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

[CHvision]

So, Will the Capitol Limited not have the Cross-country diner starting June 1st?

 

[cpotisch]

So, Will the Capitol Limited not have the Cross-country diner starting June 1st?

Aren't they expected to use the CCC as the sleeper lounge?

 

[tommylicious]

I pass gas on this entire notion. Basically changing LD food to a crappy sack lunch.

 

[Lonestar648]

I think they need the dining cars for cold storage of the meals, so why not use the cars as a lounge, sell some drinks to see if that revenue covers the LSA cost.

 

[cpotisch]

Is there any real reason why they're not heating up any in a microwave or convection oven? Because that would be pretty minimal added work, but with quite a significant benefit of being able to advertise "hot meals". Even if the quality of the food stays pretty much the same, many people will immediately imagine a better product if it's warmed up.

 

[Lonestar648]

The SCA doesn't have the time to do meal prep like with hot meals and still handle the demands in the Sleeping Car.

 

[cpotisch]

The SCA doesn't have the time to do meal prep like with hot meals and still handle the demands in the Sleeping Car.

Sleeper Lounge LSA, though?

 

[PaulM]

Did anyone spot this?

=========================================================

© 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.

============================================================================

I thought it was AU wisdom that labor costs are what kills dining cars? How can you become profitable if you can't go after your cost driver? It's not like there are expanding opportunities for diisplaced chefs and wait staff.

elsewhere in the system.

Similarly, there has been a lot of talk about the inventory management problems stocking dining cars, waste etc. How will this help? You are replacing raw materials, a lot of which should have a shelf life greater than one trip, with finished goods that can't be saved. The information available to the inventory managers will remain the same, namely the manifest. If the dining cars frequently ran out of an item the first day oput, why would the new system be any diferent?

 

[Palmetto]

Who keeps track of who's had the one, free alcoholic drink?

 

[scoostraw]

I think they need the dining cars for cold storage of the meals, so why not use the cars as a lounge, sell some drinks to see if that revenue covers the LSA cost.

I think what will happen ultimately is that there will be only one car. Maybe the Viewliner diner is reconfigured and becomes a cafe car for everyone - including serving limited hot food. Sleeping car pax will have meals delivered to their rooms.

I think this "sleeping car lounge" idea came into being only because there is not enough time in the short term to reconfigure the diners.

 

[crescent-zephyr]

Is there any real reason why they're not heating up any in a microwave or convection oven? Because that would be pretty minimal added work, but with quite a significant benefit of being able to advertise "hot meals". Even if the quality of the food stays pretty much the same, many people will immediately imagine a better product if it's warmed up.

I mentioned earlier.... This is a major change and needs to be rolled out as simple as possible. Once things get settled in, perhaps hot meals like the Acela meals can be added.

For reference: when "simplified dining" started they eliminated dining car positions and went down to 1 chef. No cooked to order items remained. No steak at dinner, and the previously availble "eggs cooked any way" was replaced by a pre-packaged "Bob evans breakfast scramble" after some time, it was decided the 1 chef could handle more and steak was added back at dinner and scrambled eggs at breakfast.

 

[AcrossTheOcean]

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.

If you paid for a roomette before the change was announced, you already paid for a "decent meal." To my knowledge, Amtrak is not reducing the cost of a roomette or giving refunds to those who purchased a sleeper fare but won't receive the "decent meal" that was adertisedd to be included in the cost. If they did and allowed people to purchase it as an add-on, it would be a different story.

When airlines make changes in service, like if they start charging for checked luggage, it goes by the date that the passenger purchased the ticket, not the date the passenger flies. There is a transition period during which some passengers have to pay for their checked luggage and others don't. However, this strategy doesn't make sense for on-board services, so there should have been much more lead time on the change in food provided.

I guess my biggest complaint is the suggested breakfast doesn't sound filling enough to count as "brunch" on the CL heading toward WAS. Will they have boxed lunches available if the train is late, or will the SCAs just have to deal with the hangry passengers? I worry the change in food provided will come as a surprise to many of this summer's sleeping car passengers who bought their tickets months ago.

 

[jebr]

Off-topic posts have been hidden. Discussion of the RailPAC memo can be discussed here.

 

[jis]

If you paid for a roomette before the change was announced, you already paid for a "decent meal." To my knowledge, Amtrak is not reducing the cost of a roomette or giving refunds to those who purchased a sleeper fare but won't receive the "decent meal" that was adertisedd to be included in the cost. If they did and allowed people to purchase it as an add-on, it would be a different story.

Let me start by stating up front that I do not support the proposed changes, and indeed I would like to see at least some significant changes made to the food that is offered.

Having said that, can you point to a single piece of advertisement that mentions "decent meal"? I can't find such. The contract is just for the travel part, and for Sleepers "complementary meals". You could find what menus were on offer on a given day. But there was nothing that suggested that the same menu would be offered six months hence.

 

[Skyline]

If you paid for a roomette before the change was announced, you already paid for a "decent meal." To my knowledge, Amtrak is not reducing the cost of a roomette or giving refunds to those who purchased a sleeper fare but won't receive the "decent meal" that was adertisedd to be included in the cost. If they did and allowed people to purchase it as an add-on, it would be a different story.

Let me start by stating up front that I do not support the proposed changes, and indeed I would like to see at least some significant changes made to the food that is offered.

Having said that, can you point to a single piece of advertisement that mentions "decent meal"? I can't find such. The contract is just for the travel part, and for Sleepers "complementary meals". You could find what menus were on offer on a given day. But there was nothing that suggested that the same menu would be offered six months hence.

Seriously? You don't think passengers expect meal service to be as good as, if not better than, what they've experienced in the past? What RR tradition has been for longer than they've been alive? That they should be willing to accept this downgrade without a price adjustment for tickets already purchased based on an assumption of something better than a poor stab at continental breakfast?

Pax seem to understand when a diner is bad-ordered and meals consisting of hard boiled eggs and breakfast sandwiches are on-loaded at a stop -- so no one starves. But this is intentional, and there needs to be more consideration given the pax. This is breach of contract, despite the mumbo jumbo of attorneys.

When sleeper prices went thru the roof in the '90s and '00s, we were told that the cost of providing good meals and full dining service was a big part of it. Now, sleeper prices are staying the same (could go up further in months/years ahead), and that full dining service and decent food is being trashed. Seriously, I expect SP-style automats to be next, with no price reduction for sleepers.

 

[jis]

There is a huge difference between being a decent organization and one that carries on barely covering their legal rear ends. Amtrak is currently sitting in the latter category, and my question was to try to verify whether they are able to do that or not, given what they have really said in their blurbs and contract of carriage. At least I am not suggesting that Amtrak is being a decent organization by any means at the present time.

 

[PVD]

What you might reasonably expect based on past experience, and what forms a legal basis for a breach of contract, may be worlds apart.

 

[crescent2]

I only drop in and out here, and may have missed some pertinent things along the way.

However--

If I understand correctly, although at present this involves only two trains, isn't this a terrible waste of the new dining cars, which took forever to get, to now let the kitchens sit unused? It would seem that a good business model would make better use of brand new, expensive equipment. Perhaps with hindsight the money would not have been spent on buying them, but the fact is it was, and now Amtrak has them. Surely they can be better utilized. With Amtrak's perpetual shortage of funds, this is no minor thing.

If I were in Congress, I'd be even more hesitant to provide additional funds in the future if I thought they might be spent on equipment that, once delivered, would never be fully put to use. That's wasteful in anyone's book.

This just makes Amtrak management look incompetent and irresponsible with resources, which Amtrak surely does not need when begging for funds. Just because they received better funding this go-around doesn't mean they will in the future.

Plus, people do have to eat during multi-day periods of time, but they already knew that when the dining cars were ordered.

My two cents, which may be about what it's worth.

 

[AmtrakBlue]

I only drop in and out here, and may have missed some pertinent things along the way.

However--

If I understand correctly, although at present this involves only two trains, isn't this a terrible waste of the new dining cars, which took forever to get, to now let the kitchens sit unused? It would seem that a good business model would make better use of brand new, expensive equipment. Perhaps with hindsight the money would not have been spent on buying them, but the fact is it was, and now Amtrak has them. Surely they can be better utilized. With Amtrak's perpetual shortage of funds, this is no minor thing.

If I were in Congress, I'd be even more hesitant to provide additional funds in the future if I thought they might be spent on equipment that, once delivered, would never be fully put to use. That's wasteful in anyone's book.

This just makes Amtrak management look incompetent and irresponsible with resources, which Amtrak surely does not need when begging for funds. Just because they received better funding this go-around doesn't mean they will in the future.

Plus, people do have to eat during multi-day periods of time, but they already knew that when the dining cars were ordered.

My two cents, which may be about what it's worth.

And my thinking is it would be a bigger waste of the diners if Amtrak goes under because of lack of funds and/or because they did not meet the mandate to get rid of F&B losses.

 

[cpotisch]

If I understand correctly, although at present this involves only two trains, isn't this a terrible waste of the new dining cars, which took forever to get, to now let the kitchens sit unused?

The Capitol Limited is Superliner, so the LSL is the only train that will be "wasting" ViewDiners. And since there are only three LSL consists, there are only three affected diners. In the grand scheme of things, that's not that much of a waste.

 

[rrdude]

I think "under-utilized" is a better description. If they sat unused, that would be a waste. I can see taking out about four 4-tops, and putting in some lounge style seating. God knows the LSA is gonna have all the room they need to spread out... And I would hope, after the initial public reactions, they will consider utilizing the convection ovens or micro-zappers, for some new, as of yet unknown, hot entree choice, even with one LSA.

 

[crescent2]

"And my thinking is it would be a bigger waste of the diners if Amtrak goes under because of lack of funds and/or because they did not meet the mandate to get rid of F&B losses."

That would be true if that were the only alternative, but I think it's debatable that the present course is one that is likely to "save" Amtrak.

If what several others have posted is accurate, it does not address the largest cost factor (employees/wages), and the inner workings re food revenue aren't good on paper. Add to that the dissatisfaction of passengers with the skimpy food and the wastefulness (more importantly at this point, the appearance of it) of the poor utilization of the new equipment. All the little parts added together just don't seem to be a good solution. Not that I'm an expert on running a railroad, LOL. I'll leave that to you folks.

It just seems there should be a better way, now that Amtrak is getting much better equipment, and I guess that was my underlying point.

Edit (to mostly agree with new posts seen later): Yes, I said that at present it only affects two (correction, one) train. As has been pointed out by others, though, there seems to be a trend to do away with full dining service. Other trains have already been affected. I hope it stops with the two trains discussed in this thread and the remaining trains with full dining cars and service stay that way.

As for "under utilization," I totally agree. That's why I said "kitchens sit unused," "better utilized," and "better used." I understand the cars would still be in the consists, only used as sleeper lounges. The not-inexpensive kitchen sections wouldn't be utilized, though.

I admittedly hate to see the full dining service go on any trains. It's such a nice (and, imo, needed) part of LD train travel. That said, I do still hope a better business solution can be found.

 

[jebr]

it does not address the largest cost factor (employees/wages)

From my understanding, it does address that cost factor by eliminating most of the diner positions. Instead of having 4-5 staff members running diner service, there's one staff member attending the lounge and prepping the meals (whatever prep is needed for that.) I thought I heard they were also adding a sleeper attendant as well, but that might be mixed up in my brain with the staff member for the sleeper lounge. Eliminating 3-4 positions per train does quite a bit to help with labor costs, though it's not a good situation if those employees can't be placed elsewhere in the system.

 

[crescent-zephyr]

I havent seen anywhere that a sleeper attendant would be added. But anything is possible I suppose.

 

[bretton88]

I've heard they're adding a sleeper attendant and a coach attendant, that's probably how they get around the union issues.