Excess Carry-on Baggage Fee Began October 1, 2015

[jebr]

Passengers boarding at an unstaffed station can't pay with cash without being hit with a penalty, where passengers at a staffed station can (by using the ticket counter instead of paying on board.)

Not exactly. The policy is that if there's no means to buy a ticket at a station (ticket office or Quik-Trak) then a ticket can be purchased from a conductor with no surcharge. On my Capitol Corridor route there are at least three stations where this can be done (OAC, HAY, SCC), and I did it once myself to see if it could be done. There's no penalty for cash to my knowledge.

Now I suppose if there's only Quik-Trak at a station, then there's no means to pay cash without a penalty. The machines don't take cash and there will be the penalty for buying tickets on board.

The Capitol Corridor only has one "bucket" that's the same whether you buy online or at the station (excepting any discounts.) The Amtrak website doesn't mention any specific penalty, but it appears that only the flexible fare would be available (as it states only a full, undiscounted, unrestricted fare can be purchased, and I don't think the Value would count as full or unrestricted.)

Onboard

On most Amtrak trains, only the full, undiscounted, unrestricted fare will be available for purchase onboard the train. This is regardless of reservations made or fares previously quoted by ticket agents, Amtrak.com or elsewhere. Higher fares usually apply when purchasing tickets onboard the train. To secure the best available fare, passengers should purchase tickets prior to boarding the train.

 

[PRR 60]

Capitol Corridor buy-on-board fares are the what the website lists as the Value fares. This is also true for the Keystone unreserved service between Philadelphia and Harrisburg.

 

[BCL]

Passengers boarding at an unstaffed station can't pay with cash without being hit with a penalty, where passengers at a staffed station can (by using the ticket counter instead of paying on board.)

Not exactly. The policy is that if there's no means to buy a ticket at a station (ticket office or Quik-Trak) then a ticket can be purchased from a conductor with no surcharge. On my Capitol Corridor route there are at least three stations where this can be done (OAC, HAY, SCC), and I did it once myself to see if it could be done. There's no penalty for cash to my knowledge.

Now I suppose if there's only Quik-Trak at a station, then there's no means to pay cash without a penalty. The machines don't take cash and there will be the penalty for buying tickets on board.

The Capitol Corridor only has one "bucket" that's the same whether you buy online or at the station (excepting any discounts.) The Amtrak website doesn't mention any specific penalty, but it appears that only the flexible fare would be available (as it states only a full, undiscounted, unrestricted fare can be purchased, and I don't think the Value would count as full or unrestricted.)

"Value" fare is the only option at the unstaffed stations without QT. When I bought my ticket on board a train OAC-GAC, it was the same $15 I would have gotten purchasing online or through the Amtrak app. I don't even know who in their right mind would purchase a "flexible" fare on Capitol Corridor anyways.

I just checked online for OAC-GAC, HAY-GAC, and SCC-GAC. All that's available is a "Value" fare at $15/$13/$6. The "Flexible" fare only seems to come up if both departure/arrival stations are staffed.

 

[jebr]

I think those would be exceptions, though, since there is no flexible fare. I would be curious what the cost would be on a reserved train.

 

[jis]

First you have to find a reserved train that stops at OAC though!

 

[jebr]

Hah! I suppose I could try it myself at SPL instead (long distance train, so multiple buckets and both value and flexible fare, along with saver sometimes,) but I like getting the 10% discount for AAA, Student Advantage, or NARP (yes, I have all three at this time) or a promo saver fare when available. My curiosity isn't worth enough to pay extra for a ticket.

 

[jis]

I just became eligible for the Senior discount last year, which beats all

 

[BCL]

I just became eligible for the Senior discount last year, which beats all

My kid is eligible for a 50% off fare any time, but that does require an adult on the same ride.

 

[Devil's Advocate]

I'd still take peak earning years over an age based discount.

 

[jis]

Ones current age is not ones to choose. It is kinda pre-determined by past events You just make the best of what you got. The whole thing is pretty inevitable, unless one manages to pre-depart.

 

[Anderson]

In response to amamba, how many people actually try to carry on two almost full size suitcases and two hand baggages on an NEC Regional anyway? Even if they are being daft enough to try to go to KIN to visit the traveler?

The carry on allowance is pretty much an amount of baggage that at least I could not reasonably drag along myself.

I think the issues will be more with nitpicks like a bag 30" long not meeting 28", which will probably be ignored in many cases, rather than one involving 3 carry-ons and 3 personal items instead of 2+2 and such. How many people really bring on more than 4 pieces anyway? Even on the NEC? For the few that do I don't think it will be that hard to manage.

Clearly if the Conductors are made in charge of enforcing this they will carry some means of effecting the charge, whether it be through some sort of POS device or by simply scanning/typing in the details of the credit card on their iPhone device and having the charge handled at the backend. We don;t know enough about how this will be done, but it does not appear to be an insurmountable problem since they do carry an extremely capable device these days to scan tickets anyway.

True, though what if someone paid cash (i.e. the green stuff) for their ticket (or paid with a now-invalid credit card...for example, I've had to have my AGR card swapped three times over the years: Once for standard expiration, twice for fraud issues)? I really don't envy the conductor who gets into that position and then has to break a $100 bill because the traveler only has $15 in small bills for food.

Another thing to consider is that on the station side of things, you're going to have a lot of station agents who won't pursue this as not being worth the hassle and others who (as noted) decide to play the nitpick game because they can.

I'd also point out that with the airlines, there's at least a nominal justification for the charges insofar as weight on the plane is a significant restriction. On Amtrak? Space limits are a thing, yes, and reducing the limit a few years ago from three bags to two (checked and carry-on) likely had at least something to do with higher load factors (and borderline overloaded baggage cars...look inside the baggage car on a peak-season Silver Service train at SAV sometime and you'll see what I mean)...but it isn't like Amtrak

FWIW, the real danger is triggering a bunch of "never again" situations (either with a station agent being a pain or repeated on-board "surprises").

 

[jebr]

True, though in theory (though not in practice in most cases) the current policy is more likely to generate "never again" passengers. There is no reduction in the official allotment of carry-on items from Sept. 30 to Oct. 1. What is happening is that instead of an unofficial "turn the other way" when it happens most of the time there's now an official "it's allowed for a fee" policy for additional carry-on baggage. I would think that, if the policy was simply just enforced more strictly, there'd be a lot more "never again" from being turned away at the platform from boarding for too much luggage (or having to abandon luggage) than having to pay $20-$40 for that luggage but still bring it with you.

 

[Anderson]

True, though in theory (though not in practice in most cases) the current policy is more likely to generate "never again" passengers. There is no reduction in the official allotment of carry-on items from Sept. 30 to Oct. 1. What is happening is that instead of an unofficial "turn the other way" when it happens most of the time there's now an official "it's allowed for a fee" policy for additional carry-on baggage. I would think that, if the policy was simply just enforced more strictly, there'd be a lot more "never again" from being turned away at the platform from boarding for too much luggage (or having to abandon luggage) than having to pay $20-$40 for that luggage but still bring it with you.

Granted that I'm usually in a sleeper, but I don't think I've ever seen or heard of someone being turned away for too much baggage at trainside. The strange situation in RVR I mentioned is the closest I've seen.

And of course, as I've said...there's a risk that this makes for a worse baggage situation in coach (since policy is now to take any baggage people bring on).

 

[jis]

True, though what if someone paid cash (i.e. the green stuff) for their ticket (or paid with a now-invalid credit card...for example, I've had to have my AGR card swapped three times over the years: Once for standard expiration, twice for fraud issues)? I really don't envy the conductor who gets into that position and then has to break a $100 bill because the traveler only has $15 in small bills for food.

What does how the original ticket was paid for have anything to do with how a surcharge is to be paid? I am afraid I am missing something. Yeah, paying by cash raise the usual paying by cash problems. That's life. Presumably there will be some policy to handle situations involving inability to pay.

Another thing to consider is that on the station side of things, you're going to have a lot of station agents who won't pursue this as not being worth the hassle and others who (as noted) decide to play the nitpick game because they can.

I can't even fathom how a station agent should go about handling this except in cases with observable huge piles of baggage. I would not expect them to do anything unless checking baggage is involved. If they have a personality disorder they will find some reason or the other to hassle passengers anyway. There is nothing stopping them now.

I'd also point out that with the airlines, there's at least a nominal justification for the charges insofar as weight on the plane is a significant restriction. On Amtrak? Space limits are a thing, yes, and reducing the limit a few years ago from three bags to two (checked and carry-on) likely had at least something to do with higher load factors (and borderline overloaded baggage cars...look inside the baggage car on a peak-season Silver Service train at SAV sometime and you'll see what I mean)...but it isn't like Amtrak

The amount of space on trains is not infinite either, so there is a similar justification except that the limits are higher as is the case already. One could quibble about what the limit should be, but there should be a limit and it should be enforced.

FWIW, the real danger is triggering a bunch of "never again" situations (either with a station agent being a pain or repeated on-board "surprises").

You can't satisfy everyone. For simply breathing air you would find a few "never agains". They are worthy of being let go. Why would anything on board be a surprise if they bother to understand the baggage rules? If they do not bother then that is life. We don;t have to suddenly become nanny outfit to babysit people through their life's problems.

In reality, what proportion of people do actually bring baggage even half way upto their full quota anyway? Are we mostly talking about theoretical problems?

 

[Peter KG6LSE]

the root of this is the stupid bag cars..... we need Roll on roll off bag cars .... and some one to man them at every station.

folks this is not 1937. its 2015. Crack down on carry on's Offer train side checked bags!

EG like a dome car's tri level floor plan....

 

[Ispolkom]

Furthermore, you're assuming that everyone has put their bags into the sizer and come out clean on the other side.

Even further still, you're apparently assuming this is a one time event that ends precisely where it began. My money is on size and weight restrictions becoming stricter over time with more and more people eventually running afoul of rules and having to pay increasingly severe surcharges. It's possible that Amtrak will not take this any further than already described, but if the airlines are any indication then Amtrak customers are likely to have several rounds of additional revenue squeezing ahead of them.

JoeBas, I don't understand what you wrote. My suitcases (or bags, as I guess I must now call them) get filthy without sizers. Have you ever seen the inside of an old Amtrak baggage car? Or do you mean they get damaged?

Devils Advocate, I'm still trying to figure out if you think there are a lot of passengers affected by this new policy or a few. That completely exhausts my ability to worry about Amtrak's future policies.

I didn't care when Amtrak lowered the number of free checked bags from 3 to 2. I don't see how the present change in policy will affect any but a tiny proportion of travelers, that is those who carry more than 150 lbs. of luggage per person. After all, I traveled to the Soviet Union for ten months with two suitcases. That included suits, a winter coat, boots, even 10 or 12 lbs. peanut butter. If anyone needs to, by herself, take more luggage than that, that passenger should either ship something or go to a station with checked luggage service. They shouldn't be allowed to carry on that much luggage as it is. Amtrak isn't a moving company.

Now, if this policy concerned medical equipment (wheelchair, oxygen, medical devices etc.), there would be cause for concern, but I'm sure it doesn't.

 

[jebr]

True, though in theory (though not in practice in most cases) the current policy is more likely to generate "never again" passengers. There is no reduction in the official allotment of carry-on items from Sept. 30 to Oct. 1. What is happening is that instead of an unofficial "turn the other way" when it happens most of the time there's now an official "it's allowed for a fee" policy for additional carry-on baggage. I would think that, if the policy was simply just enforced more strictly, there'd be a lot more "never again" from being turned away at the platform from boarding for too much luggage (or having to abandon luggage) than having to pay $20-$40 for that luggage but still bring it with you.

Granted that I'm usually in a sleeper, but I don't think I've ever seen or heard of someone being turned away for too much baggage at trainside. The strange situation in RVR I mentioned is the closest I've seen.

And of course, as I've said...there's a risk that this makes for a worse baggage situation in coach (since policy is now to take any baggage people bring on).

What written policy states that a customer is allowed to take any baggage people bring on? The public website states that the carry-on luggage policy is "strictly enforced." I double-checked the Service Standards Manual, and it even tells employees to refuse service if someone is clearly exceeding the policy.

Since all written policy that's publicly available suggests that people should not bring on excess baggage, and they may be turned away trainside if they clearly exceed the policy, the new policy is a better policy as written than the current policy. I'd rather have an enforced, written policy that allows excess baggage if I need it, even if it's for a fee, than a relatively unenforced policy where the general rule is "if you can carry it on you can bring it on" but a strict conductor or attendant could deny service if it exceeds the policy.

It bears repeating that this change does not include any reduction to the free baggage allotment. There was a minor change earlier this year in the written policy to solidify the personal items allotment (arguably with a reduction in that, though I'm not sure I'd buy that this would constitute any part of a trend) but the core substance of the carry-on allotment has not changed anytime in recent memory (I can't think of the last time it was changed.) Amtrak appears to simply be enforcing the current baggage allotment more strictly and allowing people an official way to bring more on board if they wish. To me, this is worlds better than simply enforcing it more strictly and turning people away trainside.

 

[Alice]

I re-read the policy about medical equipment. This is the first listed requirement:

Required medical devices will not count towards a passenger's allowable baggage and will be accepted free of charge if accompanied by a ticket issued at a mobility impaired fare.

My interpretation of this is that non-disability medical supplies (say prescription pills or special food) have to satisfy the same requirements and limits as anyone else. In order to pack extra items for disability, you have to be disabled. And they are defining disabled as takes disabled discount. Elsewhere, there is a list of papers that allow a person to take the discount. Also elsewhere, the disabled discount is not limited to mobility disabilities, but H-room reservations are.

Obviously there are legal issues here as written. Perhaps the official rules are written in lawyer-speak and the person who translated it to customer-friendly language introduced some inaccuracies.

The Special Items page is pretty interesting, it also has fine print for other oversize items such as golf clubs, bikes, surf boards, etc.

Page about disability discount

Page about disability documentation

 

[Anderson]

True, though what if someone paid cash (i.e. the green stuff) for their ticket (or paid with a now-invalid credit card...for example, I've had to have my AGR card swapped three times over the years: Once for standard expiration, twice for fraud issues)? I really don't envy the conductor who gets into that position and then has to break a $100 bill because the traveler only has $15 in small bills for food.

What does how the original ticket was paid for have anything to do with how a surcharge is to be paid? I am afraid I am missing something. Yeah, paying by cash raise the usual paying by cash problems. That's life. Presumably there will be some policy to handle situations involving inability to pay.

Another thing to consider is that on the station side of things, you're going to have a lot of station agents who won't pursue this as not being worth the hassle and others who (as noted) decide to play the nitpick game because they can.

I can't even fathom how a station agent should go about handling this except in cases with observable huge piles of baggage. I would not expect them to do anything unless checking baggage is involved. If they have a personality disorder they will find some reason or the other to hassle passengers anyway. There is nothing stopping them now.

I'd also point out that with the airlines, there's at least a nominal justification for the charges insofar as weight on the plane is a significant restriction. On Amtrak? Space limits are a thing, yes, and reducing the limit a few years ago from three bags to two (checked and carry-on) likely had at least something to do with higher load factors (and borderline overloaded baggage cars...look inside the baggage car on a peak-season Silver Service train at SAV sometime and you'll see what I mean)...but it isn't like Amtrak

The amount of space on trains is not infinite either, so there is a similar justification except that the limits are higher as is the case already. One could quibble about what the limit should be, but there should be a limit and it should be enforced.

FWIW, the real danger is triggering a bunch of "never again" situations (either with a station agent being a pain or repeated on-board "surprises").

You can't satisfy everyone. For simply breathing air you would find a few "never agains". They are worthy of being let go. Why would anything on board be a surprise if they bother to understand the baggage rules? If they do not bother then that is life. We don;t have to suddenly become nanny outfit to babysit people through their life's problems.

In reality, what proportion of people do actually bring baggage even half way upto their full quota anyway? Are we mostly talking about theoretical problems?

It's a mixed bag (no pun intended). The question of the status of bags of unusual shapes/sizes comes up, which is one possibility (packing a bag to over 50 lbs is doable as well). There's also the question of "what is a bag?" (e.g. multiple smaller shopping bags, a bag of food clipped onto a backpack, etc.) There have been times when I was nominally up to 4-5 "bags", but that's usually one suitcase, one backpack, a carry-out bag clipped to my backpack, and a shopping bag of some sort.

Edit: And with all due respect to the statement (which is to say with utter contempt for it), "Amtrak security standards" my arse.

 

[BCL]

True, though what if someone paid cash (i.e. the green stuff) for their ticket (or paid with a now-invalid credit card...for example, I've had to have my AGR card swapped three times over the years: Once for standard expiration, twice for fraud issues)? I really don't envy the conductor who gets into that position and then has to break a $100 bill because the traveler only has $15 in small bills for food.

What does how the original ticket was paid for have anything to do with how a surcharge is to be paid? I am afraid I am missing something. Yeah, paying by cash raise the usual paying by cash problems. That's life. Presumably there will be some policy to handle situations involving inability to pay.

Another thing to consider is that on the station side of things, you're going to have a lot of station agents who won't pursue this as not being worth the hassle and others who (as noted) decide to play the nitpick game because they can.

I can't even fathom how a station agent should go about handling this except in cases with observable huge piles of baggage. I would not expect them to do anything unless checking baggage is involved. If they have a personality disorder they will find some reason or the other to hassle passengers anyway. There is nothing stopping them now.

I'd also point out that with the airlines, there's at least a nominal justification for the charges insofar as weight on the plane is a significant restriction. On Amtrak? Space limits are a thing, yes, and reducing the limit a few years ago from three bags to two (checked and carry-on) likely had at least something to do with higher load factors (and borderline overloaded baggage cars...look inside the baggage car on a peak-season Silver Service train at SAV sometime and you'll see what I mean)...but it isn't like Amtrak

The amount of space on trains is not infinite either, so there is a similar justification except that the limits are higher as is the case already. One could quibble about what the limit should be, but there should be a limit and it should be enforced.

FWIW, the real danger is triggering a bunch of "never again" situations (either with a station agent being a pain or repeated on-board "surprises").

You can't satisfy everyone. For simply breathing air you would find a few "never agains". They are worthy of being let go. Why would anything on board be a surprise if they bother to understand the baggage rules? If they do not bother then that is life. We don;t have to suddenly become nanny outfit to babysit people through their life's problems.

In reality, what proportion of people do actually bring baggage even half way upto their full quota anyway? Are we mostly talking about theoretical problems?

It's a mixed bag (no pun intended). The question of the status of bags of unusual shapes/sizes comes up, which is one possibility (packing a bag to over 50 lbs is doable as well). There's also the question of "what is a bag?" (e.g. multiple smaller shopping bags, a bag of food clipped onto a backpack, etc.) There have been times when I was nominally up to 4-5 "bags", but that's usually one suitcase, one backpack, a carry-out bag clipped to my backpack, and a shopping bag of some sort.

Edit: And with all due respect to the statement (which is to say with utter contempt for it), "Amtrak security standards" my arse.

I think if it can fit into the sizer it's OK.

I've also seen some odd things in my travels. One was a family with a couple of overweight bags at an airline luggage counter. Each one was barely overweight. The agent suggested that they might redistribute some weight so they didn't need to pay for two overweight bags, but they declined and shelled out $100 instead of $50. I was about to say something like "Are you freaking stupid or something?" but then I figured it wasn't my money.

I've also been waiting as someone was told they about being over the one personal item limit, but was then told that they'd be OK if the smaller item was stowed in the larger item. I was in a similar situation (had a camera bag) and wasn't told to do anything.

 

[Devil's Advocate]

Devils Advocate, I'm still trying to figure out if you think there are a lot of passengers affected by this new policy or a few.

My estimate is that very few will be impacted immediately while many more will be impacted in the future. It's entirely possible I'm completely wrong but the trend I'm sensing reminds me of the early days of the airline luggage wars.

I didn't care when Amtrak lowered the number of free checked bags from 3 to 2. I don't see how the present change in policy will affect any but a tiny proportion of travelers, that is those who carry more than 150 lbs. of luggage per person. After all, I traveled to the Soviet Union for ten months with two suitcases. That included suits, a winter coat, boots, even 10 or 12 lbs. peanut butter.

All of my personal travels have been with a single carefully packed rollaboard and a personal item. At first my bags were small enough that even the most restrictive airlines were perfectly fine with them. Over time the rules have changed over and over again so that now my luggage is technically too large for nearly every airline. At the moment the discrepancy is less than obvious so I have yet to be seriously impacted, but over a long enough timeline even my carefully chosen luggage will eventually become a problem.

What written policy states that a customer is allowed to take any baggage people bring on? The public website states that the carry-on luggage policy is "strictly enforced." I double-checked the Service Standards Manual, and it even tells employees to refuse service if someone is clearly exceeding the policy.

Are you familiar with the concepts of de facto and de jure? While Amtrak's written rules have included all sorts of restrictions on luggage I've never actually seen anyone trying to measure and enforce such rules on more than a vague and superficial level.

 

[andersone]

I think I need to go and photocopy my HC license plates,,,, I don't have a placard,

 

[JoeBas]

JoeBas, I don't understand what you wrote. My suitcases (or bags, as I guess I must now call them) get filthy without sizers. Have you ever seen the inside of an old Amtrak baggage car? Or do you mean they get damaged?

It's a metaphorical figure of speech... not literally "Clean", but rather "Passes their arbitrary and inane sizer test".

 

[Hal]

Are you familiar with the concepts of de facto and de jure? While Amtrak's written rules have included all sorts of restrictions on luggage I've never actually seen anyone trying to measure and enforce such rules on more than a vague and superficial level.

That is correct. As I mentioned if any worker tried to enforce the rules in the past, and there were instances where they needed to be enforced, usually management would never back up the enforcement. I think management was depending on passengers to read the rules and honor them without the crews doing it. Probably most passengers did abide by the written rules cause they didn't know they were not actually enforced. So the crews gave up trying to enforce the written rules. So now there is the idea of enforcing the rules to increase revenue. I don't think that it is crazy that revenue could come in from doing that or that the potential figures that I posted are crazy like some think. The problem they might have collecting revenue is that crews generally don't want to get in confrontations, and might be gun shy on collecting the revenue because of past experiences.

 

[Mystic River Dragon]

I just became eligible for the Senior discount last year, which beats all

Me, too, and also for NJT, which is even better because it's half price!