Amtrak's New "Fresh Choices" Dining on CL & LSL

[neroden]

Basically, Anderson wins with reduced ridership on the LD trains, so a boycott helps Anderson get rid of LD. If everyone rides still, then Anderson wins by saying they will still ride even if we cut food service way back, because people accept what ever is put in front of them. Its a win/win for Anderson and lose/lose for those who ride the LD trains. Anderson's management probably isn't interested in ;looking at any comments sent their way unless they have to do with tweaking the new system.

Frankly, this is enough proof to me that Anderson doesn't know what he's doing. Sack him. If he'd come up with a reasonable selection for breakfast, like they have on the Downeaster... fine. But he didn't. This is just incompetence. He's not competent to run a train company.

Sure, I'll ride. But lots of people won't. He'll have to cut ticket prices to retain ridership. I'm sure many will be pleased by that, but it's a great way to hurt the bottom line.

 

[neroden]

The groundwork for all this F&B downgrade was laid in the authorization bill that required Amtrak to balance the budget of F&B as a separate line item, as absurd requirement in and of itself. That is currently the statute and as Anderson said, right or wrong, he will deliver per the statute. One obvious way, and the only fully legal way, to fix this is to change the statute. We have started the discussion going on how and when to change the statute, at the RPA Meeting this week, and with Senators and Reps on the Hill too.

Well, good work with the advocacy. But the fact is that this is simply going to increase the F&B losses.
Now there will be $0 transferred from the sleeper account to the dining car account, *and* all the cash sales in the dining car (about half of the sales on the LSL... less everywhere else) will go poof.

The LSL, the train with the *highest cash sales from coach* in the dining car as of the last published report, is quite definitely the *wrong* train to do this on if you want to balance the F&B account. In fact, this is going to blow a hole in the F&B account.

Maybe they'll only do this for the summer until they can run the LSL back to NY -- if they're not idiots.

 

[neroden]

They won't, unless it reduces the net cost of operation. Come hell or high water they are out to reduce F&B losses.

Well, they seem to be deploying a solid plan to increase the F&B losses. I do wonder how they're going to do the accounting "transfers" from sleeper to dining car now. I'll make a point of refusing the food I can't eat -- do you think they're going to do a totally dishonest budget transfer from the sleeper line to the dining line for that food?

 

[cpotisch]

I agree that this sucks, and I agree that we need to move on to some suggestions that could lead to improvements that still could fit within the framework of this program. The program is going to happen whether we like it or not (and we obviously don't).

I think most people seem to agree that making the diner available as a sleeper lounge for the duration of the trip is good. First thing we need to insist on - the lounge is off limits as office space for the conductors, etc. Those fine folks have plenty of other areas they are already using as office space. A ton is being taken away from the sleeping car passenger who is continuing to pay top dollar. Amtrak needs to make it clear that the sleeper lounge is NOT office space, and not a space for any Amtrak employee to spread out supplies. Use the closed off, empty unused kitchen for that.

Next, refine the meal delivery / eating plan. The first thing that should go is the silly notion that everyone's food should be delivered to their room. There are plenty of folks who NEED their food delivered for a variety of reasons including mobility - and there are also a number of people who look forward to escaping their room for meal time. Let us able-bodied who choose to pick up the food do so ourselves. We don't need the SCA to do that for us and become more overworked and grumpy than is often the case already.

The SCA should take everyone's order as they arrive - just as dinner reservations are typically taken today. Give passengers an order form, and explain the choices. The form specifies what the food choice for dinner and/or breakfast - along with where they want to eat it (room or lounge), and when they want each meal (among available time choices). In addition to the dinner/breakfast options - there should be fancy dessert and wine/cheese packages as well - available at alternative times (outside meal times) at an extra charge. We're already spending nearly a grand (or more) for an overnight for a couple - why not offer options (even at an added cost) that will make the experience more enjoyable?

For those who choose to eat in the lounge - there needs to be a designated pickup spot for their food. I don't care where that is - either the sleeper lounge or the regular lounge would both work just fine. During designated meal times, half the lounge would be reserved for passengers who chose to consume their meals there. The other half is always available for true lounge space.

Next - let's tweak just a little the options for breakfast and dinner. For breakfast, add a true traditional continental breakfast option - with a couple of choices of cold cereal and pastry, with some sort of fruit. Make the pastry a little unhealthy (cinnamon roll). There are enough healthy options on the menu - a lot of folks are on vacation and want to be a little bit bad. Also - why not make the same hot breakfast sandwich already available in the lounge one of the choices for breakfast?

For dinner, either add another salad option (maybe a fancy southwest salad or some sort of apple/cranberry/pecan salad) - and something more creative like cold fried chicken, baked beans/potato salad and fruit. Something you might eat at a picnic. Suggest a wine for each of the meal choices.

Lastly - the part that falls outside this program - ditch the booths in half the lounge. Turn half of it into a true lounge - with alternative seating (couches, chairs, etc.). Make the ambience as nice as possible. If the kitchen area is never going to be used to heat food - then do something different with it. Make it a bar area, or a refrigerated area for paid wine/snacks, or something. Maybe this falls under the "reinvesting part of the savings back in the program" side of things. Ultimately, I'd like to see this end up with a dedicated lounge attendant / bar tender - but that falls outside the current program I'm sure.

Ultimately, I want to see a return to hot food on even these 1 night routes. But if that's not going to happen, let's try to get at least a minimal program in place that sleeping car passengers can accept and get SOME value for. Part of the appeal of the Pacific Parlor Car when I took it years ago was the feeling of exclusivity. These new VII Diner / Sleeper Lounges are nice cars - take full advantage of that. I just don't see the current program (as they've previewed in their press release) as being attractive to most sleeping car passengers. Heck, my program might not be that attractive either - but I think it is t least a little better.

This might be the best post I’ve ever seen. Agree 100% with literally everything you said.

 

[Bob Dylan]

Now is the time for all good train advocates to let their Congress Critters AND Amtrak know their thoughts and ideas on the upcoming and continuing changes @ Amtrak.

As was said, this sucks and I won't ride anymore unless things stay the same is NOT feedback that's helpful in the Executive Suite and on Capitol Hill!

 

[pennyk]

The groundwork for all this F&B downgrade was laid in the authorization bill that required Amtrak to balance the budget of F&B as a separate line item, as absurd requirement in and of itself. That is currently the statute and as Anderson said, right or wrong, he will deliver per the statute. One obvious way, and the only fully legal way, to fix this is to change the statute. We have started the discussion going on how and when to change the statute, at the RPA Meeting this week, and with Senators and Reps on the Hill too.

And before anyone jumps up and says that Anderson should ignore the statutes selectively, be careful what you wish for. Currently, there is a significant possibility that the current administration will simply ignore the appropriations statutes, and simply not spend the money that has been appropriated by withholding its disbursement using one excuse or the other, even though that would certainly be against the spirit if not the letter of the law.

Does anyone have the statute(s) number(s) requiring Amtrak to balance the budget of F&B? In writing to my Reps, I would like to refer to a statute number (and I am a bit lazy right now and don't want to look it up). Thanks.

 

[cpotisch]

The groundwork for all this F&B downgrade was laid in the authorization bill that required Amtrak to balance the budget of F&B as a separate line item, as absurd requirement in and of itself. That is currently the statute and as Anderson said, right or wrong, he will deliver per the statute. One obvious way, and the only fully legal way, to fix this is to change the statute. We have started the discussion going on how and when to change the statute, at the RPA Meeting this week, and with Senators and Reps on the Hill too.

And before anyone jumps up and says that Anderson should ignore the statutes selectively, be careful what you wish for. Currently, there is a significant possibility that the current administration will simply ignore the appropriations statutes, and simply not spend the money that has been appropriated by withholding its disbursement using one excuse or the other, even though that would certainly be against the spirit if not the letter of the law.

Does anyone have the statute(s) number(s) requiring Amtrak to balance the budget of F&B? In writing to my Reps, I would like to refer to a statute number (and I am a bit lazy right now and don't want to look it up). Thanks.

It's either statute 6-6-6 or statute 13-13-13.

 

[pennyk]

The groundwork for all this F&B downgrade was laid in the authorization bill that required Amtrak to balance the budget of F&B as a separate line item, as absurd requirement in and of itself. That is currently the statute and as Anderson said, right or wrong, he will deliver per the statute. One obvious way, and the only fully legal way, to fix this is to change the statute. We have started the discussion going on how and when to change the statute, at the RPA Meeting this week, and with Senators and Reps on the Hill too.

And before anyone jumps up and says that Anderson should ignore the statutes selectively, be careful what you wish for. Currently, there is a significant possibility that the current administration will simply ignore the appropriations statutes, and simply not spend the money that has been appropriated by withholding its disbursement using one excuse or the other, even though that would certainly be against the spirit if not the letter of the law.

Does anyone have the statute(s) number(s) requiring Amtrak to balance the budget of F&B? In writing to my Reps, I would like to refer to a statute number (and I am a bit lazy right now and don't want to look it up). Thanks.

My question was serious and it appears that no one immediately knew the answer, so I looked it up.

If my research is accurate, the statute is Title 49 USC Ch. 243, section 24321

§24321. Food and beverage reform (a) Plan.—Not later than 90 days after the date of enactment of the Passenger Rail Reform and Investment Act of 2015, Amtrak shall develop and begin implementing a plan to eliminate, within 5 years of such date of enactment, the operating loss associated with providing food and beverage service on board Amtrak trains.

(b) Considerations.—In developing and implementing the plan, Amtrak shall consider a combination of cost management and revenue generation initiatives, including—

(1) scheduling optimization;

(2) on-board logistics;

(3) product development and supply chain efficiency;

(4) training, awards, and accountability;

(5) technology enhancements and process improvements; and

(6) ticket revenue allocation.

© Savings Clause.—Amtrak shall ensure that no Amtrak employee holding a position as of the date of enactment of the Passenger Rail Reform and Investment Act of 2015 is involuntarily separated because of—

(1) the development and implementation of the plan required under subsection (a); or

(2) any other action taken by Amtrak to implement this section.

(d) No Federal Funding for Operating Losses.—Beginning on the date that is 5 years after the date of enactment of the Passenger Rail Reform and Investment Act of 2015, no Federal funds may be used to cover any operating loss associated with providing food and beverage service on a route operated by Amtrak or a rail carrier that operates a route in lieu of Amtrak pursuant to section 24711.

 

[Thirdrail7]

The groundwork for all this F&B downgrade was laid in the authorization bill that required Amtrak to balance the budget of F&B as a separate line item, as absurd requirement in and of itself. That is currently the statute and as Anderson said, right or wrong, he will deliver per the statute. One obvious way, and the only fully legal way, to fix this is to change the statute. We have started the discussion going on how and when to change the statute, at the RPA Meeting this week, and with Senators and Reps on the Hill too.

And before anyone jumps up and says that Anderson should ignore the statutes selectively, be careful what you wish for. Currently, there is a significant possibility that the current administration will simply ignore the appropriations statutes, and simply not spend the money that has been appropriated by withholding its disbursement using one excuse or the other, even though that would certainly be against the spirit if not the letter of the law.

Does anyone have the statute(s) number(s) requiring Amtrak to balance the budget of F&B? In writing to my Reps, I would like to refer to a statute number (and I am a bit lazy right now and don't want to look it up). Thanks.

I will quote from 2008's PRIIA update for 2014

Over the years, Amtrak has operated under unrealistic fiscal expectations, and without a sufficient level of transparency.

While PRIIA 2008 has taken some initial steps to improve Amtrak’s financial condition, much more is required to

achieve greater cost efficiencies and savings in passenger rail service, provide greater transparency at Amtrak, and

ensure that the service operates like a true business. Specifically, PRRIA 2014:

Reduces Amtrak’s authorized funding levels by 40 percent: Fiscal responsibility is a top priority. For decades,

authorization bills have included unrealistic funding levels. PRRIA 2014 breaks this cycle by authorizing Amtrak at

fiscally responsible, recently appropriated funding levels. This requires Amtrak to plan based on real, constrained

funding levels — not overly optimistic targets that will never materialize.

Eliminates Amtrak’s losses in food and beverage service: For years, Amtrak has operated its food and beverage

service at a loss, ignoring mandates that this service must break even. PRRIA 2014 finally tackles this problem

head-on by requiring that Amtrak implement a series of reforms that will reduce losses and grow revenue to

eliminate this loss in five years. The bill will accomplish this by requiring:

• Improved product and supply chain efficiencies

• Strengthened training and accountability for staff

• Improving scheduling of food and beverage staff

• Ticket revenue enhancements

Additionally, the FAST act of 2015 indicated that Amtrak must reduce its lost and appropriated funds may not be used to offset food and beverages losses. It is a huge file so I will present the relevant portion:

SEC. 11207. FOOD AND BEVERAGE REFORM.

(a) AMENDMENT.—Chapter 243 of title 49, United States Code,

is further amended by adding at the end the following new section:

‘‘§ 24321. Food and beverage reform

‘‘(a) PLAN.—Not later than 90 days after the date of enactment

of the Passenger Rail Reform and Investment Act of 2015, Amtrak

shall develop and begin implementing a plan to eliminate, within

5 years of such date of enactment, the operating loss associated

with providing food and beverage service on board Amtrak trains.

‘‘(b) CONSIDERATIONS.—In developing and implementing the

plan, Amtrak shall consider a combination of cost management

and revenue generation initiatives, including—

‘‘(1) scheduling optimization;

‘‘(2) on-board logistics;

‘‘(3) product development and supply chain efficiency;

‘‘(4) training, awards, and accountability;

‘‘(5) technology enhancements and process improvements;

and

‘‘(6) ticket revenue allocation.

‘‘© SAVINGS CLAUSE.—Amtrak shall ensure that no Amtrak

employee holding a position as of the date of enactment of the

Passenger Rail Reform and Investment Act of 2015 is involuntarily

separated because of—

PUBLIC LAW 114–94—DEC. 4, 2015 129 STAT. 1639

‘‘(1) the development and implementation of the plan

required under subsection (a); or

‘‘(2) any other action taken by Amtrak to implement this

section.

‘‘(d) NO FEDERAL FUNDING FOR OPERATING LOSSES.—Beginning

on the date that is 5 years after the date of enactment of the

Passenger Rail Reform and Investment Act of 2015, no Federal

funds may be used to cover any operating loss associated with

providing food and beverage service on a route operated by Amtrak

or a rail carrier that operates a route in lieu of Amtrak pursuant

to section 24711.

‘‘(e) REPORT.—Not later than 120 days after the date of enactment

of the Passenger Rail Reform and Investment Act of 2015,

and annually thereafter for 5 years, Amtrak shall transmit to

the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure of the House

of Representatives and the Committee on Commerce, Science, and

Transportation of the Senate a report containing the plan developed

pursuant to subsection (a) and a description of progress in the

implementation of the plan.’’.

(b) CONFORMING AMENDMENT.—The table of sections for chapter

243 of title 49, United States Code, is further amended by adding

at the end the following new item:

‘‘24321. Food and beverage reform.’’.

This law was passed in 2015 and it is 2018. They have two years to comply with this law as written.

 

[cpotisch]

The groundwork for all this F&B downgrade was laid in the authorization bill that required Amtrak to balance the budget of F&B as a separate line item, as absurd requirement in and of itself. That is currently the statute and as Anderson said, right or wrong, he will deliver per the statute. One obvious way, and the only fully legal way, to fix this is to change the statute. We have started the discussion going on how and when to change the statute, at the RPA Meeting this week, and with Senators and Reps on the Hill too.

And before anyone jumps up and says that Anderson should ignore the statutes selectively, be careful what you wish for. Currently, there is a significant possibility that the current administration will simply ignore the appropriations statutes, and simply not spend the money that has been appropriated by withholding its disbursement using one excuse or the other, even though that would certainly be against the spirit if not the letter of the law.

Does anyone have the statute(s) number(s) requiring Amtrak to balance the budget of F&B? In writing to my Reps, I would like to refer to a statute number (and I am a bit lazy right now and don't want to look it up). Thanks.

My question was serious and it appears that no one immediately knew the answer, so I looked it up.

If my research is accurate, the statute is Title 49 USC Ch. 243, section 24321

§24321. Food and beverage reform

(a) Plan.—Not later than 90 days after the date of enactment of the Passenger Rail Reform and Investment Act of 2015, Amtrak shall develop and begin implementing a plan to eliminate, within 5 years of such date of enactment, the operating loss associated with providing food and beverage service on board Amtrak trains.

(b) Considerations.—In developing and implementing the plan, Amtrak shall consider a combination of cost management and revenue generation initiatives, including—

(1) scheduling optimization;

(2) on-board logistics;

(3) product development and supply chain efficiency;

(4) training, awards, and accountability;

(5) technology enhancements and process improvements; and

(6) ticket revenue allocation.

(c ) Savings Clause.—Amtrak shall ensure that no Amtrak employee holding a position as of the date of enactment of the Passenger Rail Reform and Investment Act of 2015 is involuntarily separated because of—

(1) the development and implementation of the plan required under subsection (a); or

(2) any other action taken by Amtrak to implement this section.

(d) No Federal Funding for Operating Losses.—Beginning on the date that is 5 years after the date of enactment of the Passenger Rail Reform and Investment Act of 2015, no Federal funds may be used to cover any operating loss associated with providing food and beverage service on a route operated by Amtrak or a rail carrier that operates a route in lieu of Amtrak pursuant to section 24711.

Thanks for posting. Where'd you find that? I looked up 'Amtrak 2018 Food and Beverage Statute' and a million other similar things, but couldn't find information anywhere.

 

[Thirdrail7]

It wasn't really hard, Cpotish. While I knew it was part of the Fact Act and PRiia (although I wasn't sure which version) even googling Amtrak Food and Beverages Losses Law brings up the post PennyK found, which is the Cliff Notes version:

https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/49/24321

As I previously stated, this law was passed in 2015. It is 2018. 3 years down and 2 years to go.

 

[crescent-zephyr]

And the previous attempts at following that law were the current situation on the city of New Orleans (which can't be any better than these boxes meals will be.. And at least they will be able to be served to your room in a timely manner), eliminating the diner on the star, and eliminating the seperate cafe LSA on the city and the capitol.

Seems to me if they would just learn how to properly UPSELL premium drinks that would help the bottom line real fast. Knowledge of the wine menu, properly advertising mixed drinks, and offering premium breakfast drinks (Bloody Mary, Mimosa, espresso) would help a lot. Maybe that's what the LSA in the sleeper lounge is for? We shall see.

 

[bretton88]

To note in that same legislation, Amtrak is "to run like a business." So when Anderson says he is just following the law, he is not wrong. This is the wonderful world of congressional micromanagement. Since Amtrak is seen as a bit of a luxury discretionary item, in order to obtain new and greater funding the best course of action is to show that you are complying with the laws and trying to be a good use of existing funding. Now maybe it won't work, but it's certainly better than ignoring congress (which both PRIAA and FAST mention Amtrak of being guilty).

 

[cpotisch]

Seems to me if they would just learn how to properly UPSELL premium drinks that would help the bottom line real fast. Knowledge of the wine menu, properly advertising mixed drinks, and offering premium breakfast drinks (Bloody Mary, Mimosa, espresso) would help a lot. Maybe that's what the LSA in the sleeper lounge is for? We shall see.

On some of the menus a few years ago, Amtrak was really pushing the wine. I forget the exact wording but the menus would say stuff like:

• "We recommend this entree with one of our fine vineyard selections"
• "Enjoying this salmon with our chilled Pinot Grigio, which compliments it beautifully."
  

Beautiful words from a train company describing its mediocre food served in a 60 year old train car.

 

[TinCan782]

So now, what happens to the Amtrak Culinary Advisory Team? Will they be coming up with "Fresh Choices"?

Never mattered to me looking at the menu as long as what sounded good (the description), matched what was put on the table.

http://blog.amtrak.com/2017/01/bringing-innovation-to-the-table/

 

[scoostraw]

At least Amtrak could have been honest in their rollout of this new "service". Something along the lines of "As a federally subsidized transportation service, we have been directed by congress to eliminate food and beverage economic losses. As such, this summer we are eliminating the dining cars from these trains. While Amtrak continues to strive to meet the needs of our passengers, we hope you will all help us understand your needs by means of expressing your feedback to us directly and/or to your congressional representatives."

This "Fresh Choices" nonsense smacks of the kind of crap I have come to thoroughly despise about modern corporate America. Everything is highly spun up and you have to parse every sentence - plus see what has been omitted - to tease out what is actually being said.

Myself I am in favor of having food vendors meet Amtrak trains at designated stops enroute - just like they do in other 3rd-world countries.

 

[spinnaker]

Why not just charge an extra $20 or $30 if you want a hot meal? I am paying an extra $60 for my bicycle for 3 legs of a trip this year. I can actually ship it $2 cheaper using a bike shipping service but I like the convenience of having my bike with me before and at the end each leg. Plus I have a ride home right from the station when I get to Pittsburgh. I really don't mind paying the extra $60 (actually only extra $2) to not have to pack it up and to have the bike along the whole way.

For what I am already paying for a roomette, I don't mind paying an extra $20, $30 a day to get a decent meal. A hot meal could be optional. They already have their website setup to charge extra for bikes. It would not surprise me if an extra cost plus item like hot meals could be added with a simple configuration change. I wouldn't mind making a menu choice ahead of time , if it meant a cost savings. It would be nice if you can change you mind up to say a week ahead but when making the reservation would be fine too.

 

[spinnaker]

I guess the problem with my idea is there would still be the cost of the dining car. Amtrak would need to see if there are enough people taking the option to cover the cost. OK then, just don't make it an option. Raise the price of the ticket. I would be most people willing to pay for a roomette aren't going let $50 - $100 cause them not to ride. Lack of a hot meal might though.

I can get home a whole lot cheaper flying but I consider the train ride back home a part of my vacation. When you consider the price of rooms and meals in a hotel, the train is actually a pretty darn good deal. A hotel room might be more comfortable but I would like to see you move it at 80 MPH.

And a roomette is more comfortable than firts class seats on a plane light years more comfortable than coach.

 

[crescent-zephyr]

Hot meals and the full dining car experience are 2 different things.

If they are keeping the full physical dining car, the potential for adding back hot meals is there.

How did the "at your seat" coach meals do? Couldn't the coach attrndants offer these to coach passengers?

How do the "big sky chicken dinners," served cold, do on the empire builder? They've been around for 20 years and have always sold despite the full dining car being on the train. So right there is proof that some coach passengers would rather buy a cold boxed meal than pay for a dining car experience.

 

[scoostraw]

If they are keeping the full physical dining car, the potential for adding back hot meals is there.

I would not expect the dining cars being in the consist to last very long at all.

 

[Ryan]

Given that it's already been said that they're using ViewDiners are The Sleeper Lounge, your expectations are not aligned with reality.

 

[scoostraw]

I can see the press release now.

"The sleeper lounges were under-utilized and thus have been removed."

 

[jis]

Redacted.

Mods: my administravia related post (and response to it) can be hidden away as they do not add to the discussion of the main subject of the thread

 

[pennyk]

Is it perhaps time to move this geeky "How to" stuff for the website to an appropriate other thread, since this has nothing to do with "Amtrak's new Fresh Choice"?

I admit that I am guilty of participating in this myself.

We have attempted to move all such posts to the Help Desk Forum thread "Editing quoted text?"

http://discuss.amtraktrains.com/index.php?/forum/4-help-desk-and-suggestion-box/

 

[railbuck]

“Destroy” is a bit over the top, I think. We’re talking about a sub-18 hour trip that you’re asleep for the majority of.

Destroy is exactly correct. There is no longer breakfast service on the LSL.

While I will bring my own cooler and acquire eggs and ice in Chicago, many people will simply fly.

In my case, west of Toledo, flying to Chicago would be inefficient; the choice is between Amtrak and driving. I was looking forward to the VL2 on the LSL; board at breakfast time, eat an omelet and visit with other passengers in the ambience of the new dining car while riding across northern Indiana.

Now that it will be a sleeper lounge, I won't even have access to the car, food or no food.