markhb wrote:Southern, I can't imagine that any efficiencies that would be wrought by your plan would not ultimately result in a reduction in the level of service and comfort afforded to all Amtrak passengers, effectively reducing all services across the board to a level consistent with corridor (if not commuter) trains. Therefore, you're effectively arguing against your earlier position in the Crescent thread. If there are efficiencies to be found without affecting service, then management needs to be properly incentivized to find and achieve them.
Personally, I'm on the "just admit it's a market failing that will never make money; neither does the USDA so so what?" bandwagon.
I'd think, to the contrary, that changes to the following wasteful practices would save money and allow more money to be invested in revenue-enhancing passenger comfort enhancements:
1. Inefficient work practices
"Amtrak also backed off of sweeping demands to change work rules, including contracting out more work and giving the railroad more leeway over terminations and overtime."
"Amtrak officials have argued that part of their financial problems are related to the number of unions, many of which duplicate functions. For example, the officials say three different unions are responsible for repairing air conditioners."
Source
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/co ... 03437.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
2. Failure to have a functioning and experienced board
Amtrak's board members are appointed for political reasons, generally. Amazingly, some of Amtrak's recent board members "have never been on an Amtrak train" and "didn't know what an Acela was". The board's job is to set company policy and give management its marching orders. Just how effective would advice from such a board be?
Conversely, I regularly attend board meetings for my job and am a member of one advisory board. In all of those meetings, members are experienced people in the industry and regularly challenge and question management, and challenges and questions come from experience in the industry and the desire to have the company be more efficient. (Not all private-sector boards are good, but they're almost always better than Amtrak's.)
Source:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/co ... 01703.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
3. Not effectively using technology to the same extent that other modes of transportation use it- for example:
* Why aren't all trains equipped with Wi-Fi (which can be sold to passengers for a fee if needed in order to increase profits), unlike planes? US Airways has most, if not all, of its planes with Wi-Fi.
* The Viewliners used to have TV screens in them. I understand that they were taken out because Amtrak thought that passengers would have laptops with plenty of video options in them. Why doesn't Amtrak use those screens for taking customer dinner orders instead of sending a crew of 3 people around to each room? Why doesn't Amtrak provide premium video content on them, for a fee?
4. Not using fee-for-service options to the extent airlines do:
* ClubAcelas have zero revenues. While it's good to let passengers in certain classes of service have free access (which airlines do), why not sell ClubAcela memberships to anyone who wouldn't otherwise have access- either on an annual basis or per-visit? Why not contract out ClubAcelas to United Airlines, which runs a much larger network of lounges? ClubAcelas could lose less money or maybe even show a profit, as airline ones do.
* US Airways sells all sorts of comforts for a fee, such as priority boarding. Why doesn't Amtrak sell priority boarding to coach passengers at large stations for a few bucks? I don't take Southwest, but I understand that even it does that.
4. No-bid or one-bid contracts
"Passenger Trains > Amtrak cancels additional Acela coaches
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: 12/05/12 07:54
Amtrak cancels additional Acela coaches
Author: GenePoon
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Late in 2011, Amtrak decided to increase its Acela fleet by
adding forty coaches. Amtrak issued a request for a price
proposal to a sole source...no competing bids. In February 2012, a
proposal and quote was received from the sole contractor.
Because of the high dollar value of the contract and the lack of
information from any other source for comparison, the Amtrak Office
of Inspector General initiated a review of the sole source price
proposal.
As a result of investigation pursuant to the review, the Inspector
General found that the price proposal contained amounts that "were
not based on well-supported and/or reasonable cost data."
In addition, the proposal contained comments that "suggested
modifications to significant terms and conditions" that Amtrak had
included in its request...including a provision for audits.
The Inspector General recommended that Amtrak attempt to negotiate a
lower price, and retain the audit provision that had been specified
by Amtrak and altered by the contractor.
The purchase of forty additional Acela coaches has now been
cancelled."
5. All sorts of wasteful and inefficient internal procedures
See
http://www.amtrakoig.gov/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
6. Not using public-private partnerships at all
Plenty of state-owned railroads that face funding issues use partners in the private sectors to scrounge up additional revenue. For example:
http://ppp.worldbank.org/public-private ... way-trains" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
When has Amtrak done anything with PPPs? Maybe it has with work on 30th Street Station in Philadelphia or Union Station in DC, but I don't know.
All of these things could make generate additional revenue or cost savings for Amtrak, some of them would help customer comfort and none of them would hurt customer comfort.
Amtrak's losses matter because they give ammunition to Amtrak's opponents, who are doing everything they can to shut the railroad down, and often come close to succeeding. If we want an Amtrak whose long-term survival and prosperity assured, Amtrak must be run as efficiently as possible, which will deprive its critics of their ammunition.
In addition, every penny that Amtrak wastes is a penny that cannot be spent on what I hope we all want: running more, better and faster trains.