Amtrak to passengers: Keep Out!!

[TinCan782]

Wow!

From Railway Age ...

A reliable rail industry source who wishes not to be named related this story to me from on board a recent trip on Amtrak 19, the long-distance Crescent. The words speak for themselves. They are unedited:

https://www.railwayage.com/passenger/amtrak-to-passengers-keep-out/

 

[keelhauled]

"I’m in no position to say if morale is declining as a result of Amtrak President Richard Anderson’s or deputy Stephen Gardner’s apparent interest in killing some or all of Amtrak’s long-distance trains, but I can tell you authoritatively that morale among this crew, on this night, was decidedly bad."

If anyone thinks that stories like this didn't exist before Anderson became CEO, I have a bridge to sell you.

 

[jis]

Didn't you realize yet that every bad thing that happened to Amtrak in the last five years is really all Anderson's fault?

 

[cocojacoby]

Yeah, I have to say this attitude problem has existed for years. When dining on Amtrak I often had to ask myself why do Amtrak employees hate their job. It was like we were inconveniencing them and invading their private space.

A few years ago, we did have to nicely "demand" lunch (as directed by our sleeper attendant because "we were entitled to it") on the Star before we got off in Tampa because the crew decided they were not going to start serving lunch until the train left Tampa for no reason at all. I think we were scheduled in around 12:30 which should have given us an hour.

They reluctantly cooked us up a couple of burgers. We were the only people in the diner.

We love travel by train and have endured such lousy service, but the general public would not accept this and nobody should have to.

This new box meal concept they are trying is circumnavigating what is really an untenable problem. As long as the food is good (and reports are surprisingly positive), and the service acceptable this will work while also saving Amtrak a lot of money.

I think the most interesting option for this however, is offering this type of meal service to the entire train (coach passengers paying but no cash) on the Lake Shore Limited and Capital Limited on a 24-hour basis and see if the diner could actually be a profit center.

 

[Dakota 400]

I had a similar experience on The Crescent leaving Washington. I understand that the Lounge/Cafe car is closed while in the Station; the Diner was still in operation, however, with light sticks on the tables of the diners when the lights dimmed.

Shortly before leaving the Station, I went to the Lounge Car for a pre-dinner drink. The Attendant was present; cardboard sign propped on the counter: "Closed". Questioning her, she said, "I don't open until we get to Alexandria." Prior to crossing into Virginia, the train stopped and remained stopped for several minutes. So, I sat at a booth and waited. Several other passengers arrived expecting service. Soon, a good sized line started to form and we were still not in Alexandria. Some people were clearly unhappy with the situation. Just as the train started to move again, but not yet in Virginia, the Attendant relented and opened.

The situation did not, and does not, make sense to me. The employee is present, passengers are available to spend some money, why not take advantage of the situation and make some sales? Is there some "Rule" concerning this type of situation?

If the Diner is still serving guests while the train is in the Station, why shouldn't the Lounge/Cafe car?

 

[jis]

Not having enough battery capacity in each car to keep reasonable amount of lights on to provide reasonably bright lighting through short HEP outages for changing out cars or engines is a purely American innovation in cars built between the mid-70s and early 90s. There is absolutely no rhyme nor reason why this practice became prevalent in the US, when the rest of the world carried on having enough battery capacity in each car.

It is quite reasonable not to have enough power for cooking etc. through those gaps, but just plain lights?

 

[crescent-zephyr]

If anything good can happen with Anderson, I hope he asks the question "if all flight attendants can handle payment and service of food and drinks, why can't train attendants?"

 

[Rail Freak]

Wasn't there a crew supervisor on the trains at one time in the past?

 

[Triley]

I had a similar experience on The Crescent leaving Washington. I understand that the Lounge/Cafe car is closed while in the Station; the Diner was still in operation, however, with light sticks on the tables of the diners when the lights dimmed.

Shortly before leaving the Station, I went to the Lounge Car for a pre-dinner drink. The Attendant was present; cardboard sign propped on the counter: "Closed". Questioning her, she said, "I don't open until we get to Alexandria." Prior to crossing into Virginia, the train stopped and remained stopped for several minutes. So, I sat at a booth and waited. Several other passengers arrived expecting service. Soon, a good sized line started to form and we were still not in Alexandria. Some people were clearly unhappy with the situation. Just as the train started to move again, but not yet in Virginia, the Attendant relented and opened.

The situation did not, and does not, make sense to me. The employee is present, passengers are available to spend some money, why not take advantage of the situation and make some sales? Is there some "Rule" concerning this type of situation?

If the Diner is still serving guests while the train is in the Station, why shouldn't the Lounge/Cafe car?

While the train is undergoing an engine change in DC there is no power, so no way to record sales or use the microwaves. DC is also the only place the Crescent can order supplies (aside from the obvious NYP and NOL), so that is definitely an issue.

As to why they weren't open, I have no clue. They are entitled to breaks however... Most LSAs take a break, as allowed, at NYP and WAS, since the vast majority of passengers are preoccupied at that time.

 

[MattW]

I don't think the issue above is not being open in the station, it's refusing to open until Alexandria. Once the train starts to move, HEP won't be a problem unless there is an actual problem as the engine change is either done, or the train is a runaway and now has bigger problems than a grumpy cafe attendant.

 

[crescent-zephyr]

If you walked into a Starbucks and were told the barista was on a break, you would call and complain. It shouldnt be any different on Amtrak. There's more than enough employees to cover meal breaks.

Yes I know "have to be an LSA" - that's an insane policy that no other business has implemented that I'm aware of.

 

[Devil's Advocate]

If you walked into a Starbucks and were told the barista was on a break, you would call and complain. It shouldnt be any different on Amtrak. There's more than enough employees to cover meal breaks. Yes I know "have to be an LSA" - that's an insane policy that no other business has implemented that I'm aware of.

Yeah I've never understood the LSA rule either. I guess it has to do with the perception (whether real or imagined) of hiring a bunch of unscrupulous thieves who would presumably rob Amtrak blind if given half the chance. Imagine if the purser was the only person who could sell food, drinks, and duty free goods on a flight.

 

[zephyr17]

I don't mind having no coverage for meal breaks, what I object to is the excessively long meal breaks (2 1/2 hours, plus) that some LSAs take. Many don't abuse it, but many do.

And that has nothing to do with Anderson or employees protesting Anderson. That has been going on for years. Although my very subjective impression is that it has generally gotten worse in the five years or so.

PS...SCAs do it, too. Absent from the car for hours on "meal breaks". Again, my experience is that majority don't do it, but there are many that do.

They need to bring back onboard service supervision. I know that the OBS Chiefs were cut years ago and that they may have been considered ineffective by Amtrak. I have heard that because they were officially non-management employees but were union that was an issue. But my experience was generally the onboard service was better when they were there.

I have said for a long, long time that wildly inconsistent onboard service is Amtrak's biggest problem that is within its control. If Anderson is serious about improving Amtrak, he should not be doing things like attacking LD services through weaponizing PTC, or fiddling with food service in the interest of making it more like airlines. He should directly take on the terrible customer service culture at Amtrak. Then go from there.

 

[Triley]

If you walked into a Starbucks and were told the barista was on a break, you would call and complain. It shouldnt be any different on Amtrak. There's more than enough employees to cover meal breaks.

Yes I know "have to be an LSA" - that's an insane policy that no other business has implemented that I'm aware of.

If you walked into a Starbucks and were told the barista was on a break, you would call and complain. It shouldnt be any different on Amtrak. There's more than enough employees to cover meal breaks. Yes I know "have to be an LSA" - that's an insane policy that no other business has implemented that I'm aware of.

Yeah I've never understood the LSA rule either. I guess it has to do with the perception (whether real or imagined) of hiring a bunch of unscrupulous thieves who would presumably rob Amtrak blind if given half the chance. Imagine if the purser was the only person who could sell food, drinks, and duty free goods on a flight.

It's just the way of accounting. Only LSAs are issued Amtrak funds, and to prevent theft, we are responsible for said funds. If I walk away from my cafe to use the restroom and let an assist (another LSA) use the register with "my" bank in it, and it turns up $20 short at the end of the trip, guess who has to pay for it?
And to swap out the stock to another LSA to make them responsible for it means an entire new set of paperwork. I've said this several times on here. Is it perfect? No, it sucks. But until the new POS is implemented (if Richard ever lets one get approved...), that's how it's going to be.

 

[crescent-zephyr]

Again... That's an insane business practice that I have not seen or heard of anywhere else.

Convenience stores do not close down when a cashier changes in order to do a complete inventory. For that matter, most gas stations have multiple cashiers working simultaneously, all pulling from the same stock.

 

[Devil's Advocate]

Again... That's an insane business practice that I have not seen or heard of anywhere else. Convenience stores do not close down when a cashier changes in order to do a complete inventory. For that matter, most gas stations have multiple cashiers working simultaneously, all pulling from the same stock.

The only time I've seen anything like this was in a dumpy rundown movie theater from my youth. Same accounting logic, same managerial distrust, similar customer service as Amtrak. Every rule was based on a presumption of negligence or misconduct. Leaving precious little time and energy to spend on actual customers. While they were busy locking down $20 they were carelessly squandering $200 in lost sales.

 

[Charles785]

So, it it mainly union work rules that contribute to this unfriendly customer attitude?

(And do the really conscientious, enthusiastic, and eager-to-please customer service

workers with magnetic personalities need labor unions anyway? Do the unions try

to teach their members people skills and how best to please customers?)

 

[PVD]

Union work rules don't create the problem, lack of proper supervision does. And yes, the conscientious and enthusiastic employees need unions because they are often taken advantage of. It isn't the job of the union to teach skills that should be ingrained in the culture of a company. Union protection is often an excuse that ineffective managements use because they aren't going to stand up and say we don't know how to do this right.

 

[jis]

I am sure the accounting rules are not Union work rules. They are Amtrak Management rules. While Unions may contribute a bit to them, most screwups primarily originate in management incompetence. Through my entire career I have worked in non-Union jobs, and there has been no shortage of spectacular screwups in any and all of them traceable to actions of high executives and middle managements' inability to carry out simple functions for which they are paid the big bucks.

 

[Charles785]

PVD and jis probably make some legitimate points, and I probably should have asked a

different, specific question, and that is, why is it apparently so difficult to fire

Amtrak employees with surly attitudes?

I rarely, if ever, encounter customer service employees with negative attitudes

in restaurants and hotels. Why would they be different than Amtrak?

Do union work rules make it difficult to fire employees who exhibit poor customer

service skills, or is it indeed Amtrak management that is not aware of the problem -

or does not care to fix the problem?

 

[PVD]

The simplest thought is most large companies, union or not, have a set of policies and procedures for the disciplinary process. If you have limited (or none) field or line supervision, how do you build a proper case ? The key to getting rid of people that need to go lies in uniform application of the established rules, and careful documentation. Cases that go to grievance committees, arbitration, or court, are often decided on those points, rather than the actions of the worker. Higher level management has to want to create a winning culture, and follow through on it. It is not an overnight process. Many high end restaurants and most of the better hotels in NYC are unionized, and service is not lacking. I'm not so sure it would be that hard to get rid of workers that can't cut it, if there was any real desire to do it in the first place.

 

[Triley]

Again... That's an insane business practice that I have not seen or heard of anywhere else. Convenience stores do not close down when a cashier changes in order to do a complete inventory. For that matter, most gas stations have multiple cashiers working simultaneously, all pulling from the same stock.

The only time I've seen anything like this was in a dumpy rundown movie theater from my youth. Same accounting logic, same managerial distrust, similar customer service as Amtrak. Every rule was based on a presumption of negligence or misconduct. Leaving precious little time and energy to spend on actual customers. While they were busy locking down $20 they were carelessly squandering $200 in lost sales.

They almost made things just as bad by turning all LSAs around in NYP on Regionals and Acelas... On Regionals every LSA loads their car a different way, so we'd have to rearrange everything to know where it is, and count the stock, and just imagine how long that would've taken...thankfully that's been pushed off for the time being.
I understand why the policies are the way they are, but I agree some things are frustrating and make it hard to give the best service I could.

 

[Anderson]

My understanding is that, as a rule, they open up at ALX. Especially with the "local" traffic being handled now on the NEC, there's a need to (re-)check tickets at WAS, and besides that they cannot do anything while doing the "toaster pop" in DC.

 

[daybeers]

Hasn't the Crescent combined with a Regional or two for the summer? I would think having the cafe open would make sense, otherwise that's just lost revenue.

 

[JoeBas]

I'd always thought this was because of the large turnover on the train at WAS, and that conductors/ACs want to get everyone's tickets/seat checks right...