Co-worker's reactions

Once again I find my HR person in disbelieve that I'd rather take the train than fly.

In this specific case it was Albany, NY to Ann Arbor MI. I needed to ideally spend two business days meeting with folks out there. So I was in town on the 18th and 19th.

Now, this is NOT a trip I'd recommend for most people and in fact it's not entirely the most practical trip out there. Unfortunately the train only goes to Toledo with bus service a few hours later to Ann Arbor.

To complete it I actually had to take the train to Toledo, hail a cab at 5:30 AM, get to the airport, rent a car and then drive to Ann Arbor. To catch the train home I had to do the reverse. So, in this case I think it's somewhat understandable why many would not want to do such a trip. Fortunately for me, lack of sleep is usually not a big problem. :-)

So, why did I do it?

Well, several reasons:
It was about 1/2 the cost of a direct flight.

On the other hand, a flight comperable in cost with a single-layover (in DC) would have cost me about 4 hours of each working day (arriving at Noon approximately and having to leave in the early afternoon.)

The other option was to fly out on Wednesday and stay until Saturday. In other words, now I'm adding two nights in a hotel to the cost AND spending just as much time away from my family.

So had I flown, I either would have had to leave a day early and stay until Saturday anyway in order to keep the cost down, or have the company spend twice as much money so that I could maximize my time on the ground.

So, basically the HR person thought I was nuts for saving the company money or for maximizing my time "on the ground." Oh well.

Oh, and he also misunderstood and thought I had left at 6:00 AM to arrive in Ann Arbor at 8:00 AM the next day. I had to explain to him that I had left at 6:00 PM, big difference.

Now I may have to go out again in the next two weeks and am again looking at the train as an option. My boss basically said, "if you do go, I don't want you taking the train." But of course gave no real reason. :-)


Who else finds their co-workers reactions to business trips via train to be "interesting"?

What about just taking Northwest non-stop ALB-DET?

Rhinecliff wrote:What about just taking Northwest non-stop ALB-DET?

As I stated, the cost was about twice as much as travel by train, especially on short notice.

Gilbert B Norman wrote:Saving money, that is just 'showing up' colleagues; they will always think 'if he does it, will we be next?"

Actually that's also partly company policy. We're supposed to where possible and reasonable attempt to use the most cost-effective manner of travel. And almost 1/2 price to me is cost-effective.

Corporate travel policies can be annoying for everyone. Pratt & Whitney used to maintain a beautiful airstrip at East Hartford, and an equally nice one in Indiantown, Florida. As you'd expect at an aircraft firm - lots of employees owned their own private planes. Company policy? Can't fly your Cessna or LearJet or whatnot on company bussiness - had to take a major airline, even if it meant a flight on a plane powered by the evil enemy, GE.

Couldn't run down to Middletown, CT on my Harley, either. Not allowed (though UTC's Motorcycle policy in general is quite liberal - we got the prime parking and a guard booth).

IIRC, this extended to transit buses and intercity busses, too. Amtrak was out, period.

I never understood it, really, though I've heard liability is a bit of it.

Well, as I've said before, in 17 years of frequent travel I've managed only a handful of off-NEC business trips by rail. Typically, either the schedules were inconvenient or (during the Warrington years) the cost of a sleeper room was so extravagant that it was actually cheaper to fly, rent a car, and engage a hotel room.

And another problem is that it's really tough to get a rental car at a train station in most Amtrak locations. You tend to have to taxi to the airport.

But sometimes it works. I got off in Wenatchee, WA on a Thursday evening after four days of tests of a unit grain train, and opted for the Empire Builder east to MKE, then a plane to PHL, beacuse a deluxe room was cheaper than airfare and it didn't cost me too much time (I'd have had to stay overnight in Wenatchee, commuter flight to Sea-Tac, then a late Friday arrival in PHL.)

Another time, I got a Superliner room on the Cardinal from Huntington to WAS, at one-fifth the cost of airfare, and spent the day writing my report. Only problem was having to change trains in WAS to reach PHL.

Today I'm off to NYP for a 2 PM meeting. I'll drive over to 30th Street, park the car, and make a RT on "regional" trains. I could have taken the River Line to Trenton, thence NJT, but it's the day after Thanksgiving, it takes half an hour longer...and, well, it's the day after Thanksgiving weekend and it's "other people's money".

Given how unpleasant air travel has become (had a marathon return from Kansas City last week, two days before the holiday), I'll take the train wherever and whenever it makes sense timewise and cost-wise. Unfortunately, that hasn't been very often, except on the NEC.

20+ years ago, I had a job that I had to travel 2-3 times per month on company business. Like you, Mr Moore, I too, preferred rail travel over air.

Fortunately, I worked for small company and they simply thought I was nuts for taking the train. As I usually had to put in a full day or more at a customer, I'd fly out to the city the night before (last flight of the day) and rent a hotel near the customer. I'd have reservations on Amtrak to travel home. As I lived in Milwaukee at the time, travel from the South or the west coast generally involved 2 nights on the train....broke my heart...NOT!!! I always planned it so that I left the customer on Friday...that way, my 'extra' travel time was not a loss to the company.

For what it's worth, as long as the 'top' of my receipt stack was an airline ticket, I wasn't questioned about my choice of carrier. However, in the rare occassion that the Amtrak ticket was more expensive (2 nights in deluxe sleeper from SFO, for example), I only expensed an amount equal to the airline ticket. That way, the company always got the best deal...I did too!

Regrettably, that job only lasted about 5 years, and I moved on.

Some co-workers of mine recently took the train to Pittsburgh out of Newark or Philadelphia (cannot recall whether they left from home or from work), because it was probably the most economical, and the time lost was not that bad. However, Amtrak has hurt that trip quite a bit with its latest schedule. I don't think anyone looked at them funny, but then again, train travel seems more acceptable at a university.

In my career in Finance, I had to deal with New York State auditors from the sales tax branch in Albany. At Guilford because we did conduct business in NY and after I left there at a computer manufacturer that did business there (and has since been absorbed by another outfit).
Despite a big Amtrak presence in the state, the chosen method to travel between Albany and NY City was air. You could go by train but you had to figure out scheduling and ticketing on your own and it had to be cheaper. This was mid-late 1980s. There was a lot of State business between the two cities.

What my Dad said if their was HSR in the Midwest he would take it. Also it saves the comapny $$$

AmtrakFan

Fortunately while a couple of my co-workers may look at me a bit "strangely" there's no real push to keep me off the train. I'm an IT guy so I'm already considered "weird." :-)

As for Albany-NYC, at this point I think if anyone flew (other than as a means to a connecting flight) I think our company would have a fit. So, fortunately the company truly isn't "anti-rail."


Anyway, looks like I'll be heading out to Ann Arbor again this week or next. We'll see what happens, probably the train again.