Beware of unwanted reservation changes!

[Ispolkom]

And NO!; all roomettes are not the same. Some are closer to a bathroom, some are more prone to train noise, passenger traffic, boarding and luggage rack noise...etc. It would be like one walking into a restaurant ordering and paying for a $40 swordfish dinner, and then receiving a $5 box of Van De Kamps. Then the waiter saying "well whats wrong?...It's still a fish"

No, not all roomettes are the same *to you*. On Superliners I've slept in every one except for #1 and 11-14 (though I often book the family bedroom), and *for me* they are all pretty much the same. For me the neighbors and track conditions have made much more of a difference than the location.

To use your fish example, it would be like ordering red snapper, and being served tilapia, something that happens all the time.

 

[user 1215]

I'm with those who think it should be first come first served too. While small children obviously need to be seated with their parents, I don't see why adults can't sit separately for awhile, or older children, until a pair of seats open up. My friend and I travelled a few hours before we got seats together, we didn't see any reason to make a fuss. I think it's a bit mean to make someone with a window seat move, if they were there first, and neither of us were arrogant enough to boot out those people who boarded ahead of us just because we were lucky enough to have a companion! We got seats together down the track, and what felt like the excessive thanks of the car attendant for what seemed to me as acceptance of the situation as it stood, no worries.

With the rooms I don't see why someone who had booked earlier than another party should be moved. If a group wants to be together then Amtrak should tell them when they book that there are no longer adjacent rooms, but if it is that important to the family they will check with other customers. If I were the family booking I would at that point say, oh please don't go to the trouble, unless it was a situation with many more very young children than adults and if that were the case, a bedroom would be better for at least some of the party. The people to be switched could at least have the choice. I spend thousands of dollars and fly for many hours in order to take an LD trip. I book as early as possible. I check that I get a room upstairs. I don't see why I should be treated as less important than a family. Nor more important either but first in first served is the only fair way to put someone above another in such a situation, and I make sacrifices (it's a lot to pay so far in advance) so that my room is sorted early on.

Dunno, maybe I'm used to valuing fairness over anything!! I felt outraged on behalf of the OP at comments that they were being selfish, when they were first. When I was a kid, the sofa rules dictated whoever got it first, had it all evening. The getting was no holds barred, so long as you weren't disqualified by leaving before being excused from the table and if someone was injured in the racing for it then that was unfortunate but first was first and my brother and I respected that

.

Couldn't agree more with everything here.

I'd almost agree with coach. We're talking about sleeping accomodations, though.

but NEVER guaranteed under the system we have today - except when children are involved. We always guaranteed connecting rooms (when requested) if there was a scenario where there could be only children in just one room (ie: 4 adults, 4 kids, yes; 5 adults, 3 kids, no). It's not necessarily fair to blame a family for only booking their vacation 10 months in advance just because a couple of individuals picked rooms 11 months in advance. Families should always trump the lone traveler.

Sorry, but here's where I must disagree. Would you mind telling me *why* you believe "families should always trump the lone traveler?" And where (either in law or Amtrak policy) it says they can? I didn't make the choices for those families. They chose their life on their own. They chose to have children on their own. They chose to ride the train on their own... They made their choices, as did I. They should be subject to the exact same policies/procedures as I. If there are sufficient accommodations to honor everyone's requests, then great. Otherwise, First come... First served. It's the only fair way.

First come first serve isn't always fair. Whenever there is a scenario where children are involved, the safety and comfort of a family should take priority. It may be hard to explain to someone who is not used to travelling with a family unit involving small children, but there is an element of safety that can be mitigated being either next door or across the hall. This is even more important on Viewliner sets which have a connecting door between bedrooms.

Sorry - you get the same scenery and arrive at the same time. Anything else is superficial.

Sorry... but no :excl: Same scenery and same time, perhaps, but not necessarily "same comfort!" There are legitimate reasons why I'm so "picky" when it comes to Amtrak rooms... Medical reasons.... I'd be happy to tell you them via PM.

I'm sure there are, and no need to PM. Though noticable, my experience hasn't been that one room is so much better than another that would justify a go/no-go decision. However, I DO respect your position and we must probably choose to agree to disagree.

 

[MSP_Train_Hopper]

I don't know how well these compare, but I did a stint working front desk at a hotel for a couple years and dealt with reservations and room assignments. In full disclosure, I've only gone coach on Amtrak and am taking the sleeper reservation process from what I have read on AU board postings.

When someone called into the hotel, we would tell them the room types and prices but not specific rooms (We have a room with 2 double beds for $99, etc.)

• If they had a specific room number they liked, we would book them into that room at the time they made the reservation and put a DO NOT MOVE alert on their rez. The room assignment would be included on their confirmation email and barring a mechanical failure, they would get that room.
• If they had a general request (close to elevators, high or low floor, etc.) we would make a note in their rez, but not assign them a room at that time. Each morning after checkouts had slowed, the morning shift would run a 'special request' report for people arriving later that day and assign rooms only to those who made a request based on what was available for occupancy during the guest's stay. About 95% of the time we were able to honor everyones placement request. The main clunker was the 4th of July when everyone wanted a high floor room overlooking the lake to watch fireworks.
• If they made just a general reservation (the vast majority), they would get the type of room they wanted, but the actual room assignment wouldn't be made until they checked in. In this case, the computer would start at the lowest number room and work it's way up as people checked in.

I've always been surprised that Amtrak assigns rooms as all reservations are made, as it takes out a lot of flexibility. An earlier post asked why can't they call people and ask if they are willing to be switched rooms. I know at the front desk where I worked, we simply didn't have the time and resources to be telephone negotiators. With hold times exceeding 30 minutes sometimes and probably less people woking the phones than they would ideally like, I would think Amtrak reservation agents are in the same boat, but even more so.

When it came to noisy neighbors, there were a few things we could do.

* If we were doing rounds and heard people being loud or someone called down with a complaint, we would go talk to the rowdy folks, and if that didn't work we could kick them out.

* If it was a baby crying, then if possible we would offer to move the people who had made the complaint (if possible, I'd even try and slip them a free room upgrade and help move their luggage). If the baby was crying, it must be upset over something and uprooting it's family wouldn't help it one bit. It's a baby, and no one should be surprised that they cry.

* If they complained about it in the morning, we generally would apologize but not offer any compensation. I would explain that had they let us know about it at the time, we would have corrected the situation but since they made the choice to not report it last night, then we were not given given the opportunity to make it right at that time. Many people would play this card with the motivation of getting a discount, and we weren't going to pay for their choice of accepting it through the night.

* Some people would blame us for putting them next to a family, and while we would do the best to help remedy the situation, we have no way of knowing what the dynamics of all the guests' families ahead of time. It may be easier (but not necessarily easy) for Amtrak to tell since everyone needs a ticket to ride, but not everyone needs to be listed on a hotel rez. Also, if you have a sleeper room called the Family Bedroom, it's not hard to figure out what type of guest may be staying in there.

Granted, we had a lot more room inventory to work with (268 rooms vs 1-4 sleeper cars), people weren't in such tight quarters, and the walls were thicker.

 

[JayPea]

As for me and my $.03 (inflation these days, you know :lol: ) if someone wanted to change rooms with me to accomodate a family, that would be fine with me, but I'd appreciate the courtesy of a phone call.

 

[user 1215]

Aloha

About the only thing that puzzles me is giving the room 2 to keep a family together. Room 2 is across from the attendant.. To really be together rooms across from each other are best.

Nice catch, something smells here. Maybe a sleeping car attended getting trained?

That's relatively obvious to those of us who have travelled in the sleepers. For newbies to Amtrak & unenlightened reservationists, it's probably not entirely understood.

 

[user 1215]

I don't know how well these compare, but I did a stint working front desk at a hotel for a couple years and dealt with reservations and room assignments. In full disclosure, I've only gone coach on Amtrak and am taking the sleeper reservation process from what I have read on AU board postings.

When someone called into the hotel, we would tell them the room types and prices but not specific rooms (We have a room with 2 double beds for $99, etc.)

• If they had a specific room number they liked, we would book them into that room at the time they made the reservation and put a DO NOT MOVE alert on their rez. The room assignment would be included on their confirmation email and barring a mechanical failure, they would get that room.
• If they had a general request (close to elevators, high or low floor, etc.) we would make a note in their rez, but not assign them a room at that time. Each morning after checkouts had slowed, the morning shift would run a 'special request' report for people arriving later that day and assign rooms only to those who made a request based on what was available for occupancy during the guest's stay. About 95% of the time we were able to honor everyones placement request. The main clunker was the 4th of July when everyone wanted a high floor room overlooking the lake to watch fireworks.
• If they made just a general reservation (the vast majority), they would get the type of room they wanted, but the actual room assignment wouldn't be made until they checked in. In this case, the computer would start at the lowest number room and work it's way up as people checked in.

I've always been surprised that Amtrak assigns rooms as all reservations are made, as it takes out a lot of flexibility. An earlier post asked why can't they call people and ask if they are willing to be switched rooms. I know at the front desk where I worked, we simply didn't have the time and resources to be telephone negotiators. With hold times exceeding 30 minutes sometimes and probably less people woking the phones than they would ideally like, I would think Amtrak reservation agents are in the same boat, but even more so.

Essentially my experience, although room number requests were very infrequently honored. We typically ran at 98%+ capacity year-round and it makes it really hard to block folks in and out when some patrons stay as long as 4 weeks. Also, the work going into assigning a room (blocking) was the responsibility of the night auditor. I worked in reservations which was not even co-located. We would fill the hotels' reservations into their inventory 48 hours in advance and that's the amount of time each property had to assign rooms.

 

[AutoTrDvr]

but NEVER guaranteed under the system we have today - except when children are involved. We always guaranteed connecting rooms (when requested) if there was a scenario where there could be only children in just one room (ie: 4 adults, 4 kids, yes; 5 adults, 3 kids, no). It's not necessarily fair to blame a family for only booking their vacation 10 months in advance just because a couple of individuals picked rooms 11 months in advance. Families should always trump the lone traveler.

Sorry, but here's where I must disagree. Would you mind telling me *why* you believe "families should always trump the lone traveler?" And where (either in law or Amtrak policy) it says they can? I didn't make the choices for those families. They chose their life on their own. They chose to have children on their own. They chose to ride the train on their own... They made their choices, as did I. They should be subject to the exact same policies/procedures as I. If there are sufficient accommodations to honor everyone's requests, then great. Otherwise, First come... First served. It's the only fair way.

First come first serve isn't always fair. Whenever there is a scenario where children are involved, the safety and comfort of a family should take priority. It may be hard to explain to someone who is not used to travelling with a family unit involving small children, but there is an element of safety that can be mitigated being either next door or across the hall. This is even more important on Viewliner sets which have a connecting door between bedrooms.

OK, I agree we need to disagree on the above. Believe it or not, I actually do understand the issues surrounding traveling with young kids, having witnessed many parents struggle with kids on planes/trains etc., as well as me being just as responsible for the transport of my own niece & nephew on occasion. Still, it's my choice/decision and responsibility as to how I transport them when they're in my care. And if I choose public transportation of any sort, it's my responsibility to ensure I can do so safely, and that no other passengers are inconvenienced by my decision. That includes ensuring I get adjoining seats / rooms where needed as early in advance as is possible. If I can't, then I need to pick a different mode, date, time, etc. of transport. It's all about "personal responsibility." First Come... First served is, indeed, always fair.

Sorry - you get the same scenery and arrive at the same time. Anything else is superficial.

Sorry... but no :excl: Same scenery and same time, perhaps, but not necessarily "same comfort!" There are legitimate reasons why I'm so "picky" when it comes to Amtrak rooms... Medical reasons.... I'd be happy to tell you them via PM.

I'm sure there are, and no need to PM. Though noticable, my experience hasn't been that one room is so much better than another that would justify a go/no-go decision. However, I DO respect your position and we must probably choose to agree to disagree.

IME, there are some subtle differences, especially related to height and center location vs. the ends. Some people may be able to tolerate them better and, for them, there isn't that much difference. For me, due to the "medical reasons," there is an increased sensitivity/awareness. Admittedly, height wouldn't seem to matter much on Viewliners, but I've never been on one so I don't know yet. I've only done original Herritage sleepers and SuperLiners, and my use of the Herritage cars predates the medical issues.

 

[zephyr17]

but NEVER guaranteed under the system we have today - except when children are involved. We always guaranteed connecting rooms (when requested) if there was a scenario where there could be only children in just one room (ie: 4 adults, 4 kids, yes; 5 adults, 3 kids, no). It's not necessarily fair to blame a family for only booking their vacation 10 months in advance just because a couple of individuals picked rooms 11 months in advance. Families should always trump the lone traveler.

Sorry, but here's where I must disagree. Would you mind telling me *why* you believe "families should always trump the lone traveler?" And where (either in law or Amtrak policy) it says they can? I didn't make the choices for those families. They chose their life on their own. They chose to have children on their own. They chose to ride the train on their own... They made their choices, as did I. They should be subject to the exact same policies/procedures as I. If there are sufficient accommodations to honor everyone's requests, then great. Otherwise, First come... First served. It's the only fair way.

First come first serve isn't always fair. Whenever there is a scenario where children are involved, the safety and comfort of a family should take priority. It may be hard to explain to someone who is not used to travelling with a family unit involving small children, but there is an element of safety that can be mitigated being either next door or across the hall. This is even more important on Viewliner sets which have a connecting door between bedrooms.

OK, I agree we need to disagree on the above. Believe it or not, I actually do understand the issues surrounding traveling with young kids, having witnessed many parents struggle with kids on planes/trains etc., as well as me being just as responsible for the transport of my own niece & nephew on occasion. Still, it's my choice/decision and responsibility as to how I transport them when they're in my care. And if I choose public transportation of any sort, it's my responsibility to ensure I can do so safely, and that no other passengers are inconvenienced by my decision. That includes ensuring I get adjoining seats / rooms where needed as early in advance as is possible. If I can't, then I need to pick a different mode, date, time, etc. of transport. It's all about "personal responsibility." First Come... First served is, indeed, always fair.

Sorry - you get the same scenery and arrive at the same time. Anything else is superficial.

Sorry... but no :excl: Same scenery and same time, perhaps, but not necessarily "same comfort!" There are legitimate reasons why I'm so "picky" when it comes to Amtrak rooms... Medical reasons.... I'd be happy to tell you them via PM.

I'm sure there are, and no need to PM. Though noticable, my experience hasn't been that one room is so much better than another that would justify a go/no-go decision. However, I DO respect your position and we must probably choose to agree to disagree.

IME, there are some subtle differences, especially related to height and center location vs. the ends. Some people may be able to tolerate them better and, for them, there isn't that much difference. For me, due to the "medical reasons," there is an increased sensitivity/awareness. Admittedly, height wouldn't seem to matter much on Viewliners, but I've never been on one so I don't know yet. I've only done original Herritage sleepers and SuperLiners, and my use of the Herritage cars predates the medical issues.

AutoTrnDr, you summed up my feelings perfectly as well. I had a young daughter, now 23, but when she was young I always made sure we were seated together on airlines when traveling. I always made sure of the seat assignments and considered it MY responsibility, no one else's. However, when the airline moved US, due to equipment changes, it was up to them to help me keep us together.

First come, first served, is, indeed, always fair. It is fair because there is nothing subjective about it and puts the responsibility where it belongs, where people take responsibility to watch out for their and their family's needs.

I am picky about rooms myself and I DO NOT like downstairs. I always make sure of the room when I reserve which is why I do not use the website for sleeper reservations. I would do a move if asked if it would be to what I consider an equivalent room (say a 3 in the 30 car to a 7 in a 31. Being close to the diner isn't critical to me). But ask me, don't tell me.

Onboard the CZ once, the SCA asked if he could move me to the H room from a roomette to accomodate some folks traveling together (no children). Since it has an in-room toilet and is the full width, I think he considered it an upgrade. However, it also has smaller windows and is downstairs, so I told him politely that I preferred to stay where I was. He accepted that graciously and made other arrangements. That was during the afternoon of the first day, and he was great to me the entire trip, so there were evidently no hard feelings.

Bottom line, in the same situation, I would not have moved, either.

 

[AutoTrDvr]

I don't know how well these compare, but I did a stint working front desk at a hotel for a couple years and dealt with reservations and room assignments. In full disclosure, I've only gone coach on Amtrak and am taking the sleeper reservation process from what I have read on AU board postings.

When someone called into the hotel, we would tell them the room types and prices but not specific rooms (We have a room with 2 double beds for $99, etc.)

• If they had a specific room number they liked, we would book them into that room at the time they made the reservation and put a DO NOT MOVE alert on their rez. The room assignment would be included on their confirmation email and barring a mechanical failure, they would get that room.
• If they had a general request (close to elevators, high or low floor, etc.) we would make a note in their rez, but not assign them a room at that time. Each morning after checkouts had slowed, the morning shift would run a 'special request' report for people arriving later that day and assign rooms only to those who made a request based on what was available for occupancy during the guest's stay. About 95% of the time we were able to honor everyones placement request. The main clunker was the 4th of July when everyone wanted a high floor room overlooking the lake to watch fireworks.
• If they made just a general reservation (the vast majority), they would get the type of room they wanted, but the actual room assignment wouldn't be made until they checked in. In this case, the computer would start at the lowest number room and work it's way up as people checked in.

I won't ask which hotel/chain it was you worked, but can you tell me whether it's in the "luxury" class (e.g. Starwood/Hilton//Luxury Collection, etc.), or "budget" level (Best Western, Choice Hotels, etc.), or "economy" (Motel-6, Red Roof Inn, etc.), or something totally independent? My experience has been that the higher up one goes on the luxury scale (and thus, greater demand and greater "tourist savviness"), the more "selective" the process is. That is, the more the propensity to "pre-assign" rooms to those expected to arrive on that day, rather than keep all available rooms in the available pool and let "first come first served" prevail. And, with that pre-assigning, comes the greater opportunity to discriminate.

In the time I was staying in those luxury chains, with one exception, I don't think I was ever allowed to reserve a specific room number. They simply would not allow it, or would ignore it if I did. I seemed to do better if it was the case that I was staying there and was securing a 2nd or 3rd stay within a short time. Most of my reservation requests match the 2nd bullet above. Although, in certain chains, my success in getting my requests were far less than 95% towards the luxury end, due to that "pre-assignment" process... much more successful towards the "budget" end as they tended not to pre-assign prior to check in. But again, it also depends a lot on demand.

OK, now I'll relay the war story I mentioned earlier. (Apologizes in advance for the length).

I had reserved (via the chain's Internet site) a hotel room for a hotel in which I had stayed twice before, so I knew it and it's layout, amenities, etc. I won't name the hotel, city or chain, but it would be important to know that it was in a foreign country (it's was US based international chain). The chain has a reservation/room category class where the top floors are their "club/executive/elite" floors (or whatever they were called). This was a recognized class of reservation. You book/pay for that class, you get that class. Any other "requests" are not "guaranteed" until check in. In this case, the hotel's top 2 floors (11 floors in total) were of this class. They also happen to be the only two floors that have an unobstructed view of the city, as the other floors below them face an internal courtyard. As stated earlier, I had stayed at this hotel twice before, and in both cases, I booked and received a room in that class of service.

On (literally) my last visit there, I had booked the same class of room as before (executive/club floor). I put in as special requests (and understood they were not guaranteed), "Highest floor with City View". It was for a weekend stay (Fri & Sat. night). I had booked it 3 months in advance and got the "advanced" rate discount. I arrived on Friday as scheduled at 12:30pm. The business crowd had already vanished. The "weekend wedding" crowd was nowhere yet in sight. Most of the rooms were in the process of being made up. All I expected was to be assigned something on the 10th or 11th floor, as per the category I booked/paid for. It would, simply, be a "nice to have" to get the 11th floor with a city view. After a 1/2 hour wait, and some internal chattering amongst the front desk staff, my 1st assignment: "5th floor, facing the courtyard." It wasn't even the class I had paid for! And the front desk person had the stones to try and argue with me that it *was* an executive/club room! I politely "negotiated" a little more, advising him of my previous stays and knowledge of what an executive/club room was. So, after another 10-15 minutes of internal front desk chatter, my 2nd assignment: "9th floor facing the courtyard." Closer, but no cigar! I kept on "negotiating." I had to convince the FD agent that I knew this hotel, and he wasn't offering me what I had properly reserved.

After another 15-20 minutes and more internal FD chatter, FINALLY, a room on the 11th floor :excl: Fantastic! Up I go with the concierge. Upon arrival, not only was the room on the wrong side (not facing the city), but it hadn't even been made up yet! :angry: :angry: :angry: Even the concierge was embarrassed, and called on the radio to have them try again, I conveyed my sincerest thanks. After another 10-15 minutes, finally, SUCCESS :excl: A made up room on the 11th floor facing the city! In fact, not just a room, but a suite! Polite perseverance pays off! I thanked the concierge once again, and settled in. FTR, I wasn't expecting a suite, but was grateful the ordeal was over. I wondered, "why didn't they do this before and save all that grief?" And, then, I saw it set upon the coffee table. A nice little goody bag with "free meal tickets," a plush toy, sweets and other swag. And an unsealed envelope... "Dear Mr. & Ms, <name redacted - it would give away the country>), We are pleased to welcome you to the <hotel name> and wish to present you with these welcome gifts. Please enjoy your stay!" Oddly, the letter was in English, not the native language. The hotel, it turned out, had a US manager.

Well, obviously, the room had been pre-assigned, and they gave it to me just to keep me quiet. I really feel sorry for Mr. & Ms. <name redacted> (actually, they might not have known what they would have gotten so maybe I don't), but my point is I should have been assigned something on one of those two floors initially, since it's the class I reserved and paid for. But the rooms were all pre-assigned to couples attending the weddings that weekend (and, furthermore, due to how most of those rooms are booked, were willing to pay "rack rates" for them), as I later discovered. And even, though I was finally settled and got what I wanted, the damage had been done. I didn't enjoy my stay there, and I know that the staff resented my presence, even as polite as I was. They all knew who I was, and what I had done. One of the perks of those "executive/club" floors in that hotel is access to the lounge and outdoor patio, as well as the free food/snacks on the inside of the lounge. The only requirement: you needed to show your room key card to the attendant to prove you were staying on the executive/club floors. I didn't have to show my key card even once! They all knew who I was! :wacko: And, yes, they let me in, but I could tell I was not very welcomed there. When I checked out on Sunday Morning, you could cut the tension at the FD with a knife. Not a word spoken. I left, and vowed never to return. I didn't. I'm sure they were just as pleased with that decision.

OK End of War story. Sorry for the length, but it goes to my point about the "bias" I mention in re: the solitary traveler.

I've always been surprised that Amtrak assigns rooms as all reservations are made, as it takes out a lot of flexibility. An earlier post asked why can't they call people and ask if they are willing to be switched rooms. I know at the front desk where I worked, we simply didn't have the time and resources to be telephone negotiators. With hold times exceeding 30 minutes sometimes and probably less people woking the phones than they would ideally like, I would think Amtrak reservation agents are in the same boat, but even more so.

I guess the question is, how often do they field these kinds of requests. I should think they can handle them like any other contact with reservation agents.

 

[Devil's Advocate]

There seem to be a lot of accusations about this or that position being selfish and demanding.

But who, exactly is being selfish, and who is being reasonable?

In order to find out I decided to make a quick chart of where people currently sit on this issue.

At first glance this thread appears to be a debate of equal merit between those who believe first come should mean first served and those who believe families should trump everyone else.

But when you think about it, those positions are not quite equals.

If we were truly comparing relatively identical positions we'd see something more like the following.

However, I don't know of anyone who is claiming single people should be able to trump families or anyone else.

There are also other groups that ride Amtrak besides families and single travelers that may have a preference of their own. Taking this into account we now have a somewhat clearer picture of where these positions collide.

I added another angle for friends but that position could just as easily be populated by any number of other possible groups that may ride the train together. If we look at this a bit more objectively we'd see that "first come, first served" fits surprisingly well in the compromise realm and that "families come first" is not really all that fair or objective toward anyone else.

I've traveled on Amtrak by myself, with friends, with family, and with a girlfriend having all manner of other folks surrounding us. If I were asked nicely I might move to a similar room voluntarily in order to make things easier for someone else, regardless of whichever group they did or did not belong to. I would hope most of us would do the same if given such a choice. However, what exactly constitutes a similar room should be up to the individual with the original booking. The choice should still be theirs to make and if I was simply pushed aside without regard to my own wishes I would not consider that a viable solution no matter what group the other party did or did not belong to.

That seems entirely reasonable to me and I'm surprised that one side apparently feels they can trump everyone else at the time and place of their own choosing instead of taking personal responsibility for planning their trip early enough. I'm often reserving my trips soon before departure as a necessary part of maintaining availability for my employer. In those instances I have to accept whatever is left. If I can't make do with what's available then I need to reschedule for another date. Seems simple enough to me.

So far as I can tell nobody is disputing that families should be together. The only thing that's being disputed is how exactly that should be accomplished. Some seem to think that it should be done behind the scenes and only revealed to those who have been involuntarily displaced after the change has already been made. Nothing about that sounds fair or reasonable to me. Others seem to think that it should be up to everyone to book early enough to ensure they are able to select the room(s) they want. That sounds perfectly reasonable to me and I'm surprised this is somehow considered uniquely selfish or demanding. In my view it's the closest thing we have to an objective position expressed so far.

 

[AutoTrDvr]

So far as I can tell nobody is disputing that families should be together. The only thing that's being disputed is how exactly that should be accomplished.

Precisely! I certainly am not disputing it.

Some seem to think that it should be done behind the scenes and only revealed to those who have been involuntarily displaced after the change has already been made. Nothing about that sounds fair or reasonable to me.

And I don't think that's Amtrak's official policy, either. If it is happening, it is done at the discretion of the agents. That is unacceptable! I cold tell another war story, but I think I've used up my quota for the next year or two! Maybe in Philly!

Others seem to think that it should be up to everyone to book early enough to ensure they are able to select the room(s) they want. That sounds perfectly reasonable to me and I'm surprised this is somehow considered uniquely selfish or demanding. In my view it's the closest thing we have to an objective position expressed so far.

Again, Precisely! :hi:

 

[AlanB]

And it's really a topic for another thread (and one we've beat to death previously), but don't expect a seat map. It's a significantly more complex problem on a train that makes 30 something stops along its route (and I doubt they'd develop the feature just for use on the Auto Train).

Nope, I disagree. Amtrak already has the base software in place from the original eTicket experiment for Acela. One could see the entire map of the FC car, what seats faced what way and which ones were already sold, and then pick your favorite seat. Wouldn't be very hard at all to adapt that to sleepers.

 

[jis]

And it's really a topic for another thread (and one we've beat to death previously), but don't expect a seat map. It's a significantly more complex problem on a train that makes 30 something stops along its route (and I doubt they'd develop the feature just for use on the Auto Train).

Nope, I disagree. Amtrak already has the base software in place from the original eTicket experiment for Acela. One could see the entire map of the FC car, what seats faced what way and which ones were already sold, and then pick your favorite seat. Wouldn't be very hard at all to adapt that to sleepers.

I thought so, but was waiting for you to chime in. Thank you.

 

[amamba]

And it's really a topic for another thread (and one we've beat to death previously), but don't expect a seat map. It's a significantly more complex problem on a train that makes 30 something stops along its route (and I doubt they'd develop the feature just for use on the Auto Train).

Nope, I disagree. Amtrak already has the base software in place from the original eTicket experiment for Acela. One could see the entire map of the FC car, what seats faced what way and which ones were already sold, and then pick your favorite seat. Wouldn't be very hard at all to adapt that to sleepers.

I thought so, but was waiting for you to chime in. Thank you.

But what about the fact that the direction of the sleeper car cannot be guaranteed? Would that be an issue if people were to self-assign rooms?

 

[jis]

And it's really a topic for another thread (and one we've beat to death previously), but don't expect a seat map. It's a significantly more complex problem on a train that makes 30 something stops along its route (and I doubt they'd develop the feature just for use on the Auto Train).

Nope, I disagree. Amtrak already has the base software in place from the original eTicket experiment for Acela. One could see the entire map of the FC car, what seats faced what way and which ones were already sold, and then pick your favorite seat. Wouldn't be very hard at all to adapt that to sleepers.

I thought so, but was waiting for you to chime in. Thank you.

But what about the fact that the direction of the sleeper car cannot be guaranteed? Would that be an issue if people were to self-assign rooms?

Since Amtrak is generally not very good at keeping train consists all lined up the same way, all that can be done is reserve specific room or seat in a car and not make any specific statement about which way the car will face. The same problem existed in Acela First Class since there was no guarantee which way the train would face.

There are other places where consists are much more fixed including direction of travel. For example in many countries in Europe the consists are so fixed that they are charted on big charts posted on platforms so that you can find out exactly where the car in which you have your reservation will platform.

 

[Ryan]

And it's really a topic for another thread (and one we've beat to death previously), but don't expect a seat map. It's a significantly more complex problem on a train that makes 30 something stops along its route (and I doubt they'd develop the feature just for use on the Auto Train).

Nope, I disagree. Amtrak already has the base software in place from the original eTicket experiment for Acela. One could see the entire map of the FC car, what seats faced what way and which ones were already sold, and then pick your favorite seat. Wouldn't be very hard at all to adapt that to sleepers.

I completely forgot about that.

Was it smart enough to prevent someone from buying Room A from NYP-CVS and someone else from selecting room B from CLT-NOL, preventing a through NYP-NOL room from being available?

 

[jis]

And it's really a topic for another thread (and one we've beat to death previously), but don't expect a seat map. It's a significantly more complex problem on a train that makes 30 something stops along its route (and I doubt they'd develop the feature just for use on the Auto Train).

Nope, I disagree. Amtrak already has the base software in place from the original eTicket experiment for Acela. One could see the entire map of the FC car, what seats faced what way and which ones were already sold, and then pick your favorite seat. Wouldn't be very hard at all to adapt that to sleepers.

I completely forgot about that.

Was it smart enough to prevent someone from buying Room A from NYP-CVS and someone else from selecting room B from CLT-NOL, preventing a through NYP-NOL room from being available?

That would be like someone buying a seat from WAS to WIL and a second person buying one from PHL to NYP. I would be astounded if it was unable to handle that properly without screwing up an additional through seat. But admittedly, you never know for sure .

OTOH, if individuals proceed to assign themselves seats because Mr. A needs that window seat in the 5th row and Ms. B wants an aisle seat on the 8th row because of different levels of rail noise and the way the air conditioning vents blow, and start throwing hissy-fits if their wishes is not catered to, then all bets are off.

 

[Ryan]

That's the million $$$ question. I'm sure that the system is smart enough to assign the seats in a logical manner to preserve through seats as long as possible. Once you let people start picking, that smarts goes out the window.

Also, on a train where you're dealing with dozens of seats a little bit of inefficiency is OK. Suboptimal, but OK.

On a train with 4 or 6 bedrooms, there's a much larger need for max efficiency.

 

[railbuck]

There are other places where consists are much more fixed including direction of travel. For example in many countries in Europe the consists are so fixed that they are charted on big charts posted on platforms so that you can find out exactly where the car in which you have your reservation will platform.

Yes, but even there it's not unusual to encounter an announcement that "first class is at the front of the train" (or whatever) indicating that the train is reversed from its normal direction.

 

[Anderson]

Just weighing in again, I'm inclined to prefer the following:

-Don't assign reservations until close to the last minute. This maximizes your ability to grant other requests; it will also likely avoid the issue of "I can book a roomette from A-B and B-C but not A-C" that happens on occasion.

--Exception: "Downstairs" requests based on disability go into the system with a special flag and get allocated first.

-When assigning, go in the following order:

1) Downstairs/disability requests, as above.

2) Group reservations (families and friends) and bedroom suite reservations.

3) All others filling in afterwards, with requests honored where possible (primarily upstairs requests).

This should avoid most issues...in my experience, there are only going to be a few group reservations on a train, so this should fulfill most requests

As to the "war story" (which sounds like it came from a Holiday Inn), yeah...I don't care if the staff were resentful. They had no right to be, and if they were going to have trouble granting your room request they should have at least proffered something in return or given you the benefits of those rooms even though they couldn't put you in one of the rooms due to a glitch. That the staff was resentful of what you did...if anything, I would have been inclined to call customer service and complain about the situation.

 

[user 1215]

The chain has a reservation/room category class where the top floors are their "club/executive/elite" floors (or whatever they were called). This was a recognized class of reservation. You book/pay for that class, you get that class.

This is so legitimate. I completely understand this scenario, and would have appreciated at least an explanation over excuses such as "I am getting what I paid for".

Two weekend ago, my family and I stayed at a beach resort where they had three categories of rooms: limited view, deluxe room, and balcony. The way the hotel was laid out, only a balcony gave you an ocean view. The deluxe and limited view rooms were identical; only the floor level was different to get a better view of the ocean over neighboring residences and businesses. The price difference was $10, so we went deluxe. I would say our view was 90% obstructed. After reading reviews on trip advisor, turns out limited view was 100% view of parking and dumpsters. I could have caused a stink - and yes, I would have, had my kids not been with me. But they were sold out and the best I could hope for was a $20 voucher. Not worth the stink.

Yes, I got frustrated working at Disney for a similar reason. A water view meant "if you can see a corner of a pool, it's water view". I THINK this had been revised through complaints over the years, but only to add new, revenue buckets... Ugh.

I didn't know Acela turned. I thought same seats always face same direction. How is that possible, or even necessary?

 

[AutoTrDvr]

Just weighing in again, I'm inclined to prefer the following:

-Don't assign reservations until close to the last minute. This maximizes your ability to grant other requests; it will also likely avoid the issue of "I can book a roomette from A-B and B-C but not A-C" that happens on occasion.

--Exception: "Downstairs" requests based on disability go into the system with a special flag and get allocated first.

-When assigning, go in the following order:

1) Downstairs/disability requests, as above.

2) Group reservations (families and friends) and bedroom suite reservations.

3) All others filling in afterwards, with requests honored where possible (primarily upstairs requests).

This should avoid most issues...in my experience, there are only going to be a few group reservations on a train, so this should fulfill most requests

Not my issue, I'm afraid! It must be "first come... first served." The problem with "not assigning reservations until close to the last minute" is that facilitates discrimination in favor of those groups/families/friends. The solitary traveler will most likely get shut out of their choices before they even get to bat! If I'm paying the same money as those families and friends for the same class of service, I should get the same chance at my choice. Since there are separate "special facilities" for people needing "assistance," that should be a totally separate thing... but again, first come... first served, even within the context of that "separate thing."

As to the "war story" (which sounds like it came from a Holiday Inn), yeah...I don't care if the staff were resentful. They had no right to be, and if they were going to have trouble granting your room request they should have at least proffered something in return or given you the benefits of those rooms even though they couldn't put you in one of the rooms due to a glitch. That the staff was resentful of what you did...if anything, I would have been inclined to call customer service and complain about the situation.

It wasn't a Holiday Inn. It was, actually, quite the opposite on the luxury scale. The Holiday Inn class of hotel chains can't really afford to be that selective. These guys could! The top two floors had the absolute best view of the city, which is for what everyone was competing. The floors below that had no city view at all (blocked by a courtyard). Even if the other "amenities" had been granted, it wouldn't have mattered... the view was everything! In this case, calling "customer service" was not an option, as this hotel was in a foreign country. They do things a little differently there, and it is "expected" that people take what they are given without complaint. If the customer objects, even politely, they get real huffy. They do their best not to show it, but "body language" is a...... ya know..... <well, it rhymes with "rich">. ^_^ Let's just say, I'd love to play "Texas Hold'em" with some of them... The US based customer service would not have been able to help.

But enough about hotels.... Back to Amtrak trains!

 

[Devil's Advocate]

Just weighing in again, I'm inclined to prefer the following:

-Don't assign reservations until close to the last minute. This maximizes your ability to grant other requests; it will also likely avoid the issue of "I can book a roomette from A-B and B-C but not A-C" that happens on occasion.

--Exception: "Downstairs" requests based on disability go into the system with a special flag and get allocated first.

-When assigning, go in the following order:

1) Downstairs/disability requests, as above.

2) Group reservations (families and friends) and bedroom suite reservations.

3) All others filling in afterwards, with requests honored where possible (primarily upstairs requests).

This should avoid most issues...in my experience, there are only going to be a few group reservations on a train, so this should fulfill most requests.

You're always free to give up your own assignment Anderson. The part I don't understand is why you decided that everyone else should be forced to follow your own example. Nothing in your post explains that part.

 

[jis]

Just weighing in again, I'm inclined to prefer the following:

-Don't assign reservations until close to the last minute. This maximizes your ability to grant other requests; it will also likely avoid the issue of "I can book a roomette from A-B and B-C but not A-C" that happens on occasion.

--Exception: "Downstairs" requests based on disability go into the system with a special flag and get allocated first.

-When assigning, go in the following order:

1) Downstairs/disability requests, as above.

2) Group reservations (families and friends) and bedroom suite reservations.

3) All others filling in afterwards, with requests honored where possible (primarily upstairs requests).

This should avoid most issues...in my experience, there are only going to be a few group reservations on a train, so this should fulfill most requests

Heh! This is exactly similar to what Indian Railways does with AC First Class reservations. Of course that does not prevent any of the usual moaning, bickering and horsetrading soon after people arrive at the train either.

 

[AlanB]

I didn't know Acela turned. I thought same seats always face same direction. How is that possible, or even necessary?

Acela turns the seats more than any other train around; at least in the US. In DC the set itself is never wyed, same in Boston too. They just pull in, clean the train, turn the seats that can be turned, load up and go the other direction. Yes, all that occurs over the course of like 2 or 3 hours. And with regard to the "seat that can be turned" comment, seats at tables cannot be turned, they are fixed. All other seat pairs are turned, as well as some of the singles in FC.

For trains that terminate in NY, all sets are run out to Sunnyside first, where they automatically go around the loop track and negate the need to turn the seats. That trip around the loop is also why one can never predict if the FC car will be at the front or rear of any given run.