Could Amtrak Subcontract Dining

[GoldenSpike]

Sub-contracting is a highly stupid thing to do when thinking about how to make dining car services profitable.Several railways have tried that in Europe, in Italy and Austria there is still a subcontractor whose losses are paid by the railways, in Germany and Switzerland there have been experminents (including having to competeting subcontractors at the same time in Switzerland) but all failed and nowadays the railways run the food services by themselves again.

If you want to avoid losses you either have to cut the food services (yes, i am speaking of a LD train without diner) and go back a hundred years.

This is working very well on some trains in the former Soviet Union, where the dining cars have a bad reputation anyway. Platform vendors sell all kind of stuff and food at most larger stations instead. The quality of the food is okay, the prices (at least for westerners) too.

Otherwise you just have to raise the prices (if you put in $20 more on a sleeper fare, this won't scare too many customers), but then you have to raise the quality too (and go back a hundred years when a diner was plain luxury)

In 1997, several of us took the Trans-Siberian Express from Moscow to Vladivostok (6,100 miles/7 time zones/7 days (the milk run is 10 days).

It was a bad omen on the first meal out of Moscow. Presented a three page menu, but they only had basically one or two items.

As you say we supplemented our diet with the home cooking presented by many women lined up on the platforms with their dish, fruit, etc. Nobody had any ill effects by doing this. A roaring cottage industry at all the major stops.

After four days we got off at Irkutsk for a week. By now we learned. On rebroarding for the remaining three days, we brought bottled water, Raman-type soup fixings, and a loaf of bread. Thankfully somebody head the idea to bring a jar of peanut butter from the states with him. A bananna on bread with peanut butter was awesome!

The train/diner runs on Moscow time the whole trip so meal times got a little confusing after going through 3-4 time zones.

 

[volkris]

Yes- the "evil unions" are to blame for Amtrak's woes, in fact the unions are to blame for everything wrong in this country if you ask certain people. Typically people who make these kinds of remarks have never been in a union or worked in a company that actually has union members working there.

It's an interesting response.

The question was whether Amtrak could save money subcontracting dining and whether the unions would allow it. Based on the Subway incident it sounds like yes, Amtrak might have been able to save money subcontracting out some dining, but a union threw a fit--in a very unprofessional way--and the experiment was canceled immediately. Other explanations are welcome, but based on everything I can find, that seems to be the cause.

There was not really talk of evil unions, only a simple question and an example that seemed to provide an answer.

Meanwhile, boy, your response sure had an "evil management!" tone to it.

 

[jmbgeg]

From my casual observation, food preparation for long distance trains is not a process that would be made more economical through outsourcing because of low relative meal volumes per train and an absence of economies of scale. Airport based commercial kitchens handle infinitely higher volumes. I am not sure that industry giants like Aramark or Host Marriott would touch this type of contract. Absent a national contract you end up with a network of regional or local providers.

Aramark already handles the food on most LD trains, so in a way they are contracted into the system if not this exact position.

I did not know that. Interesting.

 

[jis]

The question was whether Amtrak could save money subcontracting dining and whether the unions would allow it. Based on the Subway incident it sounds like yes, Amtrak might have been able to save money subcontracting out some dining, but a union threw a fit--in a very unprofessional way--and the experiment was canceled immediately. Other explanations are welcome, but based on everything I can find, that seems to be the cause.

My recollection (and this is subject to verification since my recollection by no measure is infallible) is that the root problem at that time, this was on the Empire Corridor as I recall, was that Amtrak management chose to ignore an existing contract which was sitting dormant as a result of discontinuance of food service on the Empire Corridor NYP - ALB service, and tried to enter into a different contract with Subway. This is what caused the dust up. In those situations where Amtrak management has played by the rules and contracted with food providers from elsewhere the unions have not been effective at blocking such at all. I am not even sure that they tried. For example did they try to block the Aramark contract?

As a matter of full disclosure I am not a union employee and have as a matter of fact been known to have opposed unionization at my workplace for my category of employees. OTOH as a matter of principle I am not anti-union under all circumstances. There are circumstances where I would be supportive of unionization in my workplace even for my category of work. But that is a separate discussion better done elsewhere.

 

[Mark]

Yes- the "evil unions" are to blame for Amtrak's woes, in fact the unions are to blame for everything wrong in this country if you ask certain people. Typically people who make these kinds of remarks have never been in a union or worked in a company that actually has union members working there.

It's an interesting response.

The question was whether Amtrak could save money subcontracting dining and whether the unions would allow it. Based on the Subway incident it sounds like yes, Amtrak might have been able to save money subcontracting out some dining, but a union threw a fit--in a very unprofessional way--and the experiment was canceled immediately. Other explanations are welcome, but based on everything I can find, that seems to be the cause.

There was not really talk of evil unions, only a simple question and an example that seemed to provide an answer.

Meanwhile, boy, your response sure had an "evil management!" tone to it.

Well, I realize my reply was harsh but I'm not anti-management at all, just anti-stupidity. I have worked on both "sides", in Management and presently on the Union side. It has been my experience that Management loves to sign a contract then simply toss it aside when some issue comes up that it, (or they), failed to forecast or predict. This is not helped by the nearly constant media bashing of the unions in this country. Students can go from Undergraduate to Doctorate studies in the US and never learn one thing about a union, how it works or why they even exist.

I think some money could probably be saved by contracting out some services but my point was not so much the contracting out but the way it tends to be implemented.

 

[Ispolkom]

The question was whether Amtrak could save money subcontracting dining and whether the unions would allow it. Based on the Subway incident it sounds like yes, Amtrak might have been able to save money subcontracting out some dining, but a union threw a fit--in a very unprofessional way--and the experiment was canceled immediately. Other explanations are welcome, but based on everything I can find, that seems to be the cause.

My recollection (and this is subject to verification since my recollection by no measure is infallible) is that the root problem at that time, this was on the Empire Corridor as I recall, was that Amtrak management chose to ignore an existing contract which was sitting dormant as a result of discontinuance of food service on the Empire Corridor NYP - ALB service, and tried to enter into a different contract with Subway. This is what caused the dust up. In those situations where Amtrak management has played by the rules and contracted with food providers from elsewhere the unions have not been effective at blocking such at all. I am not even sure that they tried. For example did they try to block the Aramark contract?

Jis, the version of events you remember would certainly put a different color on it. If there were a valid contract, Amtrak was in the wrong to violate it without compensation. In this case I would read "unprofessional" as "effective." On the other hand, the end-result is no food service on Empire trains, which seems suboptimal.

 

[AlanB]

The question was whether Amtrak could save money subcontracting dining and whether the unions would allow it. Based on the Subway incident it sounds like yes, Amtrak might have been able to save money subcontracting out some dining, but a union threw a fit--in a very unprofessional way--and the experiment was canceled immediately. Other explanations are welcome, but based on everything I can find, that seems to be the cause.

Just to make sure that things are clear here, I think that you need to define or pin down the word "dining."

To me in conjunction with Amtrak, the use of that word indicates sitting down in a dining car for a meal. I don't consider the cafe foods sold on Empire service to be dining.

In that context, I agree that Amtrak possibly could have saved money had the Subway experiment worked on the Empire Corridor. And while I'm at it, it should be noted that the Empire Service trains that go beyond Albany still do have food service and were not part of the Subway experiment. I suspect that had the Subway experiment been sucessful that we might well have seen a futher expansion of that type of service to other short haul and state sponsored trains.

However, as I sort of pointed out in a pervious post in this topic, having a Subway employee who rides 2+ hours north and then returns to go home and sleep in their bed is a very different type of job than someone who spends 2+ days working, eating, sleeping on the train, then spends a night in a hotel room before repeating everything on the return trip. Not to mention that the sole choice of Subway sandwiches for a 2+ day journey simply is unacceptable on so many levels.

I will also mention, although I can no longer find said article, that I once read that while the dining cars do loose money Amtrak actually takes a bigger bath on cafe services. While it certainly wouldn't be an ideal choice, the article seemed to indicate that eliminating all cafe cars on short haul trains that aren't State sponsored, would have cut 2/3rds to 3/4th's of Amtrak's food service losses. I've never seen any hard proof of that, so take it with a grain of salt please.

But the fact that David Gunn did cut food service on the short Empire Service runs would seem to indicate at least some truth to that claim.

 

[AlanB]

My recollection (and this is subject to verification since my recollection by no measure is infallible) is that the root problem at that time, this was on the Empire Corridor as I recall, was that Amtrak management chose to ignore an existing contract which was sitting dormant as a result of discontinuance of food service on the Empire Corridor NYP - ALB service, and tried to enter into a different contract with Subway. This is what caused the dust up. In those situations where Amtrak management has played by the rules and contracted with food providers from elsewhere the unions have not been effective at blocking such at all. I am not even sure that they tried. For example did they try to block the Aramark contract?

Your recollection is correct, Jishnu. Amtrak laid off several cafe attendants when the stopped food service on the short haul Empire Corridor trains, not to mention closing the commissary in ALB which saw still more jobs disapear. Then a few months later, along came the Subway idea.

The workers immediately protested on many different fronts, and had it gone to court/arbitration, I've no doubt that Amtrak would have lost on the grounds of Union busting.

There was also the issue of the fact that all Amtrak employees receive safety and evacuation training and the Subway workers got none of that.

 

[AlanB]

On the other hand, the end-result is no food service on Empire trains, which seems suboptimal.

And that is a problem. It's a problem that NY State keeps trying to get Amtrak to fix, although the state always somehow seems to have its head turned the wrong way when ever Amtrak sticks out its hand and asks for help in funding the abundance of service that NY State gets for free. No other state sees as many daily Amtrak trains that never leave the state as NY does, without helping to pay for them. NY helps pay for one train, the Adirondack.

Even less optimal than the lack of food service on the shorter haul EC trains, is the lack of a commissary at ALB. Back when that commissarry still operated, it was possible for a cafe car attendant to be restocked in ALB. This was very useful for the longer haul trains, like the cafe car on the Boston section of the LSL, the Adirondack, the Maple Leaf, the Ethan Allen, and even the long haul EC trains.

The first time I rode the Maple Leaf home from Toronto, the cafe attendant was out of many things by the time we got to Syracuse, still many hours from NYC. But thankfully he was able to get a partial restock at ALB, which allowed myself and many others to get something for dinner during the 2 and a half hour ride down the Hudson. When I rode the Leaf two summers ago, there was no restocking in ALB and the attendant had no substantial foods left to sell during the run down the Hudson.

 

[Ispolkom]

...
Not to mention that the sole choice of Subway sandwiches for a 2+ day journey simply is unacceptable on so many levels.

I will also mention, although I can no longer find said article, that I once read that while the dining cars do loose money Amtrak actually takes a bigger bath on cafe services. While it certainly wouldn't be an ideal choice, the article seemed to indicate that eliminating all cafe cars on short haul trains that aren't State sponsored, would have cut 2/3rds to 3/4th's of Amtrak's food service losses. I've never seen any hard proof of that, so take it with a grain of salt please.

But the fact that David Gunn did cut food service on the short Empire Service runs would seem to indicate at least some truth to that claim.

Oh, gosh, I'd rather buy pickled cabbage and boiled eggs from Russian peasant women at station stops than eat Subway sandwiches for every meal.

If you replaced the cafe car with a cart, as I've seen on British trains, would that be a significant savings? Is it the cafe cars that are the expense or is it cafe service in general?

 

[oldtimer]

I believe that cart snack and beverage service is offered on some if not all Chicago-Milwaukee trains by Amtrak employees.

 

[jis]

I believe that cart snack and beverage service is offered on some if not all Chicago-Milwaukee trains by Amtrak employees.

It is also offered on select Acela Express services.

 

[ALC Rail Writer]

I believe that cart snack and beverage service is offered on some if not all Chicago-Milwaukee trains by Amtrak employees.

It is also offered on select Acela Express services.

With those in First Class enjoying full at-seat service.

 

[AlanB]

If you replaced the cafe car with a cart, as I've seen on British trains, would that be a significant savings? Is it the cafe cars that are the expense or is it cafe service in general?

I'm sure that it would help some, as one has to consider the extra fuel expended to move the cafe car, not to mention of course repairs and maintenance on the car.

But you also have considerable expenses associated with staffing the cars, buying the items for sale, and storing, boarding, detraining, and inventorying the items. Those expenses would not go away with cart service, although they would be reduced, since you'd have less inventory on a cart compared to a cafe car.

 

[ALC Rail Writer]

If you replaced the cafe car with a cart, as I've seen on British trains, would that be a significant savings? Is it the cafe cars that are the expense or is it cafe service in general?

I'm sure that it would help some, as one has to consider the extra fuel expended to move the cafe car, not to mention of course repairs and maintenance on the car.

But you also have considerable expenses associated with staffing the cars, buying the items for sale, and storing, boarding, detraining, and inventorying the items. Those expenses would not go away with cart service, although they would be reduced, since you'd have less inventory on a cart compared to a cafe car.

Where do they store all the stuff for the cart? Amcans barely have enough room for the pax heads and feet much less a cart and stuff for it...

 

[Sam31452]

Carts are very widely used in Europe, on trains which don't have enough passengers for a dining car (which means a number between 50 and 500).

An ideal candidate for such a service would be a under 4hr run. You don't even need much space to store the cart and the stock, in Europe the cart is then usually fixed near the last door of the train or in the baggage car.

 

[p&sr]

Those expenses would not go away with cart service, although they would be reduced, since you'd have less inventory on a cart compared to a cafe car.

Just what we DON'T need is "less inventory". The Snack Cars are running out of things all the time, especially on the longer trips. If this were replaced by carts, then we'd just have to COUNT on going hungry!

 

[volkris]

So it sounds like an alternative question to whether unions would block subcontracting is whether unions' CONTRACTS would block it. Might as well drop the word "unions", then, and just ask if existing contracts prevent Amtrak from attempting such things. The answer seems to be a resounding "Well, it doesn't help"

 

[ALC Rail Writer]

Those expenses would not go away with cart service, although they would be reduced, since you'd have less inventory on a cart compared to a cafe car.

Just what we DON'T need is "less inventory". The Snack Cars are running out of things all the time, especially on the longer trips. If this were replaced by carts, then we'd just have to COUNT on going hungry!

Um dude-- he's talking about Empire Service trains that only operate on short runs. The ones that run to Buffalo have snack cars, but the ones that only go up to ALB or so have no food service. The argument is over whether its worth it to put a whole car on the consist for a 3-4 hour trip as opposed to a cart. Currently Amtrak doesn't run any food service-- bit it cars or carts. So even a cart would be an improvement over nothing!

 

[AlanB]

So it sounds like an alternative question to whether unions would block subcontracting is whether unions' CONTRACTS would block it. Might as well drop the word "unions", then, and just ask if existing contracts prevent Amtrak from attempting such things. The answer seems to be a resounding "Well, it doesn't help"

That I would agree with.

And the big question that still remains is, just how much could be saved by replacing the dining car crew via some other alternative when those contracts expire. Personally I believe that some money could be saved, but I'm not sure that it would be a huge amount and I'm not sure that it would be in the best interests of the passengers.

 

[AlanB]

Those expenses would not go away with cart service, although they would be reduced, since you'd have less inventory on a cart compared to a cafe car.

Just what we DON'T need is "less inventory". The Snack Cars are running out of things all the time, especially on the longer trips. If this were replaced by carts, then we'd just have to COUNT on going hungry!

Um dude-- he's talking about Empire Service trains that only operate on short runs. The ones that run to Buffalo have snack cars, but the ones that only go up to ALB or so have no food service. The argument is over whether its worth it to put a whole car on the consist for a 3-4 hour trip as opposed to a cart. Currently Amtrak doesn't run any food service-- bit it cars or carts. So even a cart would be an improvement over nothing!

Actually Amtrak still runs the cafe cars to/from ALB, since it's those very same cafe cars that provide the business class seating on those trains. The cafe just runs unstaffed and with no inventory. Perhaps yet another argument for restoring cafe service, since the costs of hauling said cars are still there, but now the only revenue that is collected from the car is the BC fares.

 

[ALC Rail Writer]

Those expenses would not go away with cart service, although they would be reduced, since you'd have less inventory on a cart compared to a cafe car.

Just what we DON'T need is "less inventory". The Snack Cars are running out of things all the time, especially on the longer trips. If this were replaced by carts, then we'd just have to COUNT on going hungry!

Um dude-- he's talking about Empire Service trains that only operate on short runs. The ones that run to Buffalo have snack cars, but the ones that only go up to ALB or so have no food service. The argument is over whether its worth it to put a whole car on the consist for a 3-4 hour trip as opposed to a cart. Currently Amtrak doesn't run any food service-- bit it cars or carts. So even a cart would be an improvement over nothing!

Actually Amtrak still runs the cafe cars to/from ALB, since it's those very same cafe cars that provide the business class seating on those trains. The cafe just runs unstaffed and with no inventory. Perhaps yet another argument for restoring cafe service, since the costs of hauling said cars are still there, but now the only revenue that is collected from the car is the BC fares.

I didn't notice a club car on my last time to Yonkers, granted, I didn't tour the train-- but usually my eye is trained to look at the consist before I board.

I'll trust you.

In that case, they may as well put some food and an employee inside the car, or at least run a cart and store the food in the cabinets.

 

[AlanB]

I didn't notice a club car on my last time to Yonkers, granted, I didn't tour the train-- but usually my eye is trained to look at the consist before I board.
I'll trust you.

In that case, they may as well put some food and an employee inside the car, or at least run a cart and store the food in the cabinets.

If the train has business class, then it most likely has a Club-Dinette at one end or the other, never in the middle. It would be very rare to see a standard full length BC car on the Empire Service.

Note: The Adirondack doesn't have BC service, so you'll never see a Club-Dinette on that train.

 

[ALC Rail Writer]

I didn't notice a club car on my last time to Yonkers, granted, I didn't tour the train-- but usually my eye is trained to look at the consist before I board.
I'll trust you.

In that case, they may as well put some food and an employee inside the car, or at least run a cart and store the food in the cabinets.

If the train has business class, then it most likely has a Club-Dinette at one end or the other, never in the middle. It would be very rare to see a standard full length BC car on the Empire Service.

Note: The Adirondack doesn't have BC service, so you'll never see a Club-Dinette on that train.

Yeah must have just missed it on the consist. Two different trains though-- the one I took out was going to be a medium-haul and the one coming back in was short hall. There were six cars in the consist of the outbound, and only four on the inbound.

 

[Ispolkom]

Those expenses would not go away with cart service, although they would be reduced, since you'd have less inventory on a cart compared to a cafe car.

Just what we DON'T need is "less inventory". The Snack Cars are running out of things all the time, especially on the longer trips. If this were replaced by carts, then we'd just have to COUNT on going hungry!

Um dude-- he's talking about Empire Service trains that only operate on short runs. The ones that run to Buffalo have snack cars, but the ones that only go up to ALB or so have no food service. The argument is over whether its worth it to put a whole car on the consist for a 3-4 hour trip as opposed to a cart. Currently Amtrak doesn't run any food service-- bit it cars or carts. So even a cart would be an improvement over nothing!

Actually Amtrak still runs the cafe cars to/from ALB, since it's those very same cafe cars that provide the business class seating on those trains. The cafe just runs unstaffed and with no inventory. Perhaps yet another argument for restoring cafe service, since the costs of hauling said cars are still there, but now the only revenue that is collected from the car is the BC fares.

It seems odd that Amtrak is saving money by running the car without service, but I don't know the economics of such things. My thought with the cart was merely based on my experience on British railroads, where I've been impressed by the variety of products for sale. Perhaps I'm easily impressed.

In any case, living in the Land of Superliners (all my recent trips to DC have been on the Capitol Limited), I my memories of east coast trains are vague at best.