Could Amtrak Subcontract Dining

[Green Maned Lion]

You know, while I love Slumbercoach cars, I'm kinda thinking that in todays world, a section sleeper would be more effective. People aren't as privacy oriented when traveling anymore. If you use one roomette space worth for a attendants room on one side, and a pair of bathrooms on the other, a Viewliner could handle 20 sections, which means 40 passengers, 10 more than they currently handle, and probably 15-20 more than they handle on average.

A Superliner could handle 28 sections, with 4 bathrooms (lower level, two each where the Family and Handicapped rooms are) and an attendants room, which would handle a total of 56 passengers, 16 more than the normal sleeper capacity, and probably 25 more than they normally handle. If you were to manufacture these out of transdorms, they could handle 26 sections, an attendants room, and four bathrooms. So you could have a theoretical Southwest Chief of 3 P42s, a Viewliner Baggage-dorm, a Trans-Slumbercoach, 4 coaches, lounge, diner, and 2 regular sleepers. Full capacity would be 80 First Class passengers, 52 Slumbercoach passengers, and 300 Coach passengers, total 432. A typical loading during peak season would be more like 58, 52, and 300 respectively, total 410.

A Viewliner train so equipped, lets say the Silver Meteor. Lets also say they buy 25 sectionals, planning on one per train. That would place a bag-dorm, 3 sleepers, a slumbercoach, a diner, a lounge and 5 coaches? That would be maximum of 90 First Class, 40 Slumbercoach, 300 coach, total 430. More typical loading 75, 40, 300, or 415. Compared to todays train, which is 84 and 240 max, 324, with 310 being more typical. So you'd increase capacity to 430 from 324, which is 106 people per train, two trains per day (one each direction) and 365 days a year. You've increased capacity by 78,000 riders annually.

 

[MrFSS]

You know, while I love Slumbercoach cars, I'm kinda thinking that in todays world, a section sleeper would be more effective. People aren't as privacy oriented when traveling anymore. If you use one roomette space worth for a attendants room on one side, and a pair of bathrooms on the other, a Viewliner could handle 20 sections, which means 40 passengers, 10 more than they currently handle, and probably 15-20 more than they handle on average.
A Superliner could handle 28 sections, with 4 bathrooms (lower level, two each where the Family and Handicapped rooms are) and an attendants room, which would handle a total of 56 passengers, 16 more than the normal sleeper capacity, and probably 25 more than they normally handle. If you were to manufacture these out of transdorms, they could handle 26 sections, an attendants room, and four bathrooms. So you could have a theoretical Southwest Chief of 3 P42s, a Viewliner Baggage-dorm, a Trans-Slumbercoach, 4 coaches, lounge, diner, and 2 regular sleepers. Full capacity would be 80 First Class passengers, 52 Slumbercoach passengers, and 300 Coach passengers, total 432. A typical loading during peak season would be more like 58, 52, and 300 respectively, total 410.

A Viewliner train so equipped, lets say the Silver Meteor. Lets also say they buy 25 sectionals, planning on one per train. That would place a bag-dorm, 3 sleepers, a slumbercoach, a diner, a lounge and 5 coaches? That would be maximum of 90 First Class, 40 Slumbercoach, 300 coach, total 430. More typical loading 75, 40, 300, or 415. Compared to todays train, which is 84 and 240 max, 324, with 310 being more typical. So you'd increase capacity to 430 from 324, which is 106 people per train, two trains per day (one each direction) and 365 days a year. You've increased capacity by 78,000 riders annually.

Not bad ideas - I agree with the sections. I only rode in one once back in the early 60's and don't have a lot of memories (I was on my way to basic training in the service and had other things on my mind). When I last rode The Canadian our bedroom car had three or four sets of sections on each side of the aisle at the other end of the car. No one ever used them on that trip, but they looked pretty wide and I'll bet two people would fit fine in a lower berth. The upper wasn't as wide as the lower. That might increase passenger load, too.

 

[amtrakwolverine]

how about this. have a option on whether you want meals included with your sleeper. lets say something like a option like for $100 more add meals to your sleeper. if you choose not to have meals included to keep the cost of the room down then you have to pay for the meals.

 

[sunchaser]

how about this. have a option on whether you want meals included with your sleeper. lets say something like a option like for $100 more add meals to your sleeper. if you choose not to have meals included to keep the cost of the room down then you have to pay for the meals.

Alan already replied to this on pg 7-

The current problem is that ARROW can't handle having some sleepers that include meals, while others don't. It would also be quite confusing to the dining car staff, and I suspect that even passenger would have a hard time understanding things. Yes, many would realize that they booked a room that did not include meals, but others would not notice that. I can see big arguements coming in the diner if that were the case.
The best answer IMHO remains that Amtrak needs a new type of sleeper car, like say a slumbercoach or some type of business class car with seats that almost fully recline. This class would not include meals and it would be easy to keep things straight.

--------------------

Alan,

Take care and take trains!

After reading his answer I would have to agree the Staff would have a terrible time keeping track of who paid or didn't pay for meals.

Sorry, I must be doing the quote function wrong- I had to copy/paste this in.

 

[Joel N. Weber II]

Lets also say they buy 25 sectionals, planning on one per train.

How do you deal with the Empire Builder and LSL splits?

 

[Joel N. Weber II]

Railroads of today are still grappling with the problem of loading more and larger vehicles onto autoracks. One popular solution is to create a double-length car that is articulated over a single middle truck so that each half of the car is about the same length as a conventional autorack. These cars, which can be seen in operation on many of the railroads of the western US (but also seen occasionally in the Great Lakes and Southern Ontario), are brand named AutoMax cars. These cars, built by Gunderson (a subsidiary of The Greenbrier Companies) measure 145 ft 4 in (44.3 m) long and 20 ft 2 in (6.15 m) tall; they feature adjustable interior decks to carry up to 22 light trucks and minivans.

just apply the same technology to the dining cars.

I don't think you even need to do that much to serve meals to passengers in an adjacent car. Isn't it possible to get a meal in the upstairs of a PPC which is cooked in the kitchen of an adjacent dining car on the Coast Starlight?

 

[jackal]

Yes, let's delay the train in a station while the LSA runs out to the local supermarket to buy a bunch of supplies with his own money, suplies for meals that the lone cook won't be able to prep on his own and still feed everyone.

Well, a delay of like 24 hours (major track damage), I would say a well run railroad would indeed have a train remain stopped at a station, rather than having it proceed to a siding.

Possibly my view it a bit skewed, but my employer empowers me to make reasonable choices during an unusual situation, and that includes making necessary charges with my business AmEx card. There is no reason that an LSA could not be empowered similarly. And if the LSA doesn't have a business AmEx card, then the simple thing to do, is to have the LSA use cash out of their onboard working cash. There are lots of options, if any planning happens at all, before the LSA would have to use their own money.

Also, Aramark should have a large enough of an operational base, that it should be able to pull basic supplies from its numerous other operations in the event of an emergency on a LD Amtrak train they are the contracted food service provider.

IIRC, Amtrak used to actually put management-level staff on trains, and these managers could actually authorize company funds to be spent. I'm not sure that I'd put that kind of power in the hands of someone who isn't in a management-level position--as good, experienced, and loyal as most LSAs are, there's a chance that one bitter about labor relations or something could spend the company's money just out of spite.

Slightly unrelated question:I have read travel reports about sleeper pax being offered sparkling apple juice or champagne upon boarding in the afternoon/evening. Does anyone know if they still do that? And if so, which trains?

That happens on the Empire Builder only.

On the LSL out of Chicago, sleeping car pax are offered a free wine tasting in the dining car, and sparkling apple juice is also an option.

Finally the Auto Train has a free wine tasting in the cafe car shortly before departure from the originating stations.

Thanks Alan! I thought they did on the CS last year, maybe that was only for the relaunch of the PPC?

I'll still bring my own anyway. Thought it was a nice touch though!

Indeed, sunchaser, your memory is correct. I as well was served a champagne upon departure from LAX heading north in a roomette last year. 10:15am is normally a bit early for champagne...but since my body clock was all screwed up from working a 10-hour shift and then departing on a five-hour flight (on which I only slept for a couple of hours, despite receiving an upgrade to first class), I was perfectly happy to have one! Besides, I had just had "lunch" in the form of two french dip sandwiches from Phillippe's! :lol:

I do not know if they are still doing this or if this was special to the relaunch, as you say, as I have (sadly) not traveled on Amtrak since then.

 

[sunchaser]

how about this. have a option on whether you want meals included with your sleeper. lets say something like a option like for $100 more add meals to your sleeper. if you choose not to have meals included to keep the cost of the room down then you have to pay for the meals.

Alan already replied to this on pg 7-

The current problem is that ARROW can't handle having some sleepers that include meals, while others don't. It would also be quite confusing to the dining car staff, and I suspect that even passenger would have a hard time understanding things. Yes, many would realize that they booked a room that did not include meals, but others would not notice that. I can see big arguements coming in the diner if that were the case.
The best answer IMHO remains that Amtrak needs a new type of sleeper car, like say a slumbercoach or some type of business class car with seats that almost fully recline. This class would not include meals and it would be easy to keep things straight.

--------------------

Alan,

Take care and take trains!

After reading his answer I would have to agree the Staff would have a terrible time keeping track of who paid or didn't pay for meals.

Sorry, I must be doing the quote function wrong- I had to copy/paste this in.

Thanks for the fix!!

 

[Ispolkom]

You know, while I love Slumbercoach cars, I'm kinda thinking that in todays world, a section sleeper would be more effective. People aren't as privacy oriented when traveling anymore. If you use one roomette space worth for a attendants room on one side, and a pair of bathrooms on the other, a Viewliner could handle 20 sections, which means 40 passengers, 10 more than they currently handle, and probably 15-20 more than they handle on average.

I'm having difficulty with the idea that people aren't as privacy oriented when traveling. When I look at advertising for traveling, I find constant emphasis on privacy. Private balconies on cruise ships. Private pods in first class on airliners. Goodness, the flack I get from the ladies at work when I mention that we stayed in a hotel with the bathroom down the hall. (How often do you use the bathroom, I ask.)

Look at MrFSS's description of the Canadian: "No one ever used them on that trip."

I've traveled in something like a section several times, platskarnyi klass on Soviet trains. It seemed a bit communal to sell to Americans, and I'd be hard-pressed to imagine how Amtrak could offer it for less than the equivalent airfare.

 

[volkris]

You know, while I love Slumbercoach cars, I'm kinda thinking that in todays world, a section sleeper would be more effective. People aren't as privacy oriented when traveling anymore.

That's a sort of bizarre thing to say.

Privacy is becoming more and more of an expectation in American society; what have you seen that leads you to believe travel is exempt from this?

If nothing else, the generation of kids beginning to graduate from college right now are extremely concerned with their physical privacy (online... that's another matter, interestingly enough), with seems to put an expiration date on travel options that deemphasize privacy. Even if the current crop of riders are less concerned with privacy, eventually it will be time for the new generation to take their place, and I believe they'd respond much better to Slumbercoaches.

 

[jackal]

You know, while I love Slumbercoach cars, I'm kinda thinking that in todays world, a section sleeper would be more effective. People aren't as privacy oriented when traveling anymore.

That's a sort of bizarre thing to say.

Privacy is becoming more and more of an expectation in American society; what have you seen that leads you to believe travel is exempt from this?

If nothing else, the generation of kids beginning to graduate from college right now are extremely concerned with their physical privacy (online... that's another matter, interestingly enough), with seems to put an expiration date on travel options that deemphasize privacy. Even if the current crop of riders are less concerned with privacy, eventually it will be time for the new generation to take their place, and I believe they'd respond much better to Slumbercoaches.

Agreed. I read that and was a bit confused.

Actually, many colleges are redesigning their dorms because kids these days expect privacy, and the communal bunk buddy-type rooms of old are no longer appealing. My university built its first dorms about 10 years ago, and the doubles feature two separate bedrooms (one person per room) with a common sitting area and bathroom for each double and the quads feature four separate bedrooms (still one person per room) with a common sitting area and bathroom for each quad (no showers down the hall, either!). They're almost like mini apartments (albeit with no kitchen facilities).

Even universities with 30-year-old dorms (or older!) are beginning to tear them down and build new ones because college kids get to the school and are horrified they have to actually share sleeping quarters with other people. Many kids these days don't like to expose their bodies to others and want a private room where they can go about their business without interference from others. Comment on these social developments as you will (I can just see what some people are going to say!), but it's reality these days, and no amount of kvetching here is going to change it.

 

[sunchaser]

You know, while I love Slumbercoach cars, I'm kinda thinking that in todays world, a section sleeper would be more effective. People aren't as privacy oriented when traveling anymore.

That's a sort of bizarre thing to say.

Privacy is becoming more and more of an expectation in American society; what have you seen that leads you to believe travel is exempt from this?

If nothing else, the generation of kids beginning to graduate from college right now are extremely concerned with their physical privacy (online... that's another matter, interestingly enough), with seems to put an expiration date on travel options that deemphasize privacy. Even if the current crop of riders are less concerned with privacy, eventually it will be time for the new generation to take their place, and I believe they'd respond much better to Slumbercoaches.

GML,

You know, it's funny that you think people aren't as privacy oriented when traveling. Even when I was young, there were certain things done in private. I am positive that my kids would disagree with you about privacy while traveling. They are just a few years older than you. We have a teenage grandchild that would disagree too. I am sure given the choice, you would not want to share compartments with strangers unless they were close to your age. Or you might want to avoid the same for the same reasons. There are some things you just don't want to hear or see.

 

[user 1215]

I think that both need to be incorporated. Note that there are WAY more hotels out there than youth hostels. However, there is a demand for the hostel business model. I would love to see something like 3 full-sleepers, a sectional, AND business class as well as coach on the real long distance trains. Like the Sunset. Before Katrina. With good, fresh food.

 

[Tony]

Even universities with 30-year-old dorms (or older!) are beginning to tear them down and build new ones because college kids get to the school and are horrified they have to actually share sleeping quarters with other people. Many kids these days don't like to expose their bodies to others and want a private room where they can go about their business without interference from others. Comment on these social developments as you will (I can just see what some people are going to say!), but it's reality these days, and no amount of kvetching here is going to change it.

IMHO, some of this is due to the fact that few kids today ever even shared a bedroom at home with a sibling. They grow up with their bedroom at home being their own, very private, space, and expect that to continue to be true at collage. Sorry, but what I have observed from this, is a complete lack of "social skills" in knowing how to successfully live with another person.

Add to that, that most high schools don't require students to take showers after gym anymore, and you have created a generation of kids who freak out at the thought of taking a shower in a locker room as adults.

 

[volkris]

IMHO, some of this is due to the fact that few kids today ever even shared a bedroom at home with a sibling. They grow up with their bedroom at home being their own, very private, space, and expect that to continue to be true at collage.

The research agrees with you: the shift toward kids having their own bedrooms lead to the higher want for private space in college. But regardless of WHERE the attitude came from, it's here and colleges across the country have had to adapt. At some point Amtrak will have to as well.

 

[jis]

IMHO, some of this is due to the fact that few kids today ever even shared a bedroom at home with a sibling. They grow up with their bedroom at home being their own, very private, space, and expect that to continue to be true at collage.

The research agrees with you: the shift toward kids having their own bedrooms lead to the higher want for private space in college. But regardless of WHERE the attitude came from, it's here and colleges across the country have had to adapt. At some point Amtrak will have to as well.

Amtrak already does not have any open sleeping accommodation. Are you suggesting that Amtrak will need to get rid of Coach seating and replace it with seating in small compartments?

 

[sunchaser]

IMHO, some of this is due to the fact that few kids today ever even shared a bedroom at home with a sibling. They grow up with their bedroom at home being their own, very private, space, and expect that to continue to be true at collage.

The research agrees with you: the shift toward kids having their own bedrooms lead to the higher want for private space in college. But regardless of WHERE the attitude came from, it's here and colleges across the country have had to adapt. At some point Amtrak will have to as well.

When I was growing up, for a number of years I shared a room (and bed) with my older sister.

When our kids were growing up, they had to share rooms and sometimes beds, but not always.

My grandkids as well have to share bedrooms. Just not enough bedroom in their house & they can't afford a bigger one.

I think in America, privacy & the lack thereof will always be a sticking point for many reasons.

I still share a bed-with my hubby!

In regards to cheaper sleeping quarters on trains, we have discussed it before. While I have never rode in one, I've seen old movies with what I would call a sleeperette-it looked like a roomette set up for night, but was closed by curtains. Each bunk was a separate compartment. They were designed for sleeping only. It didn't look like they folded up. I saw them in the old movie 'some like it hot' (Marilyn Monroe, Tony Curtis, Jack Lemmon).

I think that would address cost and privacy issues, but not necessarily the food issues. Maybe if they gave an opt out on meals for sleepers, & then require all pax to present their ticket at mealtimes to verify, it may eliminate confusion.

 

[Tony]

Are you suggesting that Amtrak will need to get rid of Coach seating and replace it with seating in small compartments?

I what sunchasher mentions, is what we are talking about. Not getting rid of coach, but develop something between Sleeper Class and Coach Class.

In regards to cheaper sleeping quarters on trains, we have discussed it before. While I have never rode in one, I've seen old movies with what I would call a sleeperette-it looked like a roomette set up for night, but was closed by curtains. Each bunk was a separate compartment. They were designed for sleeping only. It didn't look like they folded up. I saw them in the old movie 'some like it hot' (Marilyn Monroe, Tony Curtis, Jack Lemmon).

I thought it was that the Coach seats folded down into the lower bed, and an upper bed pivoted down. Kind of like a Superliner Roomette, but w/o the walls/doors.

BTW, for me, it was in one of the I Love Lucy travel episodes.

I think that would address cost and privacy issues, but not necessarily the food issues. Maybe if they gave an opt out on meals for sleepers, & then require all pax to present their ticket at mealtimes to verify, it may eliminate confusion.

Well, I think the tangent we went off onto here, was that Sleeper Class would still get included meals included, but the new Bunk Class (anyone have a better term?) would offer a flat bed to sleep on, possibly a common shower, but no meals and no daytime privacy.

 

[sunchaser]

Are you suggesting that Amtrak will need to get rid of Coach seating and replace it with seating in small compartments?

I what sunchasher mentions, is what we are talking about. Not getting rid of coach, but develop something between Sleeper Class and Coach Class.

In regards to cheaper sleeping quarters on trains, we have discussed it before. While I have never rode in one, I've seen old movies with what I would call a sleeperette-it looked like a roomette set up for night, but was closed by curtains. Each bunk was a separate compartment. They were designed for sleeping only. It didn't look like they folded up. I saw them in the old movie 'some like it hot' (Marilyn Monroe, Tony Curtis, Jack Lemmon).

I thought it was that the Coach seats folded down into the lower bed, and an upper bed pivoted down. Kind of like a Superliner Roomette, but w/o the walls/doors.

BTW, for me, it was in one of the I Love Lucy travel episodes.

I think that would address cost and privacy issues, but not necessarily the food issues. Maybe if they gave an opt out on meals for sleepers, & then require all pax to present their ticket at mealtimes to verify, it may eliminate confusion.

Well, I think the tangent we went off onto here, was that Sleeper Class would still get included meals included, but the new Bunk Class (anyone have a better term?) would offer a flat bed to sleep on, possibly a common shower, but no meals and no daytime privacy.

No, don't get rid of coach. Just another form of sleeper at hopefully a lower price with less amenties.

It looked like a car with bunks lining each side of the car. It had walls on each side of the bunks. It did not look like they were moveable at all. Not like a pullman 'coach' which had couches that folded out into beds. Much like roomettes & bedrooms now. Picture a roomette set up as beds, not movable, with curtains for both bunks, no door, & not sold as a set. I think there was actually more like 3 bunks.

 

[Tony]

Not like a pullman 'coach' which had couches that folded out into beds. Much like roomettes & bedrooms now. Picture a roomette set up as beds, not movable, with curtains for both bunks, no door, & not sold as a set. I think there was actually more like 3 bunks.

You mean a "Bunk Class" car that was dedicated only for night-time use, and went completely unused during the day? Well, unless you had passengers wishing to sleep thru the day. Now that might be possible if such a car had no windows at all, and therefore, was pretty much dark even at noon.

Anyway, I don't think Amtrak would ever approve a new car that had such limited, night time only, use.

 

[sunchaser]

Not like a pullman 'coach' which had couches that folded out into beds. Much like roomettes & bedrooms now. Picture a roomette set up as beds, not movable, with curtains for both bunks, no door, & not sold as a set. I think there was actually more like 3 bunks.

You mean a "Bunk Class" car that was dedicated only for night-time use, and went completely unused during the day? Well, unless you had passengers wishing to sleep thru the day. Now that might be possible if such a car had no windows at all, and therefore, was pretty much dark even at noon.

Anyway, I don't think Amtrak would ever approve a new car that had such limited, night time only, use.

Yes, if this video is historically accurate they already did in the past. It shows the bunks at about 50 secs in,

take a look. I am pretty sure there were windows too. Bathroom was at the end of the car.



Compared to a Pullman (scroll down for photos)

http://www.trainweb.org/carl/GrandLuxe/Trainmaster.html

This is one BEAUTIFUL train-way out of most person's price range, but still beautiful.

 

[Bigval109]

Could Amtrak contract its Diner car to a third party with the stipulations that they would get $x per sleeper car passenger (regardless of if they ate or not), then ran the dining car at whatever cost they felt necessary to be profitable? They wouldn't even have to kick back to Amtrak because that would still save 'em money.
Have they tried that, like the 24-hour diner, on any route as a trial?

Or would the Unions have a total fit over it and never let it happen?

Aloha

I don't want to debate union positions, but if the company you worked for, wanted to hire another group of workers, to put more money in the company pocket. How would you feel, and what would you do in that situation?

Mahalo

Try working for Walmart on what little walmart pays. Then add in a salary cap to keep your wages low. The union wage is their people only hope. They had a salary realignment a few years back many got a nickel others got nothing plus a salary cap. Managers pay increased about $20,000 to $30,000 a year. New worker loss the 90 day pay raise. So you are stuck at a low wage for a year before you can get a raise of .60 hour max. If that were you I think you would feel differently instead of being on the high horse looking down on the little guy with poor wages trying to take care of his family. I was on the room once when they told this guy how little he was going to make he looked like he was in shock. He was hollering wow that all, mind you the work is hard. After a while he did take the job but I heard him say his unemployment was more that what they were offering. But being a man, a man doesn't feel good about himself if he is not working.

 

[sunchaser]

Could Amtrak contract its Diner car to a third party with the stipulations that they would get $x per sleeper car passenger (regardless of if they ate or not), then ran the dining car at whatever cost they felt necessary to be profitable? They wouldn't even have to kick back to Amtrak because that would still save 'em money.
Have they tried that, like the 24-hour diner, on any route as a trial?

Or would the Unions have a total fit over it and never let it happen?

Aloha

I don't want to debate union positions, but if the company you worked for, wanted to hire another group of workers, to put more money in the company pocket. How would you feel, and what would you do in that situation?

Mahalo

Try working for Walmart on what little walmart pays. Then add in a salary cap to keep your wages low. The union wage is their people only hope. They had a salary realignment a few years back I got .06 many others got nothing plus a salary cap. Managers pay increased about $20,000 to $30,000 a year. New worker loss the 90 day pay raise. So you are stuck at a low wage for a year before you can get a raise of .60 hour max. If that were you I think you would feel differently instead of being on the high horse looking down on the little guy with poor wages trying to take care of his family. I was on the room once when they told this guy how little he was going to make he looked like he was in shock. He was hollering wow that all mind you the work is hard. After a while he did take the job but I heard him say his unemployment was more that what they were offering. But being a man, a man doesn't feel good about himself if he is not working.

Exactly what does Walmart pay? I've heard varying wages. Most of the jobs I had did not give a .60 hour raise. When I go to walmart, there is always plenty of employees, usually the same people. If it wasn't a good place to work, they would find something else. Most of them do not seem unhappy to be there.

I have several relatives that were union. Generally vastly overpaid, & rarely worked a full shift while clocked in. If the Union didn't like the bennie pkg, they threaten strike. One relative was planning to retire recently from his union job, & he said he would get close to 5k/mo. Plus more from disability. He asked me our income, & he was shocked.

Very unlikely that your coworker's unemployment was more than his pay.

I do not know if the union is an issue for the food service on Amtrak. I know that sleepers provide more revinue. Food service usually is shoestring at best & always on the edge of profitability.

If at all possible, Amtrak should add more sleepers. sleepers=revinue. And of course more food to go with the added sleepers.

I am not sure if they have an issue with spoilage of food. I do know, in most states, in commercial settings you must throw out cooked food that is leftover. Unless they've changed that law. Most food if properly cooled, will stay fresh for at least 4-5 days.

 

[EB_OBS]

Little if anything brought into the diner is frozen (save for the ice cream) it is cooked at stations and brought on board, reheated in convection ovens. For the MILLIONTH time it isn't microwaved TV dinners.

Hi ALC,

Actually your description is close but not totally correct. Vendors that supply Aramark and Amtrak with products prepare and package the products at their manufacturing facilities and the goods are shipped ready to re-heat to Aramark distribution centers in a frozen state.

So basically, for products that are pre-cooked or partially cooked, the vendors do the cooking and packaging. A perfect example is the baked chicken. It is fully cooked and packaged then flash frozen and boxed for delivery. The chicken is then thawed and re-heated in convection ovens on the train.

In the case of Amtrak, Aramark does not perform any food preperation per say. Aramark functions as a receiving, storage and distribution point. Aramark managers work closely with Amtrak Food & Beverage in order to maintain stock levels, establish a par for trains, meet FDA regulations, account for stock distributed to trains and returned at the end of a trip, and to manage condemnage or spoilage.

In reply to the general discussion;

Aramark does not determine what foods or products that Amtrak may or may not serve on-board. Any decisions to add or to delete a product from the menu are solely Amtrak's.

Amtrak's Executive Chef Daniel Malzhan came to Amtrak after the implementation of SDS. I've met him. He's correcting some of the mistakes that SDS introduced. This can be verified by referring to the menu changes that rolled out last October and by more changes coming.

Unfortunately, Amtrak management is committed, by the numbers, to continue using plastic on many trains. Even though the quality and thus cost of the plastic was increased a few times, the savings vs. the labor and benefits cost of the second cook do skew towards using the plastic.

IMO, Amtrak's OBS labor could never be contracted out at any cost savings. You simply are not going to get quality employees to work 16 to 20 hour days, gone from home for 3 to 6 days at a time and required to maintain the kind of training and emergency preparedness that Amtrak employees possess for anything less than is currently standard wages for OBS employees. Amtrak waiters and train attendants start out around $15 and top out at I think $20. I'm not exactly sure what the last contract's wage increases were to the penny. LSA make between $15 and $25 with about a $2 premium for working a diner over a cafe. While these are damned good wages for sure, no Amtrak OBS employees are getting rich working on-board.

I could probably write more but at the moment I'm out of time.

 

[Green Maned Lion]

Lets also say they buy 25 sectionals, planning on one per train.

How do you deal with the Empire Builder and LSL splits?

The Empire builder, last time I checked, Joel, does not use Viewliner equipment. In any case, the Boston section just got back having a sleeper. They can live without the Slumbercoach.

You know, while I love Slumbercoach cars, I'm kinda thinking that in todays world, a section sleeper would be more effective. People aren't as privacy oriented when traveling anymore. If you use one roomette space worth for a attendants room on one side, and a pair of bathrooms on the other, a Viewliner could handle 20 sections, which means 40 passengers, 10 more than they currently handle, and probably 15-20 more than they handle on average.

I'm having difficulty with the idea that people aren't as privacy oriented when traveling. When I look at advertising for traveling, I find constant emphasis on privacy. Private balconies on cruise ships. Private pods in first class on airliners. Goodness, the flack I get from the ladies at work when I mention that we stayed in a hotel with the bathroom down the hall. (How often do you use the bathroom, I ask.)

Look at MrFSS's description of the Canadian: "No one ever used them on that trip."

I've traveled in something like a section several times, platskarnyi klass on Soviet trains. It seemed a bit communal to sell to Americans, and I'd be hard-pressed to imagine how Amtrak could offer it for less than the equivalent airfare.

You know, while I love Slumbercoach cars, I'm kinda thinking that in todays world, a section sleeper would be more effective. People aren't as privacy oriented when traveling anymore.

That's a sort of bizarre thing to say.

Privacy is becoming more and more of an expectation in American society; what have you seen that leads you to believe travel is exempt from this?

If nothing else, the generation of kids beginning to graduate from college right now are extremely concerned with their physical privacy (online... that's another matter, interestingly enough), with seems to put an expiration date on travel options that deemphasize privacy. Even if the current crop of riders are less concerned with privacy, eventually it will be time for the new generation to take their place, and I believe they'd respond much better to Slumbercoaches.

To the above and others, I reply that you are wrong. How am I suggesting we sell this? I am suggesting Amtrak sells this as a per-seat upgrade for about the same as Business class. For this you get a bed on which you can lay horizontal. People would be willing to pay for the chance to sleep horizontally. If you want privacy, that costs extra. You pay $113 for coach, $165 for a section, $303 for a roomette, and $582 for a Bedroom. Two people would make more sense in a roomette, I admit- $330 for a section verses $416 in a roomette.

Bet you Amtrak can fill the car every time.

University? Puh-lease. There is a VERY different dynamic staying in a curtained-off section for a night on a train and sharing a room for months on end in university!