Passenger Trains > Competitive Rail Passenger Service Pilot Progam

Comments were due last Monday on FRA Docket 2016-0023 Competitive Rail Passenger Service Pilot Program, which is a provision of the FAST Act to develop private operators for three of the 15 long-distance routes.  Comments were filed by Iowa Pacific, Brightline, Amtrak, and others.  There is a public hearing in Washington on September 7, then a further comment period.

Enjoy reading:  https://www.regulations.gov/docket?D=FRA-2016-0023 .

 



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 08/28/16 06:22 by eee.

Comments section: AFL-CIO-(TTD) wants "protection" for union workers.

It will be interesting to see how prospective bidders deal with the some of the advantages Amtrak enjoys, especially the reluctance of freight railroads to work with any railroad other than Amtrak (or commuter services). Amtrak's liability provisions would also make it hard for another carrier to provide full service including the T&E crews. I suspect if this experiment happens it will look very similar to IP's service. Amtrak will continue to provvide access to the railroads using their train crews while the new service provider uses their equipment and on board service. Perhaps Amtrak's new president will enable this to actually happen. Judging by the Hoosier State, passengers will be delighted.

The fun part for railfans will be speculating which train will be the guinea pig. I'll vote for the City of New Orleans. Service can only improve on that train. There is also opportunity for increased revenue with better marketing for the tourist market in Memphis and New Orleans as well as again attracting the hoards of passengers that road IC's fleet of trains from the delta region. Another plus would be integrating the train into the proposals now being made to extend the train along the Gulf coast.



 

Use non union workers....particularly in the on board jobs that interact with passengers.  Result: Better service as the bad ones can be canned for any reason so those who remain care more about the quality of work and keeping their jobs.

So what would you do? Fire all the On Board workers the good along with the bad? As 10 year veteran on Board Service Employee and Union member I can tell you that what kept poorly performing workers on the job, more than any other factor was Amanagement's inability to properly screen (in the hiring process), train, monitor, supervise and build a good case for employee termination.

John Webb
Trinidad, CA

Thank you, John.  The bad ones were pointed out to Amtrak mgmt. by fellow workers, but no one retrained them or did much with the info. 

And once the train left the station, the bad actors felt no one was looking or cared.

Even very modest proposals like assigning extra bidding credits for people with good scores on company follow up of passengers is treated like an atomic bomb. The poor performers would have an incentive to upgrade their performance.

Not self initiated surveys, but the regular follow up of "how was your trip?" survey Amtrak should be asking a significant % of its customers.

andersonb109 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Use non union workers....particularly in the on
> board jobs that interact with passengers.
>  Result: Better service as the bad ones can be
> canned for any reason so those who remain care
> more about the quality of work and keeping their
> jobs.
You 've made a very good point !

On the Hoosier State, does Amtrak provide the Engineer and Conductor, and Iowa Pacific provide car attendants, food and lounge people, etc.?

 

The proposed Gulf service only uses the CNO equipment, not its name. The train will have its own name being completely separate running between New Orleans and Jacksonville which keeps it under 750 miles for State sponsorship.





palmland Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> It will be interesting to see how prospective
> bidders deal with the some of the advantages
> Amtrak enjoys, especially the reluctance of
> freight railroads to work with any railroad other
> than Amtrak (or commuter services). Amtrak's
> liability provisions would also make it hard for
> another carrier to provide full service including
> the T&E crews. I suspect if this experiment
> happens it will look very similar to IP's service.
> Amtrak will continue to provvide access to the
> railroads using their train crews while the new
> service provider uses their equipment and on board
> service. Perhaps Amtrak's new president will
> enable this to actually happen. Judging by the
> Hoosier State, passengers will be delighted.
>
> The fun part for railfans will be speculating
> which train will be the guinea pig. I'll vote for
> the City of New Orleans. Service can only improve
> on that train. There is also opportunity for
> increased revenue with better marketing for the
> tourist market in Memphis and New Orleans as well
> as again attracting the hoards of passengers that
> road IC's fleet of trains from the delta region.
> Another plus would be integrating the train into
> the proposals now being made to extend the train
> along the Gulf coast.
>
>
>
>  

Posted from Android

KV1guy Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The proposed Gulf service only uses the CNO
> equipment, not its name. The train will have its
> own name being completely separate running between
> New Orleans and Jacksonville which keeps it under
> 750 miles for State sponsorship.

Could you cite a source for that? So far what I have seen says the service will be New Orleans to Orlando and that makes it more than 750 miles. Of course no one has decreed that states together are not allowed to sponsor a service longer than 750 miles.All that has been decreed by PRIIA is that states must sponsor a service less than 750 miles. Besides the funding that they are primarily looking for is federal funding with state and locality matching funds.

For those who spend the time to read and study FRA Docket 2016-0023, you should find it quite enlightening.

Mr. Ellis did his homework on this one, I have to admit. Some good lessons can be learned from this recent history. While politely stated, it's a blistering frank reality. Congratulations for putting it in print!

On the other hand is we have Richard Slattery writing on behalf of NRPC. Also, a must read. Can you say "Don't Kill My M-O-N-O-P-O-L-Y ?? Richard, I drank your PRIIA serum, got sick and nearly died. I don't want a refill...



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 08/29/16 08:24 by PC1974.

PC1974 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> For those who spend the time to read and study FRA
> Docket 2016-0023, you should find it quite
> enlightening..........
 
I tried, I really tried, but halfway thru the third paragraph of section I.C. Operating Subsidy my head exploded.
 

PC1974 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> For those who spend the time to read and study FRA
> Docket 2016-0023, you should find it quite
> enlightening.
>
> Mr. Ellis did his homework on this one, I have to
> admit. Some good lessons can be learned from this
> recent history. While politely stated, it's a
> blistering frank reality. Congratulations for
> putting it in print!
>
> On the other hand is we have Richard Slattery
> writing on behalf of NRPC. Also, a must read.
> Can you say "Don't Kill My M-O-N-O-P-O-L-Y ??
> Richard, I drank your PRIIA serum, got sick and
> nearly died. I don't want a refill...

Thanks for posting this item. I read through all the comments and generally agree with your conclusions.
i had not previously seen the losses per sleeping car passenger line before now. If accurate, truly eye watering.

The comments on the UK rail system not exactly accurate. Government support has declined over the last few years due to the happy coincidence of rising volumes meeting rising fares. Comparisons are difficult since the government owns and maintains the railway and has private operators actually running the trains. Most of the operators make a profit - "above the rail". Those that do not are primarily in low population areas. 

prrmpup Wrote:

> Thanks for posting this item. I read through all
> the comments and generally agree with your
> conclusions.
> i had not previously seen the losses per sleeping
> car passenger line before now. If accurate, truly
> eye watering.

​Which one of the files did you find that in? Thanks.

ts1457 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> prrmpup Wrote:
>
> > Thanks for posting this item. I read through
> all
> > the comments and generally agree with your
> > conclusions.
> > i had not previously seen the losses per
> sleeping
> > car passenger line before now. If accurate,
> truly
> > eye watering.
>
> ​Which one of the files did you find that in?
> Thanks.

In Ed Ellis' comments. It is in the big table.

< On the Hoosier State, does Amtrak provide the Engineer and Conductor, and Iowa Pacific provide car attendants, food and lounge people, etc >

Yes, that's how it is. Amtrak should have been thrilled from the getgo in not having to scrounge up a Gennie and 2 Horizon coaches, yet still keep their valuable train crews, but instead kicked and screamed until IPH won.

For a brief period before IPH took over, they had coffee, donuts and Wifi on the Hoosier State, then yanked them away a few months later ("I'm taking my ball and going home").
After IPH, Amtrak sticks a half-Biz class car on the Cardinal to keep up with the Jones's, which is very nice, but it meant the deletion of the 4th Am-2 coach that the train had last summer.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 08/29/16 11:30 by joemvcnj.

Mr. Ellis' comments are difficult to find.  When you follow the link you must then click on
"Comments View all 9".   

His comments are well worth your while reading.  Especially if you are a fanatic "Amtrak can do no 
wrong" type.  You will find out what some of us long suspected about Amtrak putting up road blocks
to anyone desiring to operate a first class operation.

Good Luck to Mr. Ellis on capturing some service.

Here you go. Direct link to a PDF file:

https://www.regulations.gov/contentStreamer?documentId=FRA-2016-0023-0011&amp;attachmentNumber=1&amp;disposition=attachment&amp;contentType=pdf
 

Here is the link to all the comments: https://www.regulations.gov/docketBrowser?rpp=25&amp;so=DESC&amp;sb=docId&amp;po=0&amp;dct=PS&amp;D=FRA-2016-0023

So if one were to attend to hearing could they ask FRA why they did not enforce the requirement in PRIIA for Amtrak to post variable costs for the routes despite the investment in the nice new accounting system? Could they ask were the Viewliner II cars are or what is the plan for long distance trains outside of a private operator?