once it was an overweight woman with a kid at the Fremont, CA station. The station has a curved platform, and there can be a pretty big gap. She was yelling for some help with her items, even though it didn't appear that she needed any. And yeah - it looked like she had maybe four items that would be considered carry on sized. Mostly she was overloaded with too much stuff and the kid wasn't big enough to carry more than just one item - and was pushing along her own stroller to boot.


----------



## Train2104 (Aug 5, 2015)

AmtrakLKL said:


> I have no idea how conductors will collect payment onboard, but hope it won't be too complicated as that will greatly reduce onboard enforcement.


Probably just cut a COTS like they do with any other onboard revenue transaction.

But having to call CNOC for a passenger with only a credit card is going to be a big hassle.


----------



## niemi24s (Aug 5, 2015)

AmtrakLKL said:


> . . .will be charged the highest YOFC. . .


I give up. Google just says it's the Yangtze Optical Fibre and Cable company. What is it?


----------



## AmtrakBlue (Aug 5, 2015)

BCL said:


> PVD said:
> 
> 
> > At least the way it works in NY, the hang tag is intended for the individual, not a specific vehicle. My mom was legally blind due to macular degeneration, If I drove her somewhere, we were entitled to use her tag. Obviously she did not own a car or drive. If you are regularly in one car, you might want the plates. But here, they are only good for off street handicapped spaces, we have no reserved spaces on street. For on street privileges, you need a special dash placard, much harder to get, you have to be seen by their doctor.
> ...


Here are links with explanations for the symbols. I guessed most of them, including WC - water closet (bathroom).

http://www.accesscard.org.uk/symbols-text/(text only)

http://www.accesscard.org.uk/apply/medical-evidence/(interactive)


----------



## Train2104 (Aug 5, 2015)

niemi24s said:


> AmtrakLKL said:
> 
> 
> > . . .will be charged the highest YOFC. . .
> ...


What you see on the Amtrak site as a "Flexible" fare.


----------



## AmtrakLKL (Aug 5, 2015)

niemi24s said:


> AmtrakLKL said:
> 
> 
> > . . .will be charged the highest YOFC. . .
> ...


YOFC is the fare basis and in this case corresponds to the highest coach fare bucket, Y. The fare basis contains all the rules associated with that fare such as refunds, changes, advance booking requirements, etc. It is similar to the airlines but much, much less complicated.


----------



## BCL (Aug 5, 2015)

niemi24s said:


> AmtrakLKL said:
> 
> 
> > . . .will be charged the highest YOFC. . .
> ...


Still don't know, but it's mentioned in this thread as some sort of fare code.

http://discuss.amtraktrains.com/index.php?/topic/43209-amtrak-inventory-bucket-codes/

Saw something else that mentioned YOFC is the fare basis for full fare coach. I knew someone who was a travel agent, and Y-class stood for full fare, refundable/transferrable economy class. Even business travelers don't pay that unless booking last minute these days.


----------



## Thirdrail7 (Aug 5, 2015)

Train2104 said:


> AmtrakLKL said:
> 
> 
> > I have no idea how conductors will collect payment onboard, but hope it won't be too complicated as that will greatly reduce onboard enforcement.
> ...



it is actually easier than that. They can process the transaction but they should nudge the passenger in the direction of calling the 1-800 as if they are changing their reservation. This way, it can actually be entered in the PNR and everyone that has access to the manifest can see that the fee was already paid.

While I do understand where Devil's Advocate is coming from (is this a slippery slope, where will Amtrak go from here) this is one thing that should actually help, especially the conductors.

This isn't something that was dreamed up in a back room by a bunch of people rubbing their hands together, snickering about how they try to capture more revenue. This was pretty much a joint effort between crews and passengers alike. The trains are packed and passengers often load their excessive luggage into the ADA areas, which causes problems down line. It can delay trains as passengers grapple with bags that can barely fit down the aisle, let alone in the luggage rack.

As Jis (and others mentioned) the policy will not impact the vast majority of passengers. The passengers impacted will now have more of a clear cut policy instead of facing the potential of running into the far and few on board crew members that will enforce the policy.

This policy should really help the on board crews since passenger services is supposed to take the lead where they can. This is very powerful since they are the ones that tend to....how should we put this diplomatically.....have a department that employs people that may have an "incentive" to violate the current policy (every has that....right? h34r: ) and when on board crews tried to enforce the policy on board, they were often told they were put on the train by the aforementioned group of employees.

This should greatly reduce the aspect.

The bottom line is the fee shouldn't impact that many people. If passengers wish to pay the fee, they may still bring what they need. If passengers decide not to travel with as much, well that still helps since there is less luggage, more spaces and hopefully, a little less dwell.

The only thing that surprises me is the timing. I thought they were going to wait a little while longer since some of the baggage cars are supposed to start eventually showing up on trains that currently don't have baggage cars.


----------



## VentureForth (Aug 6, 2015)

Charging fees for overweight carry on bags is ridiculous. I understand checked bags - there needs to be a deterrent to keep station staff from throwing their backs out when lifting bags over their shoulders and throwing them onto a cart or into the baggage car. But so long as the passenger is carrying their own bag, it shouldn't matter if it weighs 100 lbs.

This seems to be an airline policy that some dolt copied and pasted into Amtrak without understanding the implications weight has on aircraft performance. First, jet fuel is much more expensive than diesel. Next, every pound of payload reduces range which has to be made up in fuel. Sure, trains are affected by weight as well, but even fully loaded passenger trains are lightweight compared to freights. The performance/weight ratio is much further apart.


----------



## Train2104 (Aug 6, 2015)

I agree that charging a fee for excess quantity luggage is a good idea since it reduces dwell time, etc. You can't carry more than 4 pieces of luggage on your person, anything extra takes multiple trips and costs time.

The scenario that I'm envisioning being a possible issue is charging the fee to someone at a station without checked baggage who tries to bring their (1 or 2) large suitcases aboard that greatly exceed the carry on size limit but would be legal as checked bags. There isn't really a comparable airline example, since almost all flights and airports offer checked bag service...


----------



## andersone (Aug 6, 2015)

In Ohio you need a Dr.'s certificate to get HC tags. I got the permanent ones because one night we rushed to Columbus to James Hospital, parked in the HC ramp and She Who Must Be Obeyed forgot to hang the tag. I am amazed how many people just leave their tag hang from their mirror even though the tag instructs you not to.We got a notice a $250 fine, fought it and won (although it was a hassle) so I decided to just get permanent tags for both vehicles. I keep my old windshield placard for renters. The tags allow me take any HC spot regardless of location.

I looked at my Ohio vehicle registration, and noted it only gives the tag number not the tag type. So I scanned it, then took a photo of the tag and put it into the pdf. Now I have an image with both of them at once (the tag has that universal wheelchair symbol on it.) I only did this because I am an anal retentive almost paranoid but I did have space on my Google Drive so I can access it anywhere. If you saw my in person with the trachea and the permanent Quasi Moto rad burns covering the right side of my head you wouldn't even ask for documentation. It must be the old Girl Scout in me.

Having said that we started packing for Yellowstone. We use three rollers (one is strictly photo gear and scopes) that will be checked. For I carry a knapsack, we have a collapsible Coleman cooler (we actually pack it with train clothes and use it as a cooler when we get there), SWMBO has one of those neat locking carryall's with a lock that you can use virtually anywhere for her stuff and I have my trusty med bag with drugs for the ugly, a nebulizer, and all the variant bandages, trachea cleaning supplies and all the other wonderful paraphernalia needed for daily existence. You just don't know how good life can get til you need a small tube of saline to breathe. We are actually under the 2+2+2+2 limit, but my photo gear bag gets real close to the weight limit. I can re-pack if anyone squawks, although I use cable ties to discourage wandering hands in the checked luggage. I just have a few in the knapsack.

As mother said frequently "Even paranoids have real enemies."


----------



## AmtrakLKL (Aug 6, 2015)

VentureForth said:


> Charging fees for overweight carry on bags is ridiculous. I understand checked bags - there needs to be a deterrent to keep station staff from throwing their backs out when lifting bags over their shoulders and throwing them onto a cart or into the baggage car. But so long as the passenger is carrying their own bag, it shouldn't matter if it weighs 100 lbs.
> 
> This seems to be an airline policy that some dolt copied and pasted into Amtrak without understanding the implications weight has on aircraft performance. First, jet fuel is much more expensive than diesel. Next, every pound of payload reduces range which has to be made up in fuel. Sure, trains are affected by weight as well, but even fully loaded passenger trains are lightweight compared to freights. The performance/weight ratio is much further apart.


Really? It seems to me passengers with overweight bags (25lbs+) are the ones least able to lug them up the steps into an Amfleet coach. The employees end up doing the heavy lifting because, again, it is easier to just put it onboard than have a denied boarding situation. Now you'll have to find space or heft it up into the luggage rack and repeat the process in reverse at the passenger's destination. It's also amazing how many people just freely bound up or down the steps, lugging a bag or not. Safety first says use the hand rails and watch your step. Can't do that very well with a 100lbs bag.


----------



## jis (Aug 6, 2015)

That is a very good point AmtrakLKL! Many people are done with lugging once they reach the train door. After that it becomes someone else's problem to get the thing on board and placed out of the way. Since the same employees have to potentially handle them when push comes to shove, it is reasonable for the same 50lb limit to apply, as it already does.


----------



## BCL (Aug 6, 2015)

AmtrakLKL said:


> VentureForth said:
> 
> 
> > Charging fees for overweight carry on bags is ridiculous. I understand checked bags - there needs to be a deterrent to keep station staff from throwing their backs out when lifting bags over their shoulders and throwing them onto a cart or into the baggage car. But so long as the passenger is carrying their own bag, it shouldn't matter if it weighs 100 lbs.
> ...


Isn't the carry on max weight the same 50 lbs for a standard check in piece?

And yeah - it does sound as if Amtrak employees will be dealing with that weight, in addition to possibly exceeding the rating for some racks. Some passengers are then going to want to place them in the overhead racks/bins, and then that becomes a problem if it's dropped on someone's head.

I've also seen some passengers (not with an obvious disability) who assumed that someone would help with their luggage.


----------



## Hal (Aug 6, 2015)

BCL said:


> AmtrakLKL said:
> 
> 
> > VentureForth said:
> ...


They are told that someone will help. And I know of several employees who were injured helping. Also it is not just the luggage racks. Boarding and detraining at low level platforms can mean passengers need help getting them up and down putting them on and off the train.


----------



## OlympianHiawatha (Aug 6, 2015)

Last night a pax boarding Coach on the 98 Meteor had about 6 carry on grips and the Attendant as per the book politely informed her she had too much baggage and in the future there would be a penalty. Since they were "small" grips I believe she was allowed to take them on.


----------



## Thirdrail7 (Aug 6, 2015)

BCL said:


> AmtrakLKL said:
> 
> 
> > VentureForth said:
> ...


To further expand on this matter, remember planes tend to load, fly to their destination and unload. This is not typical when it comes to passenger trains. So, now you have this giant bag that lacks maneuverability as passenger boarding down line board the train. The behemoths typically can't fit into the luggage rack and passengers (as well as crew members) have trouble schlepping them up and down the narrow aisles (and staircases on Superliner equipment). So where do they end up? In the "vacant" area at the end of the coach which actually is for passengers that require special needs, such a wheelchairs or a place for their service animal. While that space may be available right now, four stops down the line, a passenger needs that area. A passenger disembarking with a large bag can also block other movements. These kinds of thing add up to dwell.

I haven't flown in years, but I doubt this kind of stuff occurs on a plane.


----------



## Devil's Advocate (Aug 6, 2015)

I'm all for making people carry and lift their own luggage and then charging them if they cannot do so in a timely and reasonable manner. Over the years I've stopped helping other people with luggage because I've come to the conclusion that the only way they'll ever learn to stop bringing more than they can handle is if the rest of us stop doing it for them. That being said, I don't see why small but dense packers like me should have to pack lighter than usual just because someone who will never touch my bag might not be able to handle it on their own. If I can handle my bags with ease and the train can handle them without issue then it shouldn't matter how heavy they are, at least in my view.


----------



## BCL (Aug 6, 2015)

Thirdrail7 said:


> BCL said:
> 
> 
> > AmtrakLKL said:
> ...


Run out of storage space in the cabin of an airliner, and the crew will start to "gate check" items (no extra charge) that meet the carry on guidelines but can't be stored in the cabin. And yeah it takes time to handle this. In many ways I think airline flight crew employees hate the charges for check in baggage since it makes their job tougher. Many use carry on simply because they don't want the airlines handling their stuff. Then as more passengers bring carry on to avoid the fees, they have to deal with passengers fighting over available overhead bin space.


----------



## crescent2 (Aug 6, 2015)

These allowances per person seem extremely generous to me, plus many items don't count. I've never noticed anyone with nearly that much luggage. Those two larger size pieces are BIG honkin' bags.

My daughter, SIL, and their two middle-school-age children just spent 15 days traveling through western Canada, and they didn't take much, if any, more than that for the entire family. And they aren't light packers.

However, I can imagine some problems with enforcement, especially until the kinks are worked out.

This is very, very low on my list of "Things I wish Amtrak had not changed."


----------



## neroden (Aug 6, 2015)

All I care about is that they accept medically-required-due-to-disability equipment as free excess baggage. For me and my fiancee on a long trip, that's a CPAP and my unfortunately-necessary bag of food (which I really wish I didn't have to carry); plus the wheelchair which we check. For some friends I know, it would be 2 CPAPs and leg pumps for a leg disorder. For another friend with a really nasty disease, it's the *cooler's worth* of refrigeration-required prescription medications.

This stuff adds up fast, and we all frankly wish we didn't have to carry it, but we do. Which is why charging for it would add insult to injury. It's illegal discrimination under the ADA to charge passengers extra to carry this stuff which they absolutely would not carry but-for the disability -- so I hope Amtrak trains its conductors properly regarding the ADA. Since the policy as published is illegal.


----------



## crescent2 (Aug 6, 2015)

I'd be very surprised if they counted medical or medically necessary items against the limit. Some baby items are probably exempted, too. Even airlines exempt some items, and their carry-on sizes and numbers aren't nearly as generous.


----------



## VentureForth (Aug 7, 2015)

Well, y'all have answered my question quite acceptably. I still have a problem with what to do about folks travelling between non-checked baggage end points.


----------



## crescent2 (Aug 7, 2015)

Yes, that's certainly something air travelers don't come up against. But Amtrak's baggage allowance is still so super-generous that I just can't fault them with it. Each person can bring on 150 pounds of luggage! That's a LOT even if no more can be checked. Families traveling in a private vehicle wouldn't have room for that much (each) if there were several people in the car.

It will be interesting to see how well or consistently it is enforced, assuming anyone actually tries to bring more than that. :unsure:

I don't really mean to take the position of being the defender of Amtrak on this issue, and it's not likely to ever affect me or anyone I'd be traveling with. It's just way down on my list of things I wish they hadn't done. If it in any way helps appease those in power who are trying to nickel and dime Amtrak out of business, it's one of the more harmless cuts imo.


----------



## willem (Aug 7, 2015)

crescent2 said:


> This is very, very low on my list of "Things I wish Amtrak had not changed."


 Well put.


----------



## Hal (Aug 7, 2015)

crescent2 said:


> It will be interesting to see how well or consistently it is enforced, assuming anyone actually tries to bring more than that. :unsure:


it will be interesting. They may be serious about enforcing the policy. They are issuing digital scales to conductors. They say the APD is going to back up conductors enforcement.


----------



## Hal (Aug 7, 2015)

Hal said:


> crescent2 said:
> 
> 
> > It will be interesting to see how well or consistently it is enforced, assuming anyone actually tries to bring more than that. :unsure:


They will have to back up crew against passenger complaints if it is to work.


----------



## NorthShore (Aug 8, 2015)

So, what I've learned from reading through this entire thread is that the third (obviously oversized) bag I carried aboard on my overnight, long distance round trip to visit New York was Amtrak illegal. Why? Safety concerns, of course!

Because a quirky, eccentric entertainment oriented chap wearing a pork pie hat (and looking just a tad like Buster Keaton) who holds a big bright fuchsia colored sack containing two small pillows (one for the neck/head, one for the back); a lightweight blanket (which makes his overnight in coach a little less uncomfortable); a paper bag with a deli sandwich lunch, two twenty ounce bottles of Pepsi, and a pair of loafers that are more comfortable to slip on and walk about the train surely make him a likely surreptitious terrorist. This, despite it all getting quickly unpacked and set easily upon/at his seat once aboard, for all to clearly see.

However, come October 1, it will be perfectly acceptable for said bag to come aboard, and I will no longer be in violation of policy, despite the outside possibility of exploding pillows contained therein, which will (naturally) release feathers all about the train; tickling every last passenger to death.

After all, as far as Amtrak is concerned, THAT will totally be worth the extra twenty bucks!


----------



## Peter KG6LSE (Aug 9, 2015)

Il bet with in a week there will be a ADA violation ...

The Staff on the train are already in some cases over worked . The last thing they need is more to enforce with so many laws.

Does the APD and staff KNOW the ADA. From my few encounters they are as educated as a random person on the street.

I expect amtrak with its ADA station problems, to make up for it with really good staff.

Often good staff can mitigate some of the issues..


----------



## OlympianHiawatha (Aug 9, 2015)

I never have been able to figure out why people when they travel, especially on holiday, have to bring their entire household inventory with them. My rule of travel is I take only what I can carry on my own and ideally as the trip unfolds, the weight and volume of the take along stuff diminishes as well.

Therefore I find the policy to be _*VERY*_ fair and reasonable and hopefully it will mean more room for everyone in the carry on storage areas and less stumbling over grips and other stuff (not counting folks) hanging in the aisles.


----------



## Devil's Advocate (Aug 9, 2015)

You know who doesn't only take what they can carry? Grandmothers. Lets teach 'em a lesson they'll never forget!

[/s]


----------



## AmtrakBlue (Aug 9, 2015)

Devil's Advocate said:


> You know who doesn't only take what they can carry? Grandmothers. Lets teach 'em a lesson they'll never forget!
> 
> [/s]


Hey, I resemble that remark.


----------



## Thirdrail7 (Aug 9, 2015)

I somehow doubt that many crew members are really going to push this once the passengers are on board unless

a) it is particularly egregious,

b) management is lurking

or

c) the passengers are transferring.


----------



## Anderson (Aug 10, 2015)

Thirdrail7 said:


> I somehow doubt that many crew members are really going to push this once the passengers are on board unless
> 
> a) it is particularly egregious,
> 
> ...


You raise a good point on "C"...albeit not quite how I think you meant it. I fully expect this to turn into a disaster in Chicago; in particular, I don't think someone boarding in Los Angeles is going to be thrilled at the idea of being slapped with a baggage fee two days into their trip. Add in ADA stuff (not to mention Chicago's "different" [security, anyone?] and occasionally out-of-policy [Metropolitan Lounge comes to mind] practices which make me occasionally ponder patronizing Metra for that last chunk of a trip) and that's actually going to be a problem.

To lay out a situation, let's assume you have an occasional traveler (a twice-a-year cross-country-ish LD rider). They don't take Amtrak a ton, but they do take it to visit the relatives. Well, they board in Denver heading for Washington. Nobody bothers to hit them with the baggage fee or press them to check anything (and let's assume that the "extra" bag is a small one of Christmas presents, or that they acquire a snack bag as an extra "bag" in Chicago). They get to Chicago and get told to either check one of their bags to DC or pony up $20 halfway through their trip.

For an uninitiated traveler, that is just obnoxious. For a loosely-informed but reasonably seasoned Amtrak traveler, if this happens in Chicago then this is _yet another_ bit of Chicago's insanity and if the traveler has seen Chicago employees make up a policy on the spot before their next question is likely to imply that the employee is looking to pocket $20. They'd be wrong, but given Chicago's reputation I wouldn't be surprised.

And of course, I have to slide around and ask for a definition of "bag" (e.g. does a plastic bag with a pack of jerky in it clipped to my backpack count as a separate bag?)...something which I would not be surprised to see every employee _outside_ of Chicago come up with one definition and Chicago come up with another.

For a short version, if Amtrak is going to do this then there _probably_ needs to be a sort of "statute of limitations" on hitting someone with it (e.g. if you're not dinged either at your boarding station or on the first reserved Amtrak train of your trip then you're not going to get hit on the last leg of it) or something else to avoid this turning into a case where you have two _de facto_ baggage policies depending on whether you pass through Chicago or not.

As to the issue that Thirdrail raised directly...

A) is fair enough;

B) and C) are a problem from the standpoint of inconsistency. The issue isn't so much if 5-10% of folks "get away with" an extra bag...it is if 90% do and getting caught is a rarity (basically...think the speed limit on many interstates).


----------



## Thirdrail7 (Aug 10, 2015)

How you phrased is how I meant it Anderson. If you know a passenger is transferring (which raises the chances that some other crew will charge them,) you'll nip it in the bud first. This keeps you from being taken to task when the passenger states "the other crew didn't charge me."

Another factor is the rapport some crew members have with each other. If you know the next crew is not going to say anything, then you won't either.

The bottom line is things will boil down to consistency and unfortunately, interpretation. The enforcement guide that was printed gave out pretty specific examples of what is a bag, cooler, carry on, etc. However, there is always that person that sees things literally. There is always that person that sees things figuratively.

You can't write a rule for every single eventuality. Well, you can but the rule book would be as thick as a circa 80's Webster Dictionary. :giggle:


----------



## AmtrakLKL (Aug 10, 2015)

Thirdrail7 said:


> You can't write a rule for every single eventuality. Well, you can but the rule book would be as thick as a circa 80's Webster Dictionary. :giggle:


True, but railroads come about as close as possible to having a rule for every situation and when something not covered happens you can bet a new rule will be written post haste. If you look in my grip of required documents you will find several circa 80's sized Webster Dictionaries.


----------



## fillyjonk (Aug 10, 2015)

I'm thinking now for "long" trips (Christmas break), I'm gonna have to drive the extra hour and leave out of Longview (which checks baggage) rather than Mineola (which does not). Or ship some of my clothes to the place I'm gonna be ahead of time. Bummer.

Maybe it's time to get a Kindle or similar so I don't cart books with me on the trip.

I don't even know how heavy my typical carry-on bags are. All I know is I take the "permitted" two, plus a purse, and I can lift them without troubles. But I'm pretty strong and I could see my suitcase reaching 50 lbs., especially with winter clothing in there....I wonder how strictly it will be applied; will there be a scale and if you're at 52 lbs. you have to open up and take some stuff out, or will it just be the people doing as I once saw some people doing, wheeling a filled tall trashcan on to the train using a dolly, who get smacked with the fee/requirement they take stuff out?


----------



## NorthShore (Aug 10, 2015)

Before I boarded a VIA train from Toronto to Montreal (by way - see what I did there - of Ottawa) last year, all passengers with luggage were required to have bags weighed. Since I was within weight, but had three bags to carry aboard, I was offered an option of either checking one of my pieces (on tomorrow's direct train) for free and picking it up at Gare Central or paying an extra fee to have it tagged as extra baggage and carry it aboard. Since the window of pickup for packages in Montreal was so narrow the next day, I shelled out the extra fare with resignation. (Almost as much as my ticket, itself.)

This is, ultimately, the only way in which I can see the new policy being effectively enforced, with consistency and fairness.

Otherwise, I really think it is a matter of why not leave well enough alone.


----------



## jis (Aug 10, 2015)

NorthShore, that makes eminent sense to me. Which probably indicates that this is not something that will happen on Amtrak. Cynical? Moi?


----------



## Peter KG6LSE (Aug 10, 2015)

perhaps Men should bring back the murse . Ummm man-purse... Ummm satchel .


----------



## VentureForth (Aug 12, 2015)

NorthShore said:


> Before I boarded a VIA train from Toronto to Montreal (by way - see what I did there - of Ottawa) last year, all passengers with luggage were required to have bags weighed. Since I was within weight, but had three bags to carry aboard, I was offered an option of either checking one of my pieces (on tomorrow's direct train) for free and picking it up at Gare Central or paying an extra fee to have it tagged as extra baggage and carry it aboard. Since the window of pickup for packages in Montreal was so narrow the next day, I shelled out the extra fare with resignation. (Almost as much as my ticket, itself.)
> 
> This is, ultimately, the only way in which I can see the new policy being effectively enforced, with consistency and fairness.
> 
> Otherwise, I really think it is a matter of why not leave well enough alone.


This, on the other hand, is why weight shouldn't be a issue. If NS was carrying all his own luggage, why penalize him? Why make it free to encumber resources later?



jis said:


> NorthShore, that makes eminent sense to me. Which probably indicates that this is not something that will happen on Amtrak. Cynical? Moi?


To which I say, this DOESN'T make sense to me, which is why Amtrak probably WILL do it.


----------



## Bob Dylan (Aug 12, 2015)

Peter KG6LSE said:


> perhaps Men should bring back the murse . Ummm man-purse... Ummm satchel .


Excellent point Peter!
A daypack is a man's version of a purse,so it shouldn't count.

Also, since Amtrak allows carry on Food and drink, coolers and food bags shouldn't count in the carry on allowance either,especially on trains with No food service like the Hiawathas,theEmpire Service Trains NYP-ALB! (and now the Star!) YMMV


----------



## rrdude (Aug 12, 2015)

jimhudson said:


> Peter KG6LSE said:
> 
> 
> > perhaps Men should bring back the murse . Ummm man-purse... Ummm satchel .
> ...


Well, for probably the last 7 or 8 years, ever since I swapped out my "roller-board" style suitcase for an LL Bean "backpack" style suitcase, (Hands are always fee this way!) I have never, ever, not once, while boarding an aircraft, (United, Continental, Delta, SWA) had my LL Bean backpack "count" as a carry on. I've boarded, in fact most times, with laptop bag, small duffell bag, and bag of food and/or bag of recent purchases (made in airport) and wearing backpack. I think the "wearing" is the operative word, as the gate agents typically don't "see" the bag being pulled/pushed, or in your hands.

Hey, it's worked out GREAT for me. What works for you?

Personally, I don't have any problem with the new luggage rules/enforcement. But I think the "enforcement" will be the issue.

There will be bumps in the early staging, no doubt, but seeing how much revenue it can bring in, vs. the small loss of passengers/goodwill, it's a no-brainer IMHO.


----------



## Thirdrail7 (Aug 12, 2015)

I just don't see this generating that much revenue on trains without baggage cars. I think a lot of people will just carry lighter loads, which is also a win.


----------



## Alice (Aug 12, 2015)

jimhudson said:


> Peter KG6LSE said:
> 
> 
> > perhaps Men should bring back the murse . Ummm man-purse... Ummm satchel .
> ...


Well, If they start counting daypacks, camera bags, man-purses, etc., wear your jacket over the offending item until you are settled in. If they start counting daypacks but not camera bags (as an example), then obtain a large camera bag for your small camera, which you put in your pocket. This is one reason counting small items carried personally seems so silly.


----------



## jis (Aug 12, 2015)

These are all well known issues and techniques in airline travel. they will be no different here. Multitude of really small pieces will be overlooked (at the discretion of the enforcer) just like they are in air travel.


----------



## Braniff747SP (Aug 12, 2015)

Actual enforcement will be difficult and, I predict, fairly lax. One can't overlook the deterrence value, however, of such a policy.


----------



## Ryan (Aug 12, 2015)

Deterrence both good and bad. A friend of mine was dating a guy that needed a portable dialysis machine that wasn't overly large, but weighed 75 pounds. He was perfectly capable of handling it himself, but never wanted to take the train out of fear of being denied boarding for a device that only he was going to handle.


----------



## Kat314159 (Aug 12, 2015)

Maybe this will improve the boarding experience at my home terminal. I'd think that if this wasn't your first trip out of St. Louis you'd contain yourself to less than Carry On allowance/check luggage for the TE. I just don't get why you'd subject yourself to going up, over, and down(escalator/stairs/elevator) to the platform overloaded with bags.


----------



## neroden (Aug 13, 2015)

Given that the policy as written is an illegal ADA violation, I really hope the conductors are trained to understand what the ADA *actually* requires. "This bag is needed to accomodate my disability" should cause conductors to apologize and shut up.

We'll see.


----------



## Peter KG6LSE (Aug 13, 2015)

you would think 60 mass would have there legal team check every word they print.

* sigh*

Neroden.....

I feel bad for the conductors . they have to learn the laws that are paramount to trains . Its not fair IMO to have them to be Civil rights experts too. . they have enough to do...

We need train cheifs again . some kinda Grand Poo-bah that has non tech but equle powers as the conductor.


----------



## Devil's Advocate (Aug 14, 2015)

neroden said:


> "This bag is needed to accomodate my disability" should cause conductors to apologize and shut up.


That sounds like an easy and painless way for virtually anyone to abuse the rules.


----------



## zephyr17 (Aug 14, 2015)

Devil's Advocate said:


> neroden said:
> 
> 
> > "This bag is needed to accomodate my disability" should cause conductors to apologize and shut up.
> ...


CPAPs and oxygen generators and portable medical devices generally are not counted toward carry-on limits on the airlines. TSA and gate agents know that. No reason why Amtrak personnel shouldn't. They are at least as bright as the average TSA agent.


----------



## PaulM (Aug 14, 2015)

> ... especially if Amtrak can ever figure out trainside checked baggage service and carry-on or roll-on bicycle service.


Interestingly enough, Amtrak has figured out train side checked baggage at MTP, FMD, and NEW, and carry-on or roll-on bicycle service on Illinois, North Carolina, California, Oregon, and Washington trains, and on at least one Michigan train.

But regarding bikes, I assumed you are wondering whether Amtrak will ever figure out how to use the bike racks in the new baggage cars for anything other than a hat rack.


----------



## Thirdrail7 (Aug 14, 2015)

PaulM said:


> > ... especially if Amtrak can ever figure out trainside checked baggage service and carry-on or roll-on bicycle service.
> 
> 
> Interestingly enough, Amtrak has figured out train side checked baggage at MTP, FMD, and NEW, and carry-on or roll-on bicycle service on Illinois, North Carolina, California, Oregon, and Washington trains, and on at least one Michigan train.
> ...



In addition, the Heartland Flyer is preparing to to carry bikes. As for the new bike racks, I guess they must have figured something out since they are offering aSpecial Walk-up Bike service on select Regionals to Richmond VA next month.

So, it is working its way forward. If you've followed the Viewliner II thread, you'd know there are complications in the is area. Currently, only a handful of the bags have the appropriate mod to carry the bikes.


----------



## OlympianHiawatha (Aug 14, 2015)

I am curious where the bikes will go on the _*Heartland Flyer*_ as it currently carries no Coach-Bag. I guess either they will modify the consist to include one or figure a way to hoist them into the NPCU (but I have no idea how large the baggage cavity is on that).

But however it works out it is a great idea. Now I can day trip to FTW and expand my area of wandering.


----------



## Devil's Advocate (Aug 15, 2015)

It's too bad they can't figure out how to make the HF useful for visiting OKC in addition to FTW. I'd like to see the Spurs take on the Thunder while we're both legitimate contenders but none of the options for getting there is very appealing. I-35 is heavily congested and extremely boring, the small town speeding taxes are in the stratosphere, and inviting the TSA into my life for a trip that short feels ridiculous. It would be nice to have another option if they can ever figure it out.


----------



## jis (Aug 15, 2015)

Devil's Advocate said:


> It's too bad they can't figure out how to make the HF useful for visiting OKC in addition to FTW. I'd like to see the Spurs take on the Thunder but none of the options for getting there is very appealing. I-35 is extremely boring and heavily congested, the Podunk speeding tax is in the stratosphere, and inviting the TSA into my life for a trip that short feels ridiculous. It would be nice to have another option if they can ever figure it out.


As they used to say once upon a time "Go Greyhound and leave the driving to us"?


----------



## BCL (Aug 15, 2015)

OlympianHiawatha said:


> I am curious where the bikes will go on the _*Heartland Flyer*_ as it currently carries no Coach-Bag. I guess either they will modify the consist to include one or figure a way to hoist them into the NPCU (but I have no idea how large the baggage cavity is on that).
> 
> But however it works out it is a great idea. Now I can day trip to FTW and expand my area of wandering.


The following says that they're apparently going to set aside enough space to 12 bikes and reservations are needed. The video gets cut off before the reporter finishes though.

http://www.kten.com/category/226290/video-landing-page?clipId=11762714&autostart=true

http://www.ardmoreite.com/article/20150812/NEWS/150819942

This shows a Superliner that was modified for vertical bike racks. Maybe that's what they've done?

http://www.vabike.org/bike-test-amtrak-capitol-limited/


----------



## CHamilton (Oct 1, 2015)

There were lengthy (and scripted) announcements this morning in Seattle's King Street Station about the new baggage rules. The funniest line was "if you can't lift it over your head, it's too heavy." I didn't see much change in actual operations, though.


----------



## CHamilton (Oct 1, 2015)

Yes, Amtrak is now charging a bag fee, but here's why you shouldn't freak out about it


----------



## alan_s (Oct 1, 2015)

From the topic title I expected to find a problem. Then I read this:



> Amtrak will begin charging at stations and onboard trains for excess carry on bags effective October 1. The carry on bag policy is two small personal items measuring 14x11x7 and under 25lbs each and two carry on items measuring 28x22x15 and under 50 pounds.


I can't imagine needing that much luggage unless I was moving house. This is my typical 'round the world' baggage; the second bag is only for long trips:







How do I make pictures smaller?


----------



## Train2104 (Oct 1, 2015)

CHamilton said:


> There were lengthy (and scripted) announcements this morning in Seattle's King Street Station about the new baggage rules. The funniest line was "if you can't lift it over your head, it's too heavy." I didn't see much change in actual operations, though.


The conductor's announcement on 43 (27) about opening the cafe car included a long announcement about the new baggage rules.


----------



## Rail Freak (Oct 2, 2015)

If anyone experiences any new restrictions with sleeper carry on luggage, please post! I'm flying out to ABQ for a trip , (Oct 22nd) ABQ-LAX-SAS-CHI-WAS-STP, & would really prefer to take one 33" Duffle ,opposed to two 27" bags!

Thanx

RF


----------



## willem (Oct 2, 2015)

That's the problem I see with the new policy. I can easily handle one large (32 inch) bag, but would have much more trouble with two smaller bags. Total weight would be under 50 pounds in either case.


----------



## neroden (Oct 2, 2015)

CHamilton said:


> There were lengthy (and scripted) announcements this morning in Seattle's King Street Station about the new baggage rules. The funniest line was "if you can't lift it over your head, it's too heavy." I didn't see much change in actual operations, though.


Ha. Good line.


----------



## NW cannonball (Oct 3, 2015)

"Tempest in a tea pot" Yeah.

In all my time riding Amtrak (mostly west LD trains, but some NE and Silvers)

I've seen very very few people with carry-on baggage that exceeds the newly enforced rules.

"what? me worry?"

A never-ever-riding-Amtrak friend posted me this "news" - with a "neener-neener-neener" note attached.

Even with the loose rules enforced, Amtrak carry-on is generous by far, compared to all other transport modes.

(way off-topic but - back in 1984 we rode "der Blaue Enzian" Muenchen-Wien with a couple carrying TWELVE big cases carryon, spilled into the narrow aisles. They shared their sausages and onions, nobody (not even the surly German in our compartment) complained. So what's the problem? You ride the train, you meet strange people -- rarely indeed is there a significant problem -- I just don't get it)

There's some political or sociological problem here that I just dont get. Yeah, enforce the rules, but -- something's wrong here, don;t know what


----------



## jebr (Oct 3, 2015)

Just got this in my email box this morning. Have a trip coming up in a few days.


----------



## fillyjonk (Oct 3, 2015)

1. I vaguely remember, years and years ago, someone at the BNL Amtrak station (this was the little old station, not the new multimodal) being told their bag was too heavy (I think it was one they were trying to check) and to reduce the amount of stuff. (The person threw a hissy. It WAS a very large bag).

2. I once saw a couple get on the Texas Eagle carrying a tall (like 3 1/2 foot) plastic garbage can full of stuff. Took both of them to lift it on and I wonder where they managed to stow it.

A relative of mine called me up claiming the new policy was "Two bags, only 25 lbs each" which made me growl and go I WILL PAY THE CHARGE THEN. I check online and come to find that this person was wrong - the 25 pound thing would be like for a purse or laptop. So I think I'm still good though I suspect my suitcase approaches 50 pounds on the longer trips. (I can still lift it, not sure I could lift it over my head though! But I have a bum shoulder, so....)


----------



## JayPea (Oct 3, 2015)

I never carry on anywhere near the allowed limit. But I have seen people carry on enough luggage to service a good sized Army platoon.


----------



## PVD (Oct 3, 2015)

I think that when we all first saw this, we dwelled on all the possible negative implications, the difficulty in implementing, or how a tiny minority might be negatively impacted, but the more I think about it, the baggage limits are pretty reasonable for most people, and since they (unlike most airlines) are not charging for a reasonable amount of stuff, it doesn't seem that bad. If you try to write a policy that doesn't affect anybody at some point, why even have one. You write rules for the vast majority, have reasonable accommodations for those that need it like disabled, and the very small group left over will just have to suck it up. It's a passenger train, not a moving van. Enough already with the ridiculous sense of entitlement that some people have.


----------



## Rail Freak (Oct 3, 2015)

PVD said:


> I think that when we all first saw this, we dwelled on all the possible negative implications, the difficulty in implementing, or how a tiny minority might be negatively impacted, but the more I think about it, the baggage limits are pretty reasonable for most people, and since they (unlike most airlines) are not charging for a reasonable amount of stuff, it doesn't seem that bad. If you try to write a policy that doesn't affect anybody at some point, why even have one. You write rules for the vast majority, have reasonable accommodations for those that need it like disabled, and the very small group left over will just have to suck it up. It's a passenger train, not a moving van. Enough already with the ridiculous sense of entitlement that some people have.


I understand your point but, I want to take a 33" duffle, which I could take to my roomette. Now,I'll be forced to take 2 pieces of luggage that will take up room in the down stairs rack plus my room.


----------



## PVD (Oct 3, 2015)

And that was one of the reasonable points that came up, people like you and myself who use a sleeper, as long as we aren't bothering anyone else to move the bag, or putting in a place where it is a safety hazard, leave us alone. The sleepers are not like the rest of Amtrak, particularly the Suprerliners which have a pretty decent sizes luggage rack.Even airlines that make lots of money charging for bags, have very relaxed rules for premium fare or elite status passengers. And in many cases paid credit card holders get a free bag also.


----------



## Sauve850 (Oct 3, 2015)

I agree with the policy. I doubt anyone will get after you with the 33 in duffle. Could also buy one a just a little smaller? Think those of us in sleepers wont have much of an issue. I wont anyway because I couldn't possibly deal with that many bags or that much weight.


----------



## TylerP42 (Oct 3, 2015)

I saw a lot of training materials and packets on the Lake Shore Limited this morning.

I was attempting to get a picture but I got a dirty look from a few people so I ended up not getting a photo.


----------



## jebr (Oct 3, 2015)

PVD said:


> And that was one of the reasonable points that came up, people like you and myself who use a sleeper, as long as we aren't bothering anyone else to move the bag, or putting in a place where it is a safety hazard, leave us alone. The sleepers are not like the rest of Amtrak, particularly the Suprerliners which have a pretty decent sizes luggage rack.Even airlines that make lots of money charging for bags, have very relaxed rules for premium fare or elite status passengers. And in many cases paid credit card holders get a free bag also.


Why are sleepers not like "the rest of Amtrak?" Simply because the space is a bit bigger? For the number of items, it seems difficult for a person to carry on more items in one trip safely than what the current allotment is. If someone is making more than one trip on to try and carry on their luggage, or is taking longer than normal to board because they're trying to carry on a fifth bag, this will increase the dwell time at many stations (particularly unstaffed ones, where the dwell time is very short.) Weight has to be set somewhere, not only for Amtrak staff but potentially for some sort of liability should it fall out of the overhead baggage rack or something. Size I could see being a bit lenient on, but storage space, especially in the Viewliner roomettes, is at a premium, and I'm not sure how big a bag can get before it won't fit in the overhead bin.

The only thing I could see that is mitigated is the dwell time at some longer station stops, but almost all of those already have checked baggage, and the only thing that really helps is the item count. I don't see it being practical to write specific rules for sleepers that is more lenient than the current rules because of that.


----------



## Train2104 (Oct 3, 2015)

PVD said:


> I think that when we all first saw this, we dwelled on all the possible negative implications, the difficulty in implementing, or how a tiny minority might be negatively impacted, but the more I think about it, the baggage limits are pretty reasonable for most people, and since they (unlike most airlines) are not charging for a reasonable amount of stuff, it doesn't seem that bad. If you try to write a policy that doesn't affect anybody at some point, why even have one. You write rules for the vast majority, have reasonable accommodations for those that need it like disabled, and the very small group left over will just have to suck it up. It's a passenger train, not a moving van. Enough already with the ridiculous sense of entitlement that some people have.


The issue is for people boarding at stations without checked baggage, whose bags that fit within the checked limits and don't fit in the carry on limits.

At stations with checked baggage, or for luggage beyond the checked size limits, the fee should definitely be imposed. Maybe even raised.


----------



## PVD (Oct 4, 2015)

Which is why I pointed out Superliners specifically, and mentioned not needing assistance. Yes, sleeper passengers are different, they pay more. Whether or not they pay in proportion to costs can be debated, but like it or not in our society people that pay more get more.


----------



## Ryan (Oct 4, 2015)

That, quite frankly, is bullsh-t. Having the money to pay for a sleeper doesn't make you a superman that can somehow magically carry more bags than the poor peons back in coach. Yes, you get more - a private room, a bed, meals. You don't get to just break the rules, no matter how special it may make you feel being able to pay that extra bit of cash.

Airlines are a poor example, because the limits on baggage are so low.


----------



## niemi24s (Oct 4, 2015)

I'm with Ryan 101%. All this whining and griping about what's already an overly generous baggage policy is absurd. This is Amtrak - not Allied Van Lines - fer pity sake! Sheesh!!


----------



## jis (Oct 4, 2015)

Ryan said:


> That, quite frankly, is bullsh-t. Having the money to pay for a sleeper doesn't make you a superman that can somehow magically carry more bags than the poor peons back in coach. Yes, you get more - a private room, a bed, meals. You don't get to just break the rules, no matter how special it may make you feel being able to pay that extra bit of cash.
> 
> Airlines are a poor example, because the limits on baggage are so low.


Ryan is right.

Unfortunately too many things are getting conflated in this discussion. So let us split things up logically and discuss it. I will use United as an example airline since it covers the world, and is not terribly unsimilar to most other US based airlines. There are some well known exceptions though.

1. Checked baggage: United does give extra free allowance on checked baggage, both in weight and number of pieces, based on class of travel booked and elite status. For example, because of my Platinum Elite status I am allowed upto three checked bags of upto 70lb each free of charge irrespective of class of travel. _But note, that this is not the subject of this thread._

For someone traveling using a low fare, with no status and no Explorer or equivalent or better affinity credit card, you get to pay even for the first checked bag.

2. Carry-on bags: AFAICT the same two bag rule applies to everyone irrespective of class of travel or elite status. You are allowed to book an additional seat to carry an extra bulky piece on board occupying a seat apparently, but I have never seen anyone actually do that. I suppose that might be a way to transport your Cello safely. _Note that this is the subject of this thread._

_Also note that other than booking an additional seat no excess carry-on baggage is allowed. _So there is no question of having an excess carry-on charge other than of course booking an additional seat.

3. Gate check: More often than not you don't get charged for a gate checked bag, but technically you could be if it is beyond your free checked bag allowance. You never get charged for a gate checked bag on a Regional flight AFAICT.

A small comment about "breaking the rules", I think it is a legitimate thing to discuss what the rules should be, without being blamed of "breaking the rules". However, if the rules are in place such as they are, I agree you should not get to arbitrarily break them just because you think you are special for whatever reason.

I am sure there are other models used by other airlines and it might we worthwhile bringing those up if they are relevant to this discussion. I would be the last one to claim that what United does is ideal in any way shape or for. It is just an illustrative example.


----------



## Bob Dylan (Oct 4, 2015)

Ditto on Ryan's points! Amtrak is not Mayflower Moving Company!


----------



## neroden (Oct 4, 2015)

In the past I've been forced to carry on slightly more than the new official baggage limits (by, like, one small bag) due to unpleasant amounts of medically-required stuff. Nobody's ever bothered me.

On the other hand, I watched someone try to bring two tandem strollers on board along with so many bags I couldn't count them. (And no, she didn't actually have four babies to go with the strollers.) Some people were really taking waaaay too much. And they were bizarrely resistant to checking the excesses, despite travelling between checked-luggage stations.

Amtrak's new policy is mostly fine. It needs a blanket ADA accomodation rule (in practice, I hope this is what will happen anyway). And Amtrak needs to provide more checked luggage service, because people will use it.


----------



## Hal (Oct 4, 2015)

neroden said:


> Amtrak's new policy is mostly fine. It needs a blanket ADA accomodation rule (in practice, I hope this is what will happen anyway). And Amtrak needs to provide more checked luggage service, because people will use it.


They will allow disabled passengers to carry more onboard.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk


----------



## PVD (Oct 4, 2015)

I do not mean to imply sleeper passengers or for that matter elite or first class airline passengers are in any way superior. Far from true.But the reality in the transportation business is that people who pay more get more. Even JetBlue which has been a first bag free airline since its inception now charges extra or allows you to buy a higher priced coach ticket that includes the bag. The sleeper difference is that the bags are not in the aisles, they are not taking up a seat that you might want to sit in, and and generally if you clutter up space, it's the space you occupy. I do not believe that any passenger should be able to have luggage that creates a safety or delay issue.


----------



## jebr (Oct 4, 2015)

Then I'll ask: how do you board with more than the allotted carry-on luggage amount without creating a safety or delay issue? Especially considering that on many rural platforms a step stool is required, on-board staff basically has to help if luggage is to be loaded efficiently.

I'm fine if sleeper passengers get additional checked baggage allotments, but I see it extremely unlikely where a passenger can bring more luggage than what the policy currently allows without causing a safety or delay issue (or requiring assistance to get it on-board, especially in one trip.) VIA Rail has a lot lower carry-on luggage allotments than Amtrak does, and it's actually less for sleepers (as there's little to no overhead storage space in the sleepers on VIA.) It's similar with Superliners on Amtrak; the only storage area is in the rack downstairs (or perhaps in the bedrooms; I don't take them enough to know for sure) but I can imagine it getting full if everyone brings on as much luggage as is allowed in the allotment. Coach passengers have the overhead storage area to help store additional luggage; Superliner roomettes (and possibly bedrooms) do not have that.

Not to mention that would be incredibly difficult to consistently enforce. Better to have a broad rule for everyone and stick to it rather than have little exemptions here and there that people will complain about if they don't meet even if they think they should be able to meet it.


----------



## Ispolkom (Oct 4, 2015)

PVD said:


> generally if you clutter up space, it's the space you occupy.


In my experience, sleeper passenger excess carry-on luggage clutters up the lower vestibule of Superline trains, when the limited space in the luggage rack is insufficient, or clutters up the shower compartment on Viewliner sleeping cars. The former can be a safety hazard, the latter is an irritation.


----------



## willem (Oct 4, 2015)

jebr said:


> Then I'll ask: how do you board with more than the allotted carry-on luggage amount without creating a safety or delay issue?


By carrying one 33 inch bag rather than two 28 inch bags.


----------



## jebr (Oct 4, 2015)

willem said:


> jebr said:
> 
> 
> > Then I'll ask: how do you board with more than the allotted carry-on luggage amount without creating a safety or delay issue?
> ...


That's larger, not more. Much of the argument was allowing extra bags for first class passengers. I don't know of too many places that allow even first-class passengers to bring on (or check) larger than normal bags, just usually allow one or two free bags instead of paying for them.

If sleepers truly allow for larger bags than coach does, then yes, the policy should be amended. There may be room in a bedroom for a larger bag against the wall, especially if you're the only one in it. However, it'd have to be able to be out of the way for liability reasons (for example, if there's an evacuation needed there can't be luggage blocking the door or pathway to get out of your bedroom.) A roomette doesn't really have any more room than a coach seat for storage, and coach and roomettes both have the same luggage rack downstairs on Superliners.

I really can't imagine that coach requires smaller bags than sleepers do, though. I trust (perhaps naively) that Amtrak has set the carry-on policy at an amount that can fit in the proper storage areas, and it's set at the limit of what that can be. Proof otherwise would be nice, especially if that proof shows that coach can only handle the current baggage size, but rooms can hold more safely.


----------



## PVD (Oct 5, 2015)

Most of the previous posters notion that a single reasonable set of rules is easier to implemement and enforce is probably correct. That points out one of things we have all agreed on about Amtrak, the inconsistencies. Roomettes don't get larger if 2 people are booked in them. As a single traveler the upper bunk in a viewliner makes a great luggage rack, with 2 in the room, if both passengers brought their allowance, it might be very difficult to stow safely no matter what. The over the hall stow space is ok, but is not large On a SL sleeper the racks downstairs are pretty generous, but again 2 people in the roomettes can generate twice as much baggage in the same occupied room. If 4 people travelled day mode in a bedroom or family bedroom, the amount of luggage could be ridiculous. Just as a note, I am trying to point out things about the system, not what affects me personally as it might appear. Since all of my travel is major station to major station, with checked baggage service available I will probably never be face with a problem because of this.


----------



## mjaynes288 (Oct 5, 2015)

I support this new rule. Hopefully it will avoid trips like my first overnight. I was traveling with my service dog. I made the mistake of calling to book. They insisted I use the transfer seat. When I got on the train at 11 pm there was a huge stack of baggage in the accessible area. My dog had less space than at a normal seat. People came in and out all night moving the stack. My service dog was almost stepped on too many times to count. I was also worried about the possibility of an avalanche.


----------



## PVD (Oct 5, 2015)

Rules or not, anyone who is inconsiderate to a legit service dog is a piece of garbage. I'm pretty sure all of us on this board agree on that!


----------



## Bob Dylan (Oct 5, 2015)

Ditto on the POS that dis the Handicapped and their service animals!


----------



## mjaynes288 (Oct 6, 2015)

No one was intentionally inconsiderate. It was a full train on Jan 2 so people were traveling with Christmas presents. The pile was there before I got on. The lights were dimmed because it was night. The reading spotlights were off and I did not know they existed. People do not watch where they step. My dog was in a down stay so he was about 6 inches tall and not moving. No one noticed him.


----------



## PVD (Oct 6, 2015)

It's unfortunate anything happened, but I am glad to hear it was not deliberate. This being a discussion board, people throw stuff up from all directions (including myself), sometimes just to get a reaction, but I think everyone's sense of decency would have been offended by the thought of deliberate meanness or indifference.


----------



## Rail Freak (Oct 15, 2015)

Has anyone noticed if sleeper pax are still bringing larger bags onboard since Oct. 1st?


----------



## Bob Dylan (Oct 15, 2015)

I've been on Six LD and Corrider Trains in the past 10 Days

(#2/#20/#190/#43/#29/#21) and have seen Lots of Very Large Suitcases and people carrying on more baggage than the new policy allows!

It looks like this will be another of those Amtrak YMMV expierences!

The example shown in PGH of what the Maximum size Suitcase allowed on Amtrak is, was an astoundingly large bag, but the 50 lb. limit is mentioned by signs, the agents in Staffed Stations and by robo e-mails sent out to those with reservations.


----------



## OlympianHiawatha (Oct 15, 2015)

I noticed the other day a Baggage Sizer has shown up on the platform at Norman (OK) for the _*Heartland Flyer*_. It is much more generous than what you see at the airport and even though the _*Flyer *_is a very small train (currently 2 Superliner Coaches) the Conductors have always found places to safely stash copious amount of bags and large items that show up from time to time.


----------



## AmtrakLKL (Oct 15, 2015)

Bob Dylan said:


> I've been on Six LD and Corrider Trains in the past 10 Days
> 
> (#2/#20/#190/#43/#29/#21) and have seen Lots of Very Large Suitcases and people carrying on more baggage than the new policy allows!
> 
> ...


Keep in mind they may have paid $20 for each extra or oversized bag brought onboard.


----------



## jebr (Oct 15, 2015)

I would expect them to be tagged as such, though. The ones I saw on the Builder that were oversized had an orange tag signifying they had paid the fee and a couple of orange stickers were placed on the bag.


----------



## Rail Freak (Oct 15, 2015)

I understand the situation & have no problem paying the extra $20! It is worth the money for my needs!


----------



## Bob Dylan (Oct 15, 2015)

As my old Grandpappy used to say:

"Travel Light and Travel Right!"


----------



## Mystic River Dragon (Oct 16, 2015)

On the Keystone yesterday going north out of PHL (which loses its lovely rural charm as soon as it hits the NEC and gets filled with rude and annoying people, just like the regular regionals), two millenials stashed a couple of huge suitcases in an alcove (they barely fit) and then brought them out after the conductor had gone by and put them on the floor blocking the door.

I had to ask them to move them so I could get out that door to get off at TRE (not all doors open there), and they did it, but grudgingly, because they actually had to stop staring at their phones and do something useful.


----------



## Rail Freak (Oct 17, 2015)

I happened to be going close to the STP location today, so I stopped by. I asked the agent if I paid the $20 fee for my 33" bag in ABQ would they tag my bag so it would be tagged for my trip all the way back to STP? He said that I would charged $20 dollars for every train I boarded, meaning $20 for ABQ, $20 for LAX, $20 for CHI & $20 for WAS????????????


----------



## Thirdrail7 (Oct 17, 2015)

Rail Freak said:


> I happened to be going close to the STP location today, so I stopped by. I asked the agent if I paid the $20 fee for my 33" bag in ABQ would they tag my bag so it would be tagged for my trip all the way back to STP? He said that I would charged $20 dollars for every train I boarded, meaning $20 for ABQ, $20 for LAX, $20 for CHI & $20 for WAS????????????



This is not entirely accurate. The fee is good for a continuous trip provided there aren't any stopovers. Transfers are not considered stopovers unless there is a lapse.

In other words, you would have one charge for your entire trip you listed above unless you decided to hang out in CHI for two days and then continue your trip to STP. Then, you would pay an additional fee from CHI-STP, not CHI-WAS and WAS-STP..


----------



## Rail Freak (Oct 17, 2015)

Thirdrail7 said:


> Rail Freak said:
> 
> 
> > I happened to be going close to the STP location today, so I stopped by. I asked the agent if I paid the $20 fee for my 33" bag in ABQ would they tag my bag so it would be tagged for my trip all the way back to STP? He said that I would charged $20 dollars for every train I boarded, meaning $20 for ABQ, $20 for LAX, $20 for CHI & $20 for WAS????????????
> ...


I'm not doubting you, but where do you get your info?


----------



## OBS (Oct 17, 2015)

Thirdrail7 is correct and no doubt got his information from the same memo I read regarding the implementation of the program...


----------



## Rail Freak (Oct 17, 2015)

OBS said:


> Thirdrail7 is correct and no doubt got his information from the same memo I read regarding the implementation of the program...


How would anyone know that I paid in ABQ ?????


----------



## Thirdrail7 (Oct 17, 2015)

Rail Freak said:


> OBS said:
> 
> 
> > Thirdrail7 is correct and no doubt got his information from the same memo I read regarding the implementation of the program...
> ...



The same way they will know you bought a ticket. If you know you're going to exceed the maximum allowable limit, you can declare it in advance (which is recommended) and the fee will be added to your reservation. When you purchase your reservation, the fee will show up the same way your ticket does. When a conductor scans your ticket, the bag fee will also appear on the manifest.

The same goes for the connecting crew. The fee will follow since it is in your itinerary.


----------



## jebr (Oct 17, 2015)

I believe they also tag the bag with an orange luggage tag indicating the fee has been paid. That is what I saw on the coach luggage rack, anyways, on my trip on the Empire Builder.


----------



## AmtrakLKL (Oct 18, 2015)

To elaborate a bit: the excess baggage charge is collected once per logical trip. A logical trip is basically a collection of segments, in the same reservation, where the connecting time between segments does not exceed 23.5 hours. If the time exceeds 23.5 hours, it considered a stopover which ends the trip. Continuing travel from this point starts another logical trip and triggers collection to the excess baggage charge again.

Passengers boarding/paying at staffed stations should have their bags tagged with orange excess baggage tags. Baggage that has been checked for size/weight and is within the limits is to be labeled with a Baggage Screened sticker.

If a passenger boards at an unstaffed station or is otherwise found onboard with unpaid excess baggage, the conductor is to have the passenger contact 800-USA-RAIL to have the excess baggage charge added to the reservation. If paying by credit card, the passenger will complete the transaction over the phone and the conductor will lift the baggage ticket in the EMD (ticket scanner). Passengers paying cash will have an onboard ticket issued, the receipt of which is proof of payment.

If future conductors have any questions, they can verify payment by checking the excess baggage ticket in the EMD while cash payers have the hand issued receipt. I believe passengers connecting who paid onboard can have an excess bagge tag applied at the next connecting station as well.


----------



## Rail Freak (Oct 18, 2015)

Correct me if I'm wrong, but don't the airlines base their bag measurements on linear inches?


----------



## Ryan (Oct 18, 2015)

Not for carry on sizing, no.


----------



## SarahZ (Oct 18, 2015)

The airlines have baggage sizers, like this, that your bag must fit into.







If you have a hard-sided carry-on, there's no way to force it. Duffels and softer suitcases can be squished to fit the dimensions.

Always remember to include the wheels when measuring, unless you have the type that retract into the suitcase.


----------



## BCL (Oct 18, 2015)

Rail Freak said:


> Correct me if I'm wrong, but don't the airlines base their bag measurements on linear inches?


Only if it's checked in. 62 linear inches seems to be the common standard these days. However, there are some low-cost carriers that limit it to 40 lbs - like Spirit.


----------

