Viewliner II - Part 1 - Initial Production and Delivery

[Ryan]

It is treating employees with respect. Something you obviously know nothing about.

Can we maybe disagree without the personal attacks? I happen to agree with you, but you're not helping your case.

There's a big difference between choosing to book a ticket and sharing a room with someone you know and being forced to share a 4x8 room with a stranger.

There's a smaller, but still significant difference between forcing employees to double up in a hotel room and a roomette on the train. The hotel room is significantly larger (you actually have a bathtub to retreat to) and you're not forced to remain there.

 

[StriderGDM]

These folks are on the road for days and you want to dehumanize their working conditions.

If they're demanding better sleeping conditions than I, a high-paying passenger, am getting....
...then they should all be fired as prima donnas. I believe they are not so prima-donna-ish.

If prima-donna prissy staff members think that bunking two to a room is "dehumanizing", they're in the wrong line of work. They are, in fact, selling rooms to people who bunk two to a room...

As I said, for most of American railroad history, the onboard staff were bunking six to a room in open bunks. If you think sharing a roomette is "dehumanizing", there's something wrong with you.

If the union demands featherbedding for their employees, they'll pretty soon find that there aren't any employees left. Elimination of the dining cars will knock out a lot of them. Next step will be replacement of coach attendants with Assistant Conductors; the higher pay will be compensated for by the freed-up sleeping space.

It is not featherbedding. It is treating employees with respect. Something you obviously know nothing about.

As far as railroad history. Railroad history is a history of rail workers fighting for better working conditions and safer working conditions. Study that history. That is the history we need to learn from and go back to, the fighting history. Not making concessions. Not going back in time to those working conditions.

Then I think neroden is right, the problem may ultimately solve itself when the jobs go away completely.

So is 2 to a room better than none to a room?

 

[Guest]

I thought the same when I was an entering freshmen in collage. What, having to share a dorm room? But I learned to tolerate it.

Except for the LSA and the Conductor, who due to their senior positions are entitled to a private room (the same as managers getting a private office at work), everyone else should be two to a roomette. True, there is the gender and orientation mixes to consider. And personality differences. However, if the Navy can figure out such stuff for their submarines, Amtrak can do the same.

Though, I feel I need to remind that on the Superliner transdorms, there is that employee lounge downstairs. I don't think there is any such accommodation in the new Viewliner II dorm/baggage cars. OSB's will need to use the roomettes for more than simply sleeping. They will need to use such for simple off-hours relaxation, and entertainment (TV? games? reading?).

 

[neroden]

It is not featherbedding.

It's almost literally featherbedding. Offering extra-cushy sleeping quarters! I've never seen a better example.

For reference, a roomette on some of these routes can raise upwards of $27 / hour in revenue. That's a mighty expensive perk. Would the employees care to have $13.50 an hour additional in wages instead of the solo rooms? (Rooms which they aren't even in during most of the day, because they're working?) I suspect those who have a clue might prefer it.

In Europe, of course, passengers routinely share six-bunk-to-a-room compartments with strangers. But even in the US... I have zero respect for any prima donna workers who demand better sleeping conditions than the paying passengers. I am quite sure most of them are not such prima donnas.

It would be interesting to look back at the history. I suspect this perk was given away when Amtrak had much lower ridership, much lower sleeper ticket prices, and an excess of sleeping cars. At the time it might have seemed like a cheap perk. Those times are long gone. With high ridership, high sleeper ticket prices, and a shortage of sleeping cars, it's now an extremely expensive perk. Give it back and get wage increases instead. (Or watch your craft forced out of existence because it's unsustainable -- which would suck.)

 

[keelhauled]

I'm confused as to how the employees are demanding better sleeping accommodations. Surely Amtrak is not forcing paying passengers to go two to a room. If so, that would indeed be news to me. Presumably two people staying in a one room are doing so because they are traveling together and wish to do so. So unless the crew rooms are still getting little chocolates set out, they would seem to be identical accommodations to those that a single passenger in a roomette would get. To say nothing of the fact that there's nothing barring a single passenger from paying for an entire bedroom if they feel like they have some money to burn, which by any measure would seem to be a superior accommodation.

 

[Thirdrail7]

It is not featherbedding.

It's almost literally featherbedding. Offering extra-cushy sleeping quarters! I've never seen a better example.

For reference, a roomette on some of these routes can raise upwards of $27 / hour in revenue. That's a mighty expensive perk. Would the employees care to have $13.50 an hour additional in wages instead of the solo rooms? (Rooms which they aren't even in during most of the day, because they're working?) I suspect those who have a clue might prefer it.

In Europe, of course, passengers routinely share six-bunk-to-a-room compartments with strangers. But even in the US... I have zero respect for any prima donna workers who demand better sleeping conditions than the paying passengers. I am quite sure most of them are not such prima donnas.

It would be interesting to look back at the history. I suspect this perk was given away when Amtrak had much lower ridership, much lower sleeper ticket prices, and an excess of sleeping cars. At the time it might have seemed like a cheap perk. Those times are long gone

For the record Neroden, my recollection is that Amtrak voluntarily separated the crews. It wasn't a union demand. Indeed, they shared rooms when I came around and cafe attendants on layovers didn't even get rooms. They weren't even allowed in the layover crew rooms. The took their breaks in the cafe car, guarding their stock.

All of that came to an end during a string of defeats in various lawsuits in the 90's/early 2000s and in my opinion, they did a complete 180 on various issues.

There used to be crew suites and during emergencies, employees doubled up in hotel rooms. Not these days. Everyone is separated. Before you double up, there must be mutual consent. If not, a room does not have to be provided but you can no longer order someone to double. Another result of that battle was the modesty lock on dual cab locomotives to satisfy the female engineers.

Over time, opinions evolve. Just because something was done years ago doesn't mean it is necessarily a good idea today. Just because something works in another country does not necessarily mean it is good idea here. Even if it IS a good idea, that doesn't mean it will hold up in court!

 

[Guest]

These folks are on the road for days and you want to dehumanize their working conditions.

If they're demanding better sleeping conditions than I, a high-paying passenger, am getting....
...then they should all be fired as prima donnas. I believe they are not so prima-donna-ish.

If prima-donna prissy staff members think that bunking two to a room is "dehumanizing", they're in the wrong line of work. They are, in fact, selling rooms to people who bunk two to a room...

As I said, for most of American railroad history, the onboard staff were bunking six to a room in open bunks. If you think sharing a roomette is "dehumanizing", there's something wrong with you.

If the union demands featherbedding for their employees, they'll pretty soon find that there aren't any employees left. Elimination of the dining cars will knock out a lot of them. Next step will be replacement of coach attendants with Assistant Conductors; the higher pay will be compensated for by the freed-up sleeping space.

It is not featherbedding. It is treating employees with respect. Something you obviously know nothing about.

As far as railroad history. Railroad history is a history of rail workers fighting for better working conditions and safer working conditions. Study that history. That is the history we need to learn from and go back to, the fighting history. Not making concessions. Not going back in time to those working conditions.

Then I think neroden is right, the problem may ultimately solve itself when the jobs go away completely.

So is 2 to a room better than none to a room?

Two to a room won't save the jobs.

 

[MikefromCrete]

These folks are on the road for days and you want to dehumanize their working conditions.

If they're demanding better sleeping conditions than I, a high-paying passenger, am getting....
...then they should all be fired as prima donnas. I believe they are not so prima-donna-ish.

If prima-donna prissy staff members think that bunking two to a room is "dehumanizing", they're in the wrong line of work. They are, in fact, selling rooms to people who bunk two to a room...

As I said, for most of American railroad history, the onboard staff were bunking six to a room in open bunks. If you think sharing a roomette is "dehumanizing", there's something wrong with you.

If the union demands featherbedding for their employees, they'll pretty soon find that there aren't any employees left. Elimination of the dining cars will knock out a lot of them. Next step will be replacement of coach attendants with Assistant Conductors; the higher pay will be compensated for by the freed-up sleeping space.

I'm not looking forward to this trend.

Do you actually work for a living? I would certainly hate working for you.

 

[Thirdrail7]

I'm confused as to how the employees are demanding better sleeping accommodations. Surely Amtrak is not forcing paying passengers to go two to a room. If so, that would indeed be news to me. Presumably two people staying in a one room are doing so because they are traveling together and wish to do so. So unless the crew rooms are still getting little chocolates set out, they would seem to be identical accommodations to those that a single passenger in a roomette would get. To say nothing of the fact that there's nothing barring a single passenger from paying for an entire bedroom if they feel like they have some money to burn, which by any measure would seem to be a superior accommodation.

I don't believe Neroden's point is whether or not the procedure results in "better" accommodations. I believe his point is similar to my point and that is the "grand scheme" of things.

While I'm all for private space and I can appreciate the need to wind down and clear your head on a trip, the bottom line is it eats into potential revenue.

Lots of it.

It would help Amtrak bottom lines if people doubled up like they used to and like passengers riding together do.

I see both sides. I remember the old grimy bunk rooms of yesteryear where people slept in open bunks wiht 15 or 16 of your coworkers if they were extremely lucky. If you were lucky, you slept on a recliner for hours surrounded by your coworkers. If you were unlucky, you slept on a chair, a table. a bench, newspaper or wherever you could find a few feet to yourself.

So the idea of crashing in sleeper (which I've also done during emergencies) with another person isn't repulsive in my mind. I've placed my head in far worse places.

However, I never worked almost 3 days straight in the process.

I'm pretty sure we're hijacking this thread and driving it off topic while having a debate over work rules that none of us are actually involved in. That being said, I would actually defer to actually crew members since it is their job.

In case anyone wants to talk about the actual cars, another batch of bags have been shipped south to correct the numerous issues that have cropped up. I look forward to seeing the first batch return. The mods should be interesting if the latest rumor is true.

 

[Bob Dylan]

Making OBS return to the bad old Pullman days of having to sleep in the Diners, Bag Cars and even the Barbershop/Bathroom isn't going to happen.

Returning to crew cars on Single Level Cars with the New Viewliner Bag/Dorms

is an excellent idea, it opens up more rooms for revenue passengers!

As for insisting on OBS sharing Roomettes, I doubt if anyone would want to check into a hotel where on a trip and be told that they had to share a room with a co- worker or stranger like in a hostel!

 

[Guest]

I'm confused as to how the employees are demanding better sleeping accommodations. Surely Amtrak is not forcing paying passengers to go two to a room. If so, that would indeed be news to me. Presumably two people staying in a one room are doing so because they are traveling together and wish to do so. So unless the crew rooms are still getting little chocolates set out, they would seem to be identical accommodations to those that a single passenger in a roomette would get. To say nothing of the fact that there's nothing barring a single passenger from paying for an entire bedroom if they feel like they have some money to burn, which by any measure would seem to be a superior accommodation.

I don't believe Neroden's point is whether or not the procedure results in "better" accommodations. I believe his point is similar to my point and that is the "grand scheme" of things.

While I'm all for private space and I can appreciate the need to wind down and clear your head on a trip, the bottom line is it eats into potential revenue.

Lots of it.

It would help Amtrak bottom lines if people doubled up like they used to and like passengers riding together do.

I see both sides. I remember the old grimy bunk rooms of yesteryear where people slept in open bunks wiht 15 or 16 of your coworkers if they were extremely lucky. If you were lucky, you slept on a recliner for hours surrounded by your coworkers. If you were unlucky, you slept on a chair, a table. a bench, newspaper or wherever you could find a few feet to yourself.

So the idea of crashing in sleeper (which I've also done during emergencies) with another person isn't repulsive in my mind. I've placed my head in far worse places.

However, I never worked almost 3 days straight in the process.

I'm pretty sure we're hijacking this thread and driving it off topic while having a debate over work rules that none of us are actually involved in. That being said, I would actually defer to actually crew members since it is their job.

In case anyone wants to talk about the actual cars, another batch of bags have been shipped south to correct the numerous issues that have cropped up. I look forward to seeing the first batch return. The mods should be interesting if the latest rumor is true.

I look forward to seeing the modifications that have been made too.

I do recall the hate that came my way when I posted there were problems........

 

[DryCreek]

I'm confused as to how the employees are demanding better sleeping accommodations. Surely Amtrak is not forcing paying passengers to go two to a room. If so, that would indeed be news to me. Presumably two people staying in a one room are doing so because they are traveling together and wish to do so. So unless the crew rooms are still getting little chocolates set out, they would seem to be identical accommodations to those that a single passenger in a roomette would get. To say nothing of the fact that there's nothing barring a single passenger from paying for an entire bedroom if they feel like they have some money to burn, which by any measure would seem to be a superior accommodation.

Uh Oh, now you've done it! You have clouded the rhetoric with factual observation. But, I was thinking the exact same thing myself.

Anyway, I have endured crowded berthing while serving in the U.S. Navy for six years. There were times when we had to carry excessive crew (SpecOps) and those of us regularly assigned aboard had to "hot rack". Yup, two bunks spread between three sailors. Since we worked three shifts a day, one of the three was always on watch, and you alternated between open bunks. Not very hygienic.

But, now when I travel, and when I traveled extensively while working at the shipyard I always got my own motel room. I guess that I should feel guilty about that? Now, if I was working the same train with my wife (or whatever partner you choose), I wouldn't complain about sharing a roomette. She knows I like to sleep nude, and probably wouldn't complain nearly as much as a different co-worker might.

In the photo posted above, I noticed the open bunking in what appears to be a converted boxcar. Those look like track section workers to me, not On Board Staff. When that picture was taken I'm sure that was considered normal company-provided lodging for them. I'd bet that todays track crews don't have bunkhouses like that. And, as far as the comparison to how the Pullman Porters were treated during their trips, I'm sure you can read gobs on how their unionizing efforts were successful in eliminating such conditions. That in itself speaks volume for their courage and ability to stick together in unity as those changes were made during the Jim Crow era - and I think we all know the demographic of the typical Pullman Porter during those years.

 

[Ryan]

I thought the same when I was an entering freshmen in collage. What, having to share a dorm room? But I learned to tolerate it.

Still not the same, for many of the reasons I enumerated earlier - same roommate over the course of a year becomes not a stranger. More space, no in room toilet, other places you can go.

 

[twa904]

You should see the living quarter for staff on cruise ships.

 

[andersone]

Hey mike, this is America, don't tell me who I have to sleep with

 

[Guest]

You should see the living quarter for staff on cruise ships.

Actually, I have. I went on the "below the decks" tour during my cruise. Their quarters was pretty much like the interior cabins that paying passengers would be staying in.

Everyone else gets two to a cabin, kind of like it was in college dorms.

Supervisory staff have their own private quarters (a perk of rank). And daily housekeeping too (the crew doing this housekeeping are training to be passenger stewards).

Possibly it is kind-of weird to us, but the living quarter areas are broken up into male, female, and gay. The cruise industry was actively hiring gay employees, long before it was fashionable (starting from what the 1950's?).

Unlike on Amtrak, the crew have their own socializing and entertainment areas for when they are off duty, quite separate from passengers. They have their own dining rooms (and served by waitstaff in training), their own lounge/bar, their own gym area, and yes, even their own hot tub.

 

[pvd]

With very few exceptions most cruise ships are foreign flagged and exempt from US wage and labor law. Other than entertainment and some operating crew, staff is usually from developing nations, this enables cruise lines to pay wages we would be unable to live on in this country. The sad thing is, in our country, whenever somebody makes a good deal, or gets a little bit ahead, instead of saying "why can't I get that also" they say "why should they have it" When the middle class is gone, and all that is left is rich and poor, think very carefully at which group you are going to end up in. We are gradually becoming a giant third world country.

 

[user 1215]

You should see the living quarter for staff on cruise ships.

Actually, I have. I went on the "below the decks" tour during my cruise. Their quarters was pretty much like the interior cabins that paying passengers would be staying in.

Everyone else gets two to a cabin, kind of like it was in college dorms.

I think that's the exception rather than the rule. Again, the idea is to maximize the space for revenue and minimize the space while still being humane to the crew. From what I've read - and granted, it's not from personal observations - the crew get MUCH smaller rooms than even the lowest paying passenger.

If there is a way to put two per roomette when they aren't sleeping at the same time, it would help. A small padlock on the closet could be used to protect personal items.

Unlike on Amtrak, the crew have their own socializing and entertainment areas for when they are off duty, quite separate from passengers. They have their own dining rooms (and served by waitstaff in training), their own lounge/bar, their own gym area, and yes, even their own hot tub.

Have you seen a diner after hours?

 

[neroden]

As for insisting on OBS sharing Roomettes, I doubt if anyone would want to check into a hotel where on a trip and be told that they had to share a room with a co- worker or stranger like in a hostel!

Been there, done that. This is all rather off topic, of course.
But I stand by my observation that if the entire crew are getting better accomodations than typical premium-paying passengers (which they are)... then this isn't sustainable financially and will end with a *lot* fewer crew.

It is interesting to hear that Amtrak voluntarily offered this perk during the late 90s / early 2000s -- a time when Amtrak was running out of sleeper cars. Unbelievably poor management. Thank you very much to Thirdrail7 for the information.

For the record Neroden, my recollection is that Amtrak voluntarily separated the crews. It wasn't a union demand. Indeed, they shared rooms when I came around and cafe attendants on layovers didn't even get rooms. They weren't even allowed in the layover crew rooms. The took their breaks in the cafe car, guarding their stock.

Now, giving the the cafe attendants *somewhere* to sleep other than the cafe car, that's reasonable!

All of that came to an end during a string of defeats in various lawsuits in the 90's/early 2000s and in my opinion, they did a complete 180 on various issues.

It would be interesting to see what the lawsuits were.

There used to be crew suites and during emergencies, employees doubled up in hotel rooms. Not these days. Everyone is separated. Before you double up, there must be mutual consent. If not, a room does not have to be provided

Very interesting. Amtrak could of course go back to that on board -- "Don't like your roommate, you can always pay for your own room".

but you can no longer order someone to double. Another result of that battle was the modesty lock on dual cab locomotives to satisfy the female engineers.

Over time, opinions evolve. Just because something was done years ago doesn't mean it is necessarily a good idea today. Just because something works in another country does not necessarily mean it is good idea here. Even if it IS a good idea, that doesn't mean it will hold up in court!

It would be interesting to see what the court cases were actually about. I strongly suspect that Amtrak management overreacted. Not just those in the military, but all kinds of professions have to bunk with coworkers (oil rigs come to mind, firefighters staying over at a firehouse, and as mentioned before, cruise ship workers). Anyway, thanks very much for your memories of the history.
I'm not sure it's clearly understood by the employees just how expensive a roomette is these days. This may be a change since the late 90s / early 2000s.

Relatively few passengers can afford a roomette at all. I can convince a fair number of people that a double-occupancy roomette is worth the money, but very few will consider a single-occupancy roomette reasonably priced, given that the cheapest bucket on the LSL (minus the transportation cost) generally costs over $200. The optics of this are "Staff gets luxury rooms for free as a perk", and financially, that's exactly what's going on.

If Amtrak is stuck with this, Amtrak will continue to cut OBS staff. The financial cost is too substantial, with each roomette being foregone revenue of a minimum of $10/hour, and up to $44/hour. This is a humungous percentage of wages. It's good to have good working conditions, but not when it drives your employer from profit to loss, which generally causes your job to go away.

The dining car will go first, because it costs a minimum of three roomettes (usually more like five). It's pretty obvious that Amtrak is already working on eliminating the dining cars. I'm not happy about it, but the economics of them are really terrible at current staffing levels, with current perks. Hopefully the cafe cars will be beefed up or the dining cars will be used to provide "fresh grill" service with cafe-style ordering.

Then the coach attendants will go, because they can be replaced with ACs who sleep off-board; the higher salaries & benefits for ACs will be more than made up for by the revenue from the roomettes.

The sleeping car attendants have to be located in the sleeping car to assist passengers, so they will remain (although Amtrak is clearly trying to have each Viewliner attendant handle one and a half cars); and the cafe car attendants will probably remain since it's not obvious how to replace them.

This isn't a scenario I like; I think it's bad for everyone. But it's the way things go if the cost of wages + benefits + perks is too high -- fewer and fewer employees.

 

[jis]

I am somewhat curious.... do you stuff a gay man and a straight man in the same roomette? How is that any different from putting a man and a woman in the same room, if the potential for unwanted sexual attraction and interaction is the determining factor? Would it then be OK to pair a gay and a lesbian together? As I said.... just curious since we are talking of stuffing two otherwise unrelated people together in a roomette in very close quarters. So in order to make all this work you'd require the employees to disclose their sexual orientation, which would be an interesting additional requirement. Oh well, I can see a lot of opportunities for litigation here. The lawyers must be feeling very good as they read these brilliant ideas.

Mind you, I don't have any specific position on this matter. I am just exploring possible issues that may arise.

Indeed in Europe and Asia in couchette type accommodation people who are otherwise unrelated are freely intermingled into single compartments. In India they will not generally put different sexes that are unrelated in the same compartment in AC 1st Class. That is why you do not get your actual seat/berth allocation until the final reservation charts are made. So it would all appear to be what is culturally acceptable in a particular context. I don;t know what is or is not acceptable in the US for sure. But I do know that Americans tend to be much more into their private space than most other cultures, so much so that couchette type accommodation and indeed even Sections do not work anymore in the US.

 

[user 1215]

And rolling back a few posts, that's kinda the interesting aspect. We are dealing with a NEW American culture - and dare I say - one that is just about the most selfish.

 

[jis]

With very few exceptions most cruise ships are foreign flagged and exempt from US wage and labor law. Other than entertainment and some operating crew, staff is usually from developing nations, this enables cruise lines to pay wages we would be unable to live on in this country. The sad thing is, in our country, whenever somebody makes a good deal, or gets a little bit ahead, instead of saying "why can't I get that also" they say "why should they have it" When the middle class is gone, and all that is left is rich and poor, think very carefully at which group you are going to end up in. We are gradually becoming a giant third world country.

So the challenge is to figure out how to run Amtrak under a foreign flag I suppose But that would be cabotage, and that can not be allowed without severe consequences on the airline business. Juuuust kidding of course.

 

[Guest]

As for insisting on OBS sharing Roomettes, I doubt if anyone would want to check into a hotel where on a trip and be told that they had to share a room with a co- worker or stranger like in a hostel!

I have worked for large, major corporation, and for some conferences, we were booked two to a room. I am not sure if such was to simply save money, or to address the reality that the resort/hotel didn't have enough rooms for everyone to get their own.

 

[jis]

In case anyone wants to talk about the actual cars, another batch of bags have been shipped south to correct the numerous issues that have cropped up. I look forward to seeing the first batch return. The mods should be interesting if the latest rumor is true.

How many, when and where were they shipped? Are these new cars that have never been shipped out of CAF before? Or are these cars that were already accepted and are being sent to Hialeah for further work? I guess I am left a bit confused by your pithy message.

 

[jis]

As for insisting on OBS sharing Roomettes, I doubt if anyone would want to check into a hotel where on a trip and be told that they had to share a room with a co- worker or stranger like in a hostel!

I have worked for large, major corporation, and for some conferences, we were booked two to a room. I am not sure if such was to simply save money, or to address the reality that the resort/hotel didn't have enough rooms for everyone to get their own.

Yup. It depends on the culture of the company. In some this is viewed as OK and in others not so much. Practices vary a lot even in different business units within the same company also depending on the level and role of the employees involved.