# New No Smoking Policy Coming to the Auto Train



## roadman3313 (Mar 17, 2013)

As taken from Amtrak.com...

"

Auto Train: No Smoking Policy Begins Aboard Auto Train
Effective June 1, 2013To provide a healthier environment on the train for passengers and employees, smoking will not be permitted aboard the Auto Train effective June 1, 2013. Smoking will be prohibited in all areas of the train including the Lounge car, Food Service car and Coach and Sleeping cars.

This policy also prohibits the use of medical marijuana and electronic smoking devices such as electronic cigarettes aboard the train. Contact Amtrak for more information on the Smoking Policy.

Smoking Stop at Florence, SC
Passengers will be permitted to get off the train and smoke in Florence, SC, when the train stops for servicing.
Florence is not an Auto Train station stop, so passengers aboard Trains 52 and 53 cannot board or detrain at this location.
The scheduled smoking stop times at Florence are listed below:
- Northbound Train 52: From approximately 12:30 am until 12:45 am.
- Southbound Train 53: From approximately 11:45 pm until 11:59 pm.
Passengers should remain in the immediate area of the train, ready to reboard immediately upon hearing the sound of the locomotive horn and/or verbal boarding calls from members of the train crew.
Smoking stops may be shortened or eliminated entirely if the train is operating late.
Thank you for traveling with Amtrak. We appreciate your patronage. For more information on the Smoking Policy, visit Amtrak.com, call 1-800-USA-RAIL (1-800-872-7245) or speak with a speak with a station or onboard employee.

Join us on facebook.com/Amtrak. Follow us on twitter.com/Amtrak."

Looks like Amtrak will become a 100% smoke free train system (in theory)... AFAIK anyway... looks like one will have to get up around midnight give or take to get those few puffs in... hopefully this will not result in an increase in smoking in the restrooms or out the doorway windows...


----------



## The Davy Crockett (Mar 17, 2013)

I don't think they mean it this way, but the new policy could be interpreted to mean that until 6/1/13, one can smoke medical marijuana aboard the Auto Train  - in designated smoking areas of course  . Now I've never ridden the Auto Train, but since Amtrak gets federal funds, I somehow highly doubt that this is the case. :huh:

Who writes these things? Communications :blink: ? Whoever does really needs to learn how to write so that they communicate what they are actually trying to say. Take the current (and last year's) #30 service disruption. It causes endless confusuion about which trains are actually impacted. Is it the Saturday or Sunday through the Wednesday or Thursday departures out of Chicago? The notice really could be written more clearly. All it would take is a bit more information.

It really makes me wonder if the writer has been hanging out in the Auto Train smoking lounge and has a contact high. :giggle:


----------



## benjibear (Mar 17, 2013)

The problem is you can write something, have multiple people review it, and somebody still interetes a different way.


----------



## Ryan (Mar 17, 2013)

Does the Auto Train pass through any jurisdictions where MMJ is legal?

Either way, good on Amtrak for the policy change.


----------



## afigg (Mar 17, 2013)

The Davy Crockett said:


> I don't think they mean it this way, but the new policy could be interpreted to mean that until 6/1/13, one can smoke medical marijuana aboard the Auto Train  - in designated smoking areas of course  . Now I've never ridden the Auto Train, but since Amtrak gets federal funds, I somehow highly doubt that this is the case. :huh:


I don't see that interpretation as much of a problem. If someone thinks smoking medical marijuana is currently legal while passing through Virginia, NC, SC, GA, they may be oversampling the product. :huh:

I have to agree that it is difficult to deal with every possible interpretation. Otherwise they end up writing such a long statement that few get all the way through it. Simple: starting on June 1, no more smoking in the AT lounge cars. Amtrak may save on maintenance money on one hand, while on the other hand, the on-board staff will now have to make sure that passengers don't wander off at the smoke stop.


----------



## PaulM (Mar 17, 2013)

... while on the other hand, the on-board staff will now have to make sure that passengers don't wander off at the smoke stop.



afigg said:


> Why?


----------



## The Davy Crockett (Mar 17, 2013)

benjibear said:


> The problem is you can write something, have multiple people review it, and somebody still interetes a different way.


That is the point of a good communications department. They make pretty darn clear exactly what is meant, so as to avoid misunderstandings. If multiple people are reviewing Amtrak's service notifications and alerts, they must all be hanging out in the smoking lounge, because they sometimes seems to be pretty hazy. :wacko:



Another thing important for good communications is to not have hazy spelling in one's writing...


----------



## Nathanael (Mar 17, 2013)

roadman3313 said:


> As taken from Amtrak.com...
> "
> 
> Auto Train: No Smoking Policy Begins Aboard Auto Train
> ...


They didn't SAY this, but I would guess a smoking policy wouldn't be construed to prohibit eating of medical marijuana brownies. ;-) (Federal law would still be a problem... as is the fact that medical marijuana isn't legal in any of the states the Auto Train goes through.)

It presumably doesn't prohibit "the patch" or nicotine gum either. Both of which I strongly encourage to people who are additcted to the cancer sticks; since there's NO secondhand fumes, it's much more sociable. As well as healthier due to the lack of 'tar' (nicotine by itself doesn't cause cancer or emphysema, though it does cause heart attacks).

I am really glad to see the end of smoke within the trains, and I bet the Amtrak janitorial employees are too. Smoke is really nasty to clean up. I suppose nobody thought much about it in the days of coal-burning trains, when there was a whole 'nother sort of smoke to clean up!


----------



## battalion51 (Mar 17, 2013)

People wandering off to grab a smoke is a potential issue on any of the Long Distance trains, Auto Train included. I actually saw someone downstairs in the lounge one time open the window and smoke out the window not ten feet from the smokers lounge. I let the LSA know, and the situation was handled, but people are going to do what they do, even when they have access. I do think it will be interesting to see what sort of ridership is lost, if any, and what they do with the newly vacated space the penalty box opens up.


----------



## afigg (Mar 17, 2013)

PaulM said:


> afigg said:
> 
> 
> > ... while on the other hand, the on-board staff will now have to make sure that passengers don't wander off at the smoke stop.
> ...


Fixed the nested quotes for you. As to why? Because if people wander off from the smoke stop, they end up stuck in Florence SC and Amtrak could be stuck with a car that no one drives away at the destination. Bad enough to have unclaimed luggage at the end destination, really don't want unclaimed cars to pile up.


----------



## chakk (Mar 18, 2013)

The planned "smokers stop" at Florence, SC is a compromise to no smoking at all, which is the case on most international flights that last longer than the ride on the Auto Train. But, I can also see this compromise being withdrawn if smokers litter the Florence platform with cigarette butts. I believe this is the reason that some smoking stops were eliminated on the CZ -- too much littering of the platforms which the local jurisdiction had to pay to clean up.


----------



## Cho Cho Charlie (Mar 18, 2013)

The Davy Crockett said:


> I don't think they mean it this way, but the new policy could be interpreted to mean that until 6/1/13, one can smoke medical marijuana aboard the Auto Train  - in designated smoking areas of course  .


I thought it was pretty obvious that the current (existing) policy remains in full effect until 6/1/13. No where does it say that the current policy ends immediately.


----------



## The Davy Crockett (Mar 18, 2013)

Cho Cho Charlie said:


> The Davy Crockett said:
> 
> 
> > I don't think they mean it this way, but the new policy could be interpreted to mean that until 6/1/13, one can smoke medical marijuana aboard the Auto Train  - in designated smoking areas of course  .
> ...


I was making the point that it is not well written. Funny no one has disagreed with me about the #30 notice. The same confusing notice they posted last year, BTW.


----------



## Shortline (Mar 18, 2013)

Frankly, surprised it took this long. I remember when you could smoke in sleepers, was thinking about that the other night in my roomette-I remember being an 18 YO GI en-route to another base for continued training, and I wanted to take the train from Spokane to Little Rock, instead of flying. Travel officer said I had to have a valid reason. So,I stood there, with wings on my flight suit, looked him straight in the eye, and said "I'm afraid of flying". He got me tickets on the EB an TE, and I went coach. They had stopped smoking in coach by then, but could still smoke in the sleepers. I recall, meanderinng around the train, and ended up in an unused roomette, and had a couple of marlboro's. I cant imagine being in that smal of a room with a cigarette now!


----------



## amarsh (Mar 18, 2013)

Seems silly to me to end having a designated smoking lounge, since Auto Train doesn't have any scheduled stops. And I thought that the Auto Train did have multiple ones that were non-smoking, and it was only just one per each Auto Train that was smoking? Well, just goes to show how anti-smoking groups are selfish, and always try to press for more excessive anti-smoking laws(i.e. New York state, where a law passed prohibiting smoking on open air areas(of all places, even if you're away from the station house doors/windows) of commuter rail platforms a little over a year ago). And that you'd think Amtrak would allow employees upon request to not work cleaning the designated smoking lounges, if they weren't comfortable with(or sensitive to) smoke. I'm sure I'll get major disagreement from some for having this opinion, but don't care.

Also, leads me to another point that too many of the stops on long distance trains that are the designated smoking stops don't always have proper ash urn towers positioned along the platform near where the train usually ultimately stops(and say, they're often at another end of the platform). I noticed when I recently rode the LSL and got off at Albany-Rensselaer to smoke, that there weren't any right near the door I got off to smoke, for whatever weird reason(and to my credit, I field stripped the butt when I was done, and threw it out when I got back on the train).


----------



## MattW (Mar 18, 2013)

amarsh said:


> Seems silly to me to end having a designated smoking lounge, since Auto Train doesn't have any scheduled stops. And I thought that the Auto Train did have multiple ones that were non-smoking, and it was only just one per each Auto Train that was smoking? Well, just goes to show how anti-smoking groups are selfish, and always try to press for more excessive anti-smoking laws(i.e. New York state, where a law passed prohibiting smoking on open air areas(of all places, even if you're away from the station house doors/windows) of commuter rail platforms a little over a year ago). And that you'd think Amtrak would allow employees upon request to not work cleaning the designated smoking lounges, if they weren't comfortable with(or sensitive to) smoke. I'm sure I'll get major disagreement from some for having this opinion, but don't care.
> Also, leads me to another point that too many of the stops on long distance trains that are the designated smoking stops don't always have proper ash urn towers positioned along the platform near where the train usually ultimately stops(and say, they're often at another end of the platform). I noticed when I recently rode the LSL and got off at Albany-Rensselaer to smoke, that there weren't any right near the door I got off to smoke, for whatever weird reason(and to my credit, I field stripped the butt when I was done, and threw it out when I got back on the train).


As far as I know, the Auto Train has only ever had a non-passenger scheduled stop at Florence, SC for a crew change. Any other stops, even if they happen to be in stations are due to other traffic and passengers are not allowed out. Unlike other activities such as photography, smoking only has a deleterious effect on the smoker and nearby people. The argument that it keeps people employed is valid, but you have to realize that those people are only employed in an industry that produces a product that only has deleterious effects. I'm sorry, but a practice that only causes harm, and no good, will not be upheld at least by society, and possibly the courts.


----------



## TimePeace (Mar 18, 2013)

amarsh said:


> Seems silly to me to end having a designated smoking lounge, since Auto Train doesn't have any scheduled stops. And I thought that the Auto Train did have multiple ones that were non-smoking, and it was only just one per each Auto Train that was smoking? Well, just goes to show how anti-smoking groups are selfish, and always try to press for more excessive anti-smoking laws(i.e. New York state, where a law passed prohibiting smoking on open air areas(of all places, even if you're away from the station house doors/windows) of commuter rail platforms a little over a year ago). And that you'd think Amtrak would allow employees upon request to not work cleaning the designated smoking lounges, if they weren't comfortable with(or sensitive to) smoke. I'm sure I'll get major disagreement from some for having this opinion, but don't care.
> Also, leads me to another point that too many of the stops on long distance trains that are the designated smoking stops don't always have proper ash urn towers positioned along the platform near where the train usually ultimately stops(and say, they're often at another end of the platform). I noticed when I recently rode the LSL and got off at Albany-Rensselaer to smoke, that there weren't any right near the door I got off to smoke, for whatever weird reason(and to my credit, I field stripped the butt when I was done, and threw it out when I got back on the train).


Weak. Weak.


----------



## battalion51 (Mar 18, 2013)

I don't think that this was an agenda that was pushed by anti-smoking groups. I think this is Amtrak making a business decision based on their customer base. Take a look at page 30 of the 2012 Performance Improvement Plan of the PRIIA documentation. This isn't a policy that was cobbled together overnight, it was definitely thought through. I would venture to guess as well that if there is a huge issue in Florence with butts on the ground they will install the ash trays on the platform since AT spots up at pretty much the same place every night. Additionally this is a smoke stop for the Meteor and the Palmetto bug, so they would serve six trains. The only real logistical challenge in my mind will be notifying passengers which cars they can step off from to light up. But I think they'll solve that issue pretty quickly.


----------



## AlanB (Mar 18, 2013)

battalion51 said:


> I don't think that this was an agenda that was pushed by anti-smoking groups. I think this is Amtrak making a business decision based on their customer base. Take a look at page 30 of the 2012 Performance Improvement Plan of the PRIIA documentation. This isn't a policy that was cobbled together overnight, it was definitely thought through. I would venture to guess as well that if there is a huge issue in Florence with butts on the ground they will install the ash trays on the platform since AT spots up at pretty much the same place every night. Additionally this is a smoke stop for the Meteor and the Palmetto bug, so they would serve six trains. The only real logistical challenge in my mind will be notifying passengers which cars they can step off from to light up. But I think they'll solve that issue pretty quickly.


I agree, this was more about the mess and complaints from non-smokers who could still smell the smoke in the lounge cars. Non-smokers stuck in the lounge car for dinner didn't like the smell of smoke with their steaks and such.


----------



## afigg (Mar 19, 2013)

battalion51 said:


> I don't think that this was an agenda that was pushed by anti-smoking groups. I think this is Amtrak making a business decision based on their customer base. Take a look at page 30 of the 2012 Performance Improvement Plan of the PRIIA documentation. This isn't a policy that was cobbled together overnight, it was definitely thought through.


The 2012 PIP report is a public document so we can quote from it. Amtrak weighed the issue at length and, as the discussion in the report indicates, decided that the maintenance of the smoking lounge and complaints about the odor from other passengers outweighed keeping the smoking lounge. Proving a smoking stop for the AT is not something that Amtrak is obligated to do.
What the 2012 PIP report said:



> *Eliminate smoking on board*
> Auto Train is the only train in the Amtrak system that allows smoking, and it results in a number of adverse customer impacts. These include the constant challenge of trying to mitigate the smell of cigarette smoke with special filters, which do not fully address the problem. Additionally, smoking is allowed in two of the public lounges, essentially harming the attractiveness of these cars to non-smokers, who represent at least 85% of our customers on this train.
> 
> There are, of course, risks with changing this policy, including the possibility of reduced ridership from smokers who will not use our service if this policy is imposed on them. We note here that a similar argument was made from 1995 forward, when we imposed a restriction on smoking several trains at a time over a 5 year period. Ridership loss was never experienced, in part because if a small percentage of smoking customers might chose an alternative form of transportation, that loss was offset by customers whose experience was greatly improved by the healthier atmosphere.
> ...


Next up for the AT PIP recommendations is probably priority off-loading as that should not be too difficult to implement.


----------



## cirdan (Mar 19, 2013)

The Davy Crockett said:


> Another thing important for good communications is to not have hazy spelling in one's writing...


I work for a big corporation in a marketing-related position and I know of nobody who actually likes to deal with communications.

Jobs like that tend to attract people who live in a cloud of their own and don't really care about the product you're selling or the customer you're selling it to but seem to serve only some internal wooly logic. You give them a perfectly simple and understandable text and they turn it around to make it far more complicated, misleading and outright incorrect, adding in a whole number of points of their own that were neither explicitly nor implicitly part of the original statement, and may even tack on a photo of something totally different. The next thing the customer panics and phones me for clarification and I end out passing on the original text becuase the only one the customer understands. The same effect could have been had much more quickly and with less sweat if I'd been allowed to pass out that text as it was in the first instance.


----------



## Ryan (Mar 19, 2013)

amarsh said:


> Seems silly to me to end having a designated smoking lounge, since Auto Train doesn't have any scheduled stops. And I thought that the Auto Train did have multiple ones that were non-smoking, and it was only just one per each Auto Train that was smoking? Well, just goes to show how anti-smoking groups are selfish, and always try to press for more excessive anti-smoking laws(i.e. New York state, where a law passed prohibiting smoking on open air areas(of all places, even if you're away from the station house doors/windows) of commuter rail platforms a little over a year ago).


Have you ever been on the Auto Train? Seen the smoking lounges? They're foul, and the propensity of smokers to prop the door to the smokebox open (presumeably so they can get some "fresh" air) ended up polluting the whole car.
If "not wanting to get cancer and die" is selfish, than sign me up. You're more than welcome to kill yourself, but I'm not interested in letting you kill me in the process.


----------



## SarahZ (Mar 19, 2013)

I'm sorry if having asthma and allergies makes me "selfish", and I apologize if I don't want to reek of cigarettes after a long trip. I think smokers who don't care about other people's lungs or clothes are selfish.

It's like the "smoking" section in a restaurant. Anyone who thinks the smoke stays in that one area is delusional. It creeps through the ventilation system and escapes when the door is opened.

If we could put similar bans on perfume and Glade plug-ins, I'd be a happy girl.


----------



## cirdan (Mar 19, 2013)

Sorcha said:


> I'm sorry if having asthma and allergies makes me "selfish", and I apologize if I don't want to reek of cigarettes after a long trip. I think smokers who don't care about other people's lungs or clothes are selfish.
> It's like the "smoking" section in a restaurant. Anyone who thinks the smoke stays in that one area is delusional. It creeps through the ventilation system and escapes when the door is opened.
> 
> If we could put similar bans on perfume and Glade plug-ins, I'd be a happy girl.


+1


----------



## Anderson (Mar 19, 2013)

Sorcha said:


> I'm sorry if having asthma and allergies makes me "selfish", and I apologize if I don't want to reek of cigarettes after a long trip. I think smokers who don't care about other people's lungs or clothes are selfish.
> It's like the "smoking" section in a restaurant. Anyone who thinks the smoke stays in that one area is delusional. It creeps through the ventilation system and escapes when the door is opened.
> 
> If we could put similar bans on perfume and Glade plug-ins, I'd be a happy girl.


Eh, at least in restaurants in VA, it's not much of an issue since they passed the ventilation law a few years ago (a smoking area has to be on a separate system from a non-smoking area and there has to be close to total isolation).


----------



## The Davy Crockett (Mar 19, 2013)

Sorcha said:


> I'm sorry if having asthma and allergies makes me "selfish", and I apologize if I don't want to reek of cigarettes after a long trip. I think smokers who don't care about other people's lungs or clothes are selfish.
> It's like the "smoking" section in a restaurant. Anyone who thinks the smoke stays in that one area is delusional. It creeps through the ventilation system and escapes when the door is opened.
> 
> If we could put similar bans on perfume and Glade plug-ins, I'd be a happy girl.


What loved was the SCA I had on one of the Silvers last year who thought spraying Lysol everywhere and often was a good idea. :wacko: I'm not that sensitive to stinky stuff, but it was a disgusting, heavy cloud, almost the entire journey. :angry2: Nothing like the smell and taste of Lysol in the air of the Carolinas early in the morning. :blink:


----------



## AmtrakBlue (Mar 19, 2013)

The Davy Crockett said:


> Sorcha said:
> 
> 
> > I'm sorry if having asthma and allergies makes me "selfish", and I apologize if I don't want to reek of cigarettes after a long trip. I think smokers who don't care about other people's lungs or clothes are selfish.
> ...


I sometimes think the odor eliminators/cover ups are worse than the odor they're supposed to be getting rid of/hiding. I think thier smell lingers longer than the offending odor.


----------



## fairviewroad (Mar 19, 2013)

I'm glad our guest Amarsh has weighed in. It's not clear whether s/he has taken the Auto Train, but s/he has been on at least one LD train,

which gives him/her more LD rail travel experience than the average American. And while a lot of us (including myself) come down on the

opposite side of Amarsh when it comes to the smoking question, I think it's worthwhile remembering that smokers are, in fact, fare-paying

customers and have the potential to base their travel decisions accordingly.

Now, I happen to feel that the upsides of the new Auto Train smoking policy far outweigh the downsides, but I also think Amarsh represents

a not-lunatic-fringe viewpoint that includes tens of thousands of potential Auto Train customers. So the policy change is not entirely free of

consequence.

To Amarsh: Welcome to Amtrak Unlimited, by the way. Hope you'll stick around!


----------



## SarahZ (Mar 19, 2013)

Anderson said:


> Sorcha said:
> 
> 
> > I'm sorry if having asthma and allergies makes me "selfish", and I apologize if I don't want to reek of cigarettes after a long trip. I think smokers who don't care about other people's lungs or clothes are selfish.
> ...


Oh, that's different.  I was talking about restaurants that are one, big room. If the smoking area is a separate room with separate ventilation, then I simply request a table as far away from the door to the smoking room as possible.


----------



## SarahZ (Mar 19, 2013)

fairviewroad said:


> Now, I happen to feel that the upsides of the new Auto Train smoking policy far outweigh the downsides, but I also think Amarsh representsa not-lunatic-fringe viewpoint that includes tens of thousands of potential Auto Train customers. So the policy change is not entirely free of
> 
> consequence.


Agreed. While I am happy about non-smoking policies, I do understand they can affect revenue. On the flip side, I go to restaurants and bars more often now that I don't have to worry about cigarette smoke, so while they may lose some patrons, they may also gain some.

Anyway, I get what you're saying. My boyfriend smokes, and he decided he'd rather face his fear of flying for our trip to SF than take the CZ and wait 12 hours between smoke stops. ^_^


----------



## JayPea (Mar 19, 2013)

The state of Washington has adopted a policy of allowing no smoking in public buildings at all. Not only that. but smoking is prohibited within 25 feet of doors. That leaves smokers who work along Main Street in my town at a bit of a disadvantage as Main Street is set in a narrow canyon which is shared for most of its length by a river. All of which leaves smokers with few options. I have seen Amtrak personnel make smokers at smoke stops here in Washington stand at least 25 feet from open car doors on Amtrak trains.


----------



## BCL (Mar 19, 2013)

AmtrakBlue said:


> The Davy Crockett said:
> 
> 
> > Sorcha said:
> ...


I've got a coworker who bought a used car. I immediately noticed that it smelled heavily of stale smoke with attempts to cover up with something. He said when he bought it the thing smelled of the air freshener, but then it faded and the odor of smoke was prominent. It reminds me of a lot of hotel rooms that I've stayed in.

It's a temporary fix and one that smells really odd after a while.


----------



## Bob Dylan (Mar 19, 2013)

The Davy Crockett said:


> Sorcha said:
> 
> 
> > I'm sorry if having asthma and allergies makes me "selfish", and I apologize if I don't want to reek of cigarettes after a long trip. I think smokers who don't care about other people's lungs or clothes are selfish.
> ...


Reminds me of Robert Duvals Line in "Apocalypse Now"" "I Love the Smell of Lysol (or Fabreze) in the Morning, it Smells Like...Crap!!!"


----------



## BCL (Mar 19, 2013)

Nathanael said:


> I am really glad to see the end of smoke within the trains, and I bet the Amtrak janitorial employees are too. Smoke is really nasty to clean up. I suppose nobody thought much about it in the days of coal-burning trains, when there was a whole 'nother sort of smoke to clean up!


There's a miniature steam locomotive really close to where I live set up in a public park and rides are open to the public. All their locomotives and cars were built on-site and aren't mass-produced. I was talking to one of the engineers about the fuel they use (#2 fuel oil) and asked if they ever burned anything else. He said they formerly used coal and that their oldest locomotive was converted to burn oil. Apparently they'd have to keep one car empty near the front since the soot was so heavy that it would darken the white dresses that girls would typically wear on the train.


----------



## Ann (Mar 19, 2013)

I have been taking my grandchildren on the auto train for the last 3 years. I am delighted they are stopping smoking. Even though it was only allowed in the lower level of the lower level of the lounge car, it always came upstairs. We could not even stay there to watch the movie for the smell. We are goijng again this year in the summer and will be really happy to be in the lounge car. Thank you, Amtrak!!!


----------



## battalion51 (Mar 19, 2013)

I think there's a strong parallel between Auto Train discontinuing smoking and the hotels going smoke free. I've flipped a few hotels to smoke free, and it's a pretty messy process. There's a small segment of the population that's unhappy, but it's a lot easier to tell a smoker to go outside and burn one, than it is to put a non-smoker in a smoking room on a sold out night. Will there be some attrition of smokers who go to another property now, sure. But for what it saves us as a company in cleaning cost, service recovery costs on sold out nights, etc. it ends up being more profitable. It seems like Amtrak's present intention is to just make the penalty box into additional seating space. But if they were to add an amenity like a Playstation or XBox then that could end up attracting new passengers. In today's society it is generally more profitable to gear your services towards the non-smoking crowd.


----------



## The Davy Crockett (Mar 19, 2013)

I always figured that the Auto Train was the last Amtrak train to allow smoking because of demographics. That the folks who rode it tended to be older and grew up in the age when smoking was ubiquitous in society. But I guess -  GASP  - that that generation is declining in numbers - or the ones that are left don't smoke.  They are also reaching the age where they now live in Florida, or where they are originally from, year-round. Therefore they have become less of the Auto Train's clientele, to the point where risking alienating them is now less of a concern than alienating the 'younger' generations where smoking is less prevalent.

As The Who said: "I hope I die before I get old bed-ridden..."


----------



## battalion51 (Mar 19, 2013)

Most of the old smokers are dead. :giggle:

I think it was really a hold over from the fact that they had the most effective penalty box (compared to a Smoker Coach and the Amfleet II penalty box) and that they don't advertise making a stop. But with the market research, additional costs, etc. it was time to pull the plug. And for that, I applaud them.


----------



## Bus Nut (Mar 21, 2013)

amarsh said:


> Seems silly to me to end having a designated smoking lounge, since Auto Train doesn't have any scheduled stops. And I thought that the Auto Train did have multiple ones that were non-smoking, and it was only just one per each Auto Train that was smoking? Well, just goes to show how anti-smoking groups are selfish, and always try to press for more excessive anti-smoking laws(i.e. New York state, where a law passed prohibiting smoking on open air areas(of all places, even if you're away from the station house doors/windows) of commuter rail platforms a little over a year ago). And that you'd think Amtrak would allow employees upon request to not work cleaning the designated smoking lounges, if they weren't comfortable with(or sensitive to) smoke. I'm sure I'll get major disagreement from some for having this opinion, but don't care.


Excuse me, but you are flat wrong about Amtrak's motivations. Please read the PIP report on the Auto Train. It was a completely customer-service oriented move. Less people smoke today than did in the past, and Amtrak found that the air quality was not what it should be with the Smoking Lounge despite attempts to segregate the air and clean it. Amtrak fields many, many complaints annually about the odor and air quality. Conversely, the no smoking on the train policy on all other LD routes has been working well, and no domestic flights in the US allow smoking on board.

Amtrak appears confident that this move will enhance revenues and customer satisfaction.


----------



## the Other Mike (Mar 21, 2013)

1)Many years ago ( heritage fleet) when on the CNO, I asked why I saw some people that seemed heading to the baggage car, if they were going to smoke a joint. I was told by the Amtrak employees that the best place to "smoke" was to stand on the toilet of the restroom in the dining car but make sure you hold on to the joint because the exhaust fan was THAT strong.

2)One night in the "penalty box ", it was standing room only with a line waiting to get in. There was a horrible smell that came through the "box" and I said outloud....what the hell is that.....one older woman rolled her eyes and said....we hit a skunk. No one left the room but just kept hotboxing their smokes.

3) I always use the patch for train travel because I always considered myself a considerate smoker and never smoked in the sleepers even when legal. Even when it was legal to smoke in resturants, I usually went outside. I remember sitting on a bench outside of a resturant in Scranton when one jackass crossed the street to give me hel about smoking.

4) What's wrong with electronic cigarettes in your own room ?


----------



## battalion51 (Mar 21, 2013)

Mike I think it's the whole "can of worms" philosophy. For example, my mother if she saw that would flip her lid even if it was odorless (this is the same woman who was beyond peeved when we went to a restaurant in Texas because we haven't outlawed smoking as a state in restaurants, good thing she lives in California). Then someone goes to the Conductor and complains someone is smoking on the train, then geese are being chased, etc. I give Amtrak credit for keeping it simple.


----------



## Moot (Apr 16, 2013)

Just do what I do.

Smoke and e-cig in your roomette or room with the door locked and the curtains drawn.

They can't see you doing it, and have no way to prove it since it leaves no smell or smoke behind.

I've been doing it for years, and will continue to do so.


----------



## Bob Dylan (Apr 16, 2013)

The Odds favor you being found out one of these days, hopefully you wont be out in the Big Nowhere (Dessert, Praries etc.) when you're Put Off the Train!!  Have you heard of Patches, Nicotine Gum or even Heavesn Forbid, Quitting this Addictive and Nasty Habit?? :help:


----------



## Ryan (Apr 16, 2013)

Yeah, I don't think that advocating breaking the rules is good advice to follow unless you want to be standing out in the middle of nowhere watching a pair of markers get smaller in the distance.


----------



## SarahZ (Apr 17, 2013)

There's no smoke, but there is vapor. My friend smokes those, and I can see the steam from 10 feet away. If your curtains aren't drawn quite tightly enough and/or aren't flush to the wall and window, someone could see the vapor as they pass by.

You've been lucky so far, but I would never, ever encourage other passengers to take this chance. The consequences are fairly serious. I do not smoke, but I'd rather wait for a smoke stop, chew nicotine gum, or use a patch than take a chance on getting dumped in the middle of nowhere. If your nicotine addiction is so bad that you simply cannot use an alternate method between smoke stops (and I do realize some smoke stops are as many as 12 hours apart), then perhaps you should consider driving or flying.


----------



## fillyjonk (Apr 17, 2013)

Slightly OT:

The college campus I teach on went "tobacco free" (no smoking anywhere on campus, allegedly) last year. I notice I have become FAR more sensitive to cigaratte smoke now (in the sense of if someone is smoking anywhere nearby, I can smell it and find it unappealing) than I was before.

Back when I first rode the TE, there was apparently a smoke lounge on one of the cars. One time when I was riding coach I wound up with a seat mate who both insisted on sitting in the window seat (overnight) and who wanted to get up every hour to go have his smoke. I wasn't real happy about that. Then there was the time on the crowded train when they put me in the car with the smoking lounge, even though I had asked not to (I have allergies and low-grade asthma). I wouldn't have an issue with the e-cigarettes; my understanding is they don't make smoke per se. Especially if it was someone in their own compartment doing it. (I wouldn't feel the same way about conventional or "herbal" cigarettes, because they do leave a lingering odor)

The thing with smoke (and stuff like Axe body spray, which I also hate) is that it does invade other people's space. I'm generally okay with people doing what they want provided it doesn't adversely influence others, but once it starts to invade my breathing space (or hearing space, like someone playing loud music on the train), I begin to become irritated.


----------



## DET63 (Apr 17, 2013)

Ann said:


> I have been taking my grandchildren on the auto train for the last 3 years. I am delighted they are stopping smoking. Even though it was only allowed in the lower level of the lower level of the lounge car, it always came upstairs. We could not even stay there to watch the movie for the smell. We are goijng again this year in the summer and will be really happy to be in the lounge car. Thank you, Amtrak!!!


". . . the lower level of the lower level of the lounge car"? That sounds like one of the_traveler's rides!


----------



## SarahZ (Apr 17, 2013)

fillyjonk said:


> The thing with smoke (and stuff like Axe body spray, which I also hate) is that it does invade other people's space. I'm generally okay with people doing what they want provided it doesn't adversely influence others, but once it starts to invade my breathing space (or hearing space, like someone playing loud music on the train), I begin to become irritated.


Don't even get me started on perfume... and Glade plug-ins... and scented candles... and scented hand sanitizer/lotion... Every single one of them gives me an asthma attack, and 99% of the time, they smell awful. "Berry Cherry", my foot. :angry: It smells like a bottle of Cherry Coke fell into your gas tank.


----------



## Alexandria Nick (Apr 17, 2013)

fillyjonk said:


> Slightly OT:
> The college campus I teach on went "tobacco free" (no smoking anywhere on campus, allegedly) last year. I notice I have become FAR more sensitive to cigaratte smoke now (in the sense of if someone is smoking anywhere nearby, I can smell it and find it unappealing) than I was before.


I've noticed this too. Which intrigues me because I actually kinda liked the smell before.


----------



## battalion51 (Apr 17, 2013)

Using e-cigs is also strictly prohibited by Amtrak's policy. You may have been lucky in the past, but nothing says you will be in the future. You would likely be warned if you were caught, but they could put you off the train...


----------



## nikki kefalos (Apr 23, 2013)

Why can you not use the electronic cigarette, as far as I know, you can use them virtually anywhere with no damaging effects to anyone NOR is there a smell of tobacco!!!!


----------



## VentureForth (Apr 23, 2013)

Electronic cigarettes still emit toxic vapors, albeit at 20% of the levels of cigarettes.

That being said, I don't think it would be too ob_noxious_ to have an E-Lounge....


----------



## BCL (Apr 23, 2013)

battalion51 said:


> Using e-cigs is also strictly prohibited by Amtrak's policy. You may have been lucky in the past, but nothing says you will be in the future. You would likely be warned if you were caught, but they could put you off the train...



Enforcement is of course an issue. I've seen smoking going on in the public areas, which is clearly not in compliance with Amtrak policy.


----------



## battalion51 (Apr 24, 2013)

Unfortunately it's one of those things where Amtrak crew members aren't everywhere all the time. If someone goes to the rear of a train or downstairs in a vestibule and smokes is a crew member going to see them every time? No. But if someone brings it to the attention of a crew member I'd be shocked if nothing was done about it. The Operating Crew has a lot on their plate, and the TA's similarly can get bogged down. It's like everything else, see something, say something.


----------



## SandraW (May 16, 2013)

Will the new no-smoking policy affecting ridership on the Auto Train?

I don't smoke, but it seem kind of cruel? Why can't they make the last car a smoking area? It's not like planes where there air is recirculated within the entire cabin.


----------



## BCL (May 16, 2013)

battalion51 said:


> Unfortunately it's one of those things where Amtrak crew members aren't everywhere all the time. If someone goes to the rear of a train or downstairs in a vestibule and smokes is a crew member going to see them every time? No. But if someone brings it to the attention of a crew member I'd be shocked if nothing was done about it. The Operating Crew has a lot on their plate, and the TA's similarly can get bogged down. It's like everything else, see something, say something.


Just recently I saw some guy smoking on the platform - I mean right next to a train door as it opened. The assistant conductor came storming out of another door and started yelling at him. I was under the impression that smoking isn't allowed in any area of that station (Emeryville), including outdoors and on the platforms. That doesn't mean people don't do it.

There are a few conductors where I can smell the result of their smoke breaks. Not sure where they would do it, but I'm guessing at the beginning of the run since no train will stop for more than a couple of minutes unless there's an issue.


----------



## Smokefree (Feb 2, 2015)

Albeit, this reply is almost two years after the initial post, Amtrak's explanation of weighing the possibility of reduced ridership from smokers on the AT once the train became 100% smokefree was offset by riders experiencing a healthier experience and environment left off the fact that it would also open up the market for ridership on the AT who until the smokefree policy was implemented would not take the AT because smoking was still allowed. In addition, Amtrak didn't mention (and it still doesn't) that a smokefree AT would provide a healthier and safer workplace for the Amtrak employees who were required to work the AT assignment. I don't buy any corporate suggestion that Amtrak employees who indicated their desire not to work those assignments would be honored. I'm certain that such a designation would limit their assignment opportunities at the expense of an outdated policy. The same lack of concern for Amtrak rail employees still exists by Amtrak's curent policy of allowing smoking stops at some of their stations (such as Florence, SC and Washington DC). At least one Amtrak employee is required to stand on the platform adjacent to the passengers who step off the train for their nicotine fix. The Amtrak employee is stuck amongst the smoking passengers and exposed to the toxic tobacco secondhand smoke (b/t/w, I am not an Amtrak employee). Last year, passengers on board a northbound Amtrak train delayed in the Washington DC station due to a problem switching engines (from diesel to electric) were subjected to the clouds of smoke entering the train cars through the open doors without any air conditioning operating (when the engine switching occurs all electric power in the passenger cars is shut off). Complicating matters further, the platform where smokers congregated was right outside the passenger cars where designated seating for the disabled was located, thus I could not use the respirator that I had onboard while the power shutdown was in effect. It is long overdue for Amtrak to evolve into the 21st Century and have all their property (on board as well as all station platforms) become smokefree.


----------

