Amtrak trains to get 180 day notices after July 1s

[yarrow]

amen

 

[Guest_bobbyswf]

I've only taken one cross-country Amtrak trip and am looking forward to another this year and while I am very curious about any routes being discontinued, it would be easier for novices such as myself if some of these posts were more clear. Perhaps a little less in-the-know train-speak for those of us who are new to this. Thanks for understanding.

 

[PRR 60]

I've only taken one cross-country Amtrak trip and am looking forward to another this year and while I am very curious about any routes being discontinued, it would be easier for novices such as myself if some of these posts were more clear.  Perhaps a little less in-the-know train-speak for those of us who are new to this.  Thanks for understanding.

Right now, today, July 5, there are no routes being discontinued or truncated. By law, Amtrak must give 180 days notice for any service change that will leave a town without train service. No such notices have been posted, so the only trains that could be dropped right now would be those where every stop is also served by at least one other train. Outside the corridor operations where multiple trains operate every day, almost all Amtrak train cancellations would require the 180 day notice.

So, for the next six months at least, it is business as usual for Amtrak.

 

[AmtrakWPK]

I'll add another "Amen" to Foodman53's comment.

 

[Everydaymatters]

Do you think we can chalk this up as a "non event" and go on with our lives now?

 

[Chatter163]

I think that we can. However, considering the stir that was caused, I do believe an apology/explanation is in order.

 

[RailFanLNK]

Kinda like Y2K I guess!

 

[PRR 60]

...In addition, again according to my former supervisors via my phone converstation, the station clerk at NOL, whom I believe 100% since I helped her and her family in Natchitoches when she got evacuated from NOL during Katrina, received a FedEX mail package that strickly states that it may only be opened by the manager of stations no earlier than  Monday, July 3 its contents be distributed to all depots within her division.
...Folks, this has been coming for a long time now. BNSF, Amtrak OBS Employee and myself have been warning of such radical system cuts for almost a couple of years now. I'm not going to say I told you so, because that's not an appropriate response by a member of a civil forum such as this and more importantly is it obsolutely true that those who choose not to believe statements made by others on this forum have every right to question the integrity and validity of such information made by people on any on-line forum. What I will say is that the formal announcement to the general public and the entire Amtrak employee network and the general public is scheduled for Monday, July 3 from David Hughes' office.

...Trainboy325 has said all that can be said of this very sad and disappointing subject!!!

Oops: I guess they forgot to open all those FedEx envelopes on Monday. Of course, there was no mention of which July 3rd, so maybe 2007, or 8, or...

This episode was very much like one those internet hoaxes like the exploding air fresheners or gas station fires caused by cell phones. Present a claim: back it by specific details that add to the plausibility (but are entirely hearsay or unsubstantiated or just plain made-up), and sit back and watch the fun.

I am not saying the BNSF or Trainboy started this thing. They may have been innocent conduits. But they certainly did stir the pot and at the very least did not use common sense in assessing the validity of what they posted.

Oh, the power of the internet to elevate nonsense to gospel. I saw it on a web site so it must be true.

 

[GP35]

I'm sure they are still on the floor laughing at us.

 

[Sam Damon]

If Matt should ever come back, go easy on him. Speaking for myself, I would simply be content for Matt to say on this and other forums, "Hey, I goofed up big time. I'm sorry." I realize this is difficult for some individuals to stomach. A bit of my reasoning follows.

The newsbiz is not an easy one, although many managers in it think any trained chimpanzee can do it well. 90% of those who have received a paycheck from a news operation have been burned on at least one story. The other ten percent are liars.

In the newsbiz, if you stay in it for very long, you start to develop your own version of a BS filter. This doesn't mean you neglect the "walk-in trade" such as the rumors BNSF heard; it means you test sources before you go hog-wild with a story. There are times when you protect sources. Even so, I can tell you with total assurance a lot of soul-searching goes on amongst the best ones when they agree to go with an anonymous source, precisely because you don't want to get burned. In newsbiz, your reputation tends to precede you. It's a gossipy business, probably even more so than railroads simply because the people working in it tend to be articulate.

Yes, a pot of stuff went through the Cuisinart. Even so, I lean towards forgiveness, because, as I said, I've felt the sting of having a source give me a story that was, if not wrong, at least very skewed, from the reality of a situation. This feeling is not pleasant.

 

[x-press]

If Matt should ever come back, go easy on him.  Speaking for myself, I would simply be content for Matt to say on this and other forums, "Hey, I goofed up big time.  I'm sorry."

I am in 99% agreement: Apology=Forgiven as far as I'm concerned. Though, I must note that this apology has apparently gotten stuck behind a UP freight (meaning it's going to be a bit late, assuming it gets here at all).

Honestly, I don't even mind reporting rumors on a forum like this . . . sometimes we might actually get some "inside info." My problems are more:

A) It was essentially presented as fact. If the claim had been "Historically Reliable Source: 180 Day Notices after July 1," I for one wouldn't have been as upset. Instead, every time someone noted that this was, in fact, just a rumor (sometimes gently, sometimes not), we'd get the whole "You just wait and see those trains are coming off July 1 and then it will be too late."

B The "logic test" did not seem to be applied. The timing (right after the time/money spent on diner lite, love it OR hate it), the dependability/popularity of several of the cut trains, the non-dependability/unpopularity of several trains left on, and the TOTAL silence from the thousands of Amtrak employees/NARP should have raised even an activist's eyebrows.

C) MOST importantly, the assertion that we should all run screaming to our Congressman about some internet rumor, regardless of credibility, is what I consider potentially damaging. Whether your congressman hears your objections on June 28 or July 3 makes no difference, except that you'd have full credibility on the latter, and wouldn't just be wasting their time.

So, an apology is fine, as long as it is combined with newfound wisdom. I'm not playing holier-than-thou, here. I learn from my mistakes on the board, and realize I've come off as something of a grump in the past (sometimes understandably, sometimes not).

There's always room to improve!

JPS

 

[Observer]

(Sam Damon @ Sat, Jul 8, 2006, 08:45 AM) If Matt should ever come back, go easy on him.  Speaking for myself, I would simply be content for Matt to say on this and other forums, "Hey, I goofed up big time.  I'm sorry."

I agree with Sam to a point. To say he regrets passing along something he believed to be true and defending the posting would be a good thing.

However, A declaration that he owes anybody an apology is a bit egotistical in my view. Matt didn't personally mount an attack on anyone on this forum that I read but he sure had plenty of scorn come his way.

This forum would be better served to" Slay the message, not the messenger". A person must be able to post a thread (that is not against the rules of this forum) without being ridiculed or you will have a one sided forum. To ask for some verification of the subject is very much a valid recourse as well as counter rebuttal but some replys were on the very edge of civility.

This is also why it is a novel idea to allow Guest to post replys.

 

[Dutchrailnut]

Matt was told his info was wrong from beginning, and in his hurry to be first with news he swore up and down his insider info was correct and unfallable, well it was not , so yes due to his insistence he does owe an apology.

 

[GG-1]

Matt was told his info was wrong from beginning, and in his hurry to be first with news he swore up and down his insider info was correct and unfallable, well it was not , so yes due to his insistence he does owe an apology.

Aloha

I don't think Matt owes us an apology. His conduct in reporting the information he had reason to believe in, was always presented in a respectable manner.

Possibly the support drummed up by our contacting our representatives changed the results, we may have one this battle.

Mahalo

 

[Chatter163]

I agree with Mr. x-press on this one, especially on his point C.

 

[Observer]

Matt was told his info was wrong from beginning, and in his hurry to be first with news he swore up and down his insider info was correct and unfallable, well it was not , so yes due to his insistence he does owe an apology.

So who had the crystal ball to tell him he was wrong? The way to go on the information he posted was too respectfully challange and dispute it, not slander him. Too whom is the apology due if one is due? Is he not due an apology in return for some remarks made toward him then?

Wanna lead by example and apologise first?

 

[TransAtlantic]

just a hypothetical question: if someone passes along information they do not know to be true, is it a lie? what if they KNOW the information is not true, but are not the source of the information?

 

[AmtrakWPK]

If you believe it's true when you say it, you didn't lie. If it turns out not to be true, you may have been lied to. They're not the same thing. I have no doubt whatsoever that he did indeed believe it was true. And it may even have been true. It could very well be that the big noise that we all made, including a number of calls and emails to influential congress/senate folks, newspapers, etc., created enough heat before the fact that they decided to not send out the notices. It IS an election year. We may never know. If that IS in fact the case, then everybody trying to vilify him is a jerk but doesn't know it. So have a good long think about it before you get that tar and feathers out.

 

[Amtrak OBS Gone Freight]

If you believe it's true when you say it, you didn't lie. If it turns out not to be true, you may have been lied to. They're not the same thing. I have no doubt whatsoever that he did indeed believe it was true. And it may even have been true. It could very well be that the big noise that we all made, including a number of calls and emails to influential congress/senate folks, newspapers, etc., created enough heat before the fact that they decided to not send out the notices. It IS an election year. We may never know. If that IS in fact the case, then everybody trying to vilify him is a jerk but doesn't know it. So have a good long think about it before you get that tar and feathers out.

And with the statement from this poster is exactly why I have said "NO NEWS IS GOOD NEWS!!!"

This is kinda a way of life at Amtrak as has been for a long time now. I feel as if I am in the situation the way Sam Damon describes in a previous posting. My only question is those who want verified "insider" infomation.... How much more "inside" do you need when it comes from an employee? True my management may have misled me as well, but remember folks the boardroom can and usually is an interesting place! And with that in mind, the truth always comes out in the end!!

For what it's worth, I am continuing to follow any leads I recieve from my sources as I can. We are not completely out of the woods yet, but it must be noted events have been scheduled and then rescended in the past. I vividly remember when 180 day notices made it to the bulletin board in my local station a few years ago, but were soon taken down. Amtrak has been "buying" time again and again for 35 years now. I will state this point to all being we should keep this in mind!

What I want to see now simply put is new legislation introduced, passed, and signed limiting or eliminating these "scary" reforms which are putting a heavy weight in the wrong place at Amtrak!!! That's all I have to say about that. If/when that action occurs, I will let my guard down. Other than that, it's business as usual and do not be surprised at anything out of Amtrak in the future under its current situation. That is mostly the biggest part of Matt's concern IMHO as well as mine! OBS...

 

[Sam Damon]

OBS, you did see the press release Senator Byrd put out, right? If you haven't, surf here. There's also a link there to the letter he co-authored with Senator Murray to the Amtrak Board.

This may relate to the types your colleague saw while working Silver Service. I'd appreciate your comments -- it may put another piece of the puzzle together.

 

[Amtrak OBS Gone Freight]

OBS, you did see the press release Senator Byrd put out, right? If you haven't, surf here. There's also a link there to the letter he co-authored with Senator Murray to the Amtrak Board.
This may relate to the types your colleague saw while working Silver Service. I'd appreciate your comments -- it may put another piece of the puzzle together.

No I missed this one. Thanks for the link. I will say for sure it appears all is in line regarding my observations over the last couple of years, Sam! I will forward some better details of my comments to you in a PM. I don't feel it is time to discuss that in full just yet. OBS...

 

[Chatter163]

He was told his info was wrong from beginning, and in his hurry to be first with news he swore up and down his insider info was correct and unfallable, well it was not , so yes due to his insistence he does owe an apology.

So who had the crystal ball to tell him he was wrong? The way to go on the information he posted was too respectfully challange and dispute it, not slander him. Too whom is the apology due if one is due? Is he not due an apology in return for some remarks made toward him then?

Wanna lead by example and apologise first?

The poster in the second post is missing the point of the first post. It is not the rumor itself that he reported (which was only a week or so before the alleged cutoff date, so I doubt that much really changed politically in that time frame), but the insistent way in which it was done.

When members here expressed surprise and/or were a bit skeptical, he did not modestly explain himself. Rather, he insisted, somewhat excitedly, that he had anonymous inside sources that had to be protected, and that he had to "lay it on the line, people," proclaiming what he had heard. His remarks were repeatedly peppered with "I told you this before" language. Go back and read this thread from the beginning, and you will see the reactions and insistence that were offered, when members found the rumor a bit difficult to fathom. Furthermore, there was the somewhat bizarre claim that he had to be "careful" what he posted in the internet, as he was "watched." (Had he not already revealed the privileged information?) After a day or two of these histrionics and an avalanche of inquiries, he began to realize the hole into which he had dug himself, and began to backtrack and state that these things MAY come to pass, depending on the outcome of a study by Amtrak. There really was little that could be called humble in the remarks posted, at least the earlier ones.

So again, it is not the rumor itself, but the self-sure manner in which it was presented. When others questioned it, providing a natural opportunity to clarify and qualify, this was not met with any rational specifics, but rather, claims that there was a cloak-and-dagger plot underway, one that prevented anything further from being stated, due to those courageous anonymous sources and those sleuthing internet spies--this all made the saga more than a bit bizarre. Perhaps this episode can be chalked up to youthful vigor, but given the method of operation in this thread, I think that one can deomonstrate maturity and own up to the situation, after which all moves on as before.

 

[Observer]

After a day or two of these histrionics and an avalanche of inquiries, he began to realize the hole into which he had dug himself, and began to backtrack and state that these things MAY come to pass, depending on the outcome of a study by Amtrak. There really was little that could be called humble in the remarks posted, at least the earlier ones.
So again, it is not the rumor itself, but the self-sure manner in which it was presented. When others questioned it, providing a natural opportunity to clarify and qualify, this was not met with any rational specifics, but rather, claims that there was a cloak-and-dagger plot underway, one that prevented anything further from being stated, due to those courageous anonymous sources and those sleuthing internet spies--this all made the saga more than a bit bizarre. Perhaps this episode can be chalked up to youthful vigor, but given the method of operation in this thread, I think that one can deomonstrate maturity and own up to the situation, after which all moves on as before.

So the Guy's information was wrong. BUT.. the slurs against him and not the message started coming in before the July 3rd date. I'm also aware of the "Cry Wolf" postings of Matt that cannot be backed with facts and wish he would at least post it as a rumor and not fact.

I fully understand where you are coming from and I have read the entire

thread from the first day it was posted. I'm not defending the merits of the post but I do defend his right as a member of this forum to post a subject

that he believes is true and is within the bounds of this forum without personal defamation. I'm sure he thought that the source of the 180 day

notice was impeachable when he posted it only to find it wasn't.

That along with the arguments presented by this forum may be the reason for the so called back tracking.

Should he enter a response indicating a regret for posting something that

didn't materialise, maybe, it would show maturity. Should he have learned not to vigorously defend something that cannot be backed up with facts, I hope so. Is being hardheaded a virtue or an invitation for personal scorn, NO. BUT...to apologize for a posting that wasn't vulgar, defaming other members or uncivil but inaccurate is a bit much. We all post items that are inaccurate at times and when proven to be wrong, usually acknowledge that the message was wrong but to demand an apology............

To be proven so terribly wrong by time alone would be embarrassing enough but to apologize to several members that IMHO went abit overboard in their replys ,I cannot agree with. In fact under the circumstances of several replys, I'm not sure I would.

One good thing we have in the Good Old USA is the right to our own opinion. That is true on this forum as well. I have found other than the concern for the future of Amtrak, we, like our Nation are divided on many things.

You and several others think you are owed an apology and have a right to feel that way. I and I'm sure several others( I can't prove that) feel he doesn't owe an apology. In fact I feel that the apology is due from several members and Guests to him for the personal replys that were not a rebuttal of the opinions of one of our members.

I expect Hell to freeze over before we see either..

Isn't Democracy a wonderful thing?

 

[frj1983]

I too have read this post from the beginning, but I also feel like a previous poster stated: that this forum should allow people to share information...be it correct or not.

I have the sneaking suspicion that Matt, being a passionate defender of Amtrak, was fed a little baloney by some angry, upset, fed-up, whatever, employees who would have loved to see the 180 day train off notices become valid and then say "see we told you so."

Even if he believed the information to be true, enough forum posters poked holes in the info to make the whole scenario unlikely. I would rather have "whatever" information posted here so we can debate it's merits and then can come to a conclusion. I did post to my congress-critters, but did did not mention this "rumor" as I considered it...but I think it's always OK to keep the fire stoked under our "elected" representatives feet.

So thanks to Matt for sharing the info (even if it was wrong) and thanks to all of you who logically poked holes in the argument! The debate is the thing and that is my one cent on the whole issue!

 

[The Metropolitan]

I tend to agree with Chatter.

Sure, it's fine to share rumblings that we hear from our sources, but I think a line is crossed when we present those things as indisputable facts.

The certainty of the "trainoffs" combined with the 'mystery' confidential FedEx packages really did make a crisis seem imminent.

Perhaps an apology is asking a bit much, but I do think everyone here is entitled to some sort of explanation by the original posters (particularly some degree of validation of the Fed Ex package story) and perhaps the admission that the manner in which the info was conveyed was a bit overzealous.