Amtrak service consistency vs. airlines and pre-Amtrak railroads

[SouthernRailway]

I take Amtrak only a few times a year, but I notice how inconsistent Amtrak service is, compared to airlines (as I fly once every three weeks, usually):

1. Business class on Amtrak varies widely: not just the name of the "business class" product, but the accommodations.

2. Onboard service varies widely. Sometimes I am completely ignored when I'm in a sleeping car; sometimes I am greeted by name. Sometimes I can get room service; sometimes I can't.

3. Lounges vary widely: not just the name varies but the quality varies.

The only consistency with Amtrak seems to be in the equipment: all Eastern long-distance trains have the same sleeping cars, coaches and lounges, from what I can tell.

To the contrary, at least American Airlines offers very consistent service. There are differences between domestic and international, longer flights have meals and on short flights the planes are smaller, but that's about it (subject to variations in staff helpfulness).

Were pre-Amtrak railroads more or less consistent than Amtrak? Of course, a railroad's commuter trains wouldn't be the same as its long distance ones. But, for example, if I took any Eastern long-distance train offered by a particular railroad in the 1960s, other than some being coach-only and others having sleeping cars, was service pretty consistent? Or were there big variations in train quality (such as in timekeeping, cleanliness and overall comfort) among a particular railroad's long-distance trains?

[ExCon90]

Pre-Amtrak there was a great deal of standardization within a particular railroad. Some roads were noted for better service than others, but as a rule it was consistently so. Since most sleeping-car service was provided by the Pullman Company and its employees the consistency of service standards was system-wide. There's a reprint of the Pullman handbook for service attendants in lounge cars spelling out in complete detail how service was to be provided. I remember that the manual specified something like 18 steps involved in serving a bottle of beer in a lounge car (it was brought to the passenger's lounge seat); among other things it specified that the linen napkin over the server's forearm must be placed with the fold next to the wrist. Two glasses were used: one was for the sole purpose of being filled with ice to chill it en route to the customer; the ice was then dumped into the other glass and the beer poured into the now-empty, but well chilled, glass, the glass held at a slight slant so the beer could be poured down the inside--the bottle to be presented to the customer with the label toward him prior to pouring. A passenger boarding at Portland, Me., or Portland, Ore., could expect exactly the same thing. Long-distance trains regularly made scheduled connections. In 1962 I rode the PRR's Golden Triangle overnight from Pittsburgh to Chicago and connected with the MILW's Morning Hiawatha with no problem. Returning from Minneapolis I connected from the C&NW's "400" to the returning Golden Triangle, and the connections were taken as a matter of course.
I was working in Pittsburgh at the time, and the Golden Triangle (2 coaches, a diner, and 4 sleepers) pulled in under my 8th-floor window every morning right on the dot.

[TomNelligan]

Many pre-Amtrak long distance routes offered both premier and secondary trains. The latter were typically slower and made more stops, were often heavy with mail and express, and often used older equipment. While details varied between railroads, there could definitely be differences in the level of service offered between trains on a given route.

[Greg Moore]

I ave to agree, one of my biggest complaints about Amtrak that I think is "easily" fixed is more consistent customer service. When it's great, it's great, but when it's bad, it's horrible.

I'd say most is good, but I think if Amtrak could have a consistent customer experience it would help their bottom line since it takes just one bad experience to turn away a traveler.

[Ridgefielder]

I'd say it differs for when your "pre-Amtrak" benchmark is set. There was a big difference in the quality and consistency of service offered between, say, Washington, NY and Boston by the PRR/NH in 1959 and by Penn Central in 1969.

[Tadman]

I ave to agree, one of my biggest complaints about Amtrak that I think is "easily" fixed is more consistent customer service. When it's great, it's great, but when it's bad, it's horrible.

I'd say most is good, but I think if Amtrak could have a consistent customer experience it would help their bottom line since it takes just one bad experience to turn away a traveler.

Completely agree. I was hoping the first thing Mr. Anderson would do is standardize on-board procedures. Boarding, announcements, diner reservations, etc... Would take little money or time, perhaps 90 days or less, to come up with some PDF's that clearly spell out procedure.

If you fly Delta, they read the announcements off an iphone. If you go to McDonalds, they make the burger from a chart. There is no winging it, and it makes for a better experience.

[David Benton]

I suspect there is a lack of a reward system for good employees, and a corresponding lack of remedy for under performing employees.

[eolesen]

I suspect there is a lack of a reward system for good employees, and a corresponding lack of remedy for under performing employees.

Recognizing merit tends to go against the concept of seniority and collective bargaining, and it's not uncommon for the unions to protect the lowest performers from being held accountable.

[rcthompson04]

I suspect there is a lack of a reward system for good employees, and a corresponding lack of remedy for under performing employees.

Recognizing merit tends to go against the concept of seniority and collective bargaining, and it's not uncommon for the unions to protect the lowest performers from being held accountable.

That is often the biggest issue with organized labor in the US.

[Tom M]

I completely agree with these observations. I've had pretty good sleeping car service, and I've had horrible sleeping car service. Originally I would tip at the end of the trip, as in a restaurant, thinking that a good tip should be based on good service. I came to understand that tipping was expected at the beginning of the trip, so I did that. The first time I tried that the attendant was nearly non-existent for the entire trip. I've seen polite, I've seen funny, I've seen interested, I've seen rude. The quality of service does indeed vary tremendously. I've always chalked it up to the union thing, since employees know that their job is safe no matter what kind of service they provide. But... airline employees are unionized, too. In my experience, I've never seen airline employees treat passengers with the indifference shown by some Amtrak employees. So, there's something else going on. Has the attitude of the 60s, when many railroads were doing everything possible to discourage passenger traffic, somehow been instilled into the DNA of some Amtrak employees?

[gokeefe]

I'd say it differs for when your "pre-Amtrak" benchmark is set. There was a big difference in the quality and consistency of service offered between, say, Washington, NY and Boston by the PRR/NH in 1959 and by Penn Central in 1969.

Along the same lines my Father recalls to this very day a terrible trip on the B&O from Washington to Chicago and probably the worst hamburger he ever had. He was at the University of Chicago as a college student on the early 60s (ca. 1960-1964).

A trip on the SCL in a Pullman to Fort Jackson, SC? No problem.

On the complete opposite of the spectrum my Mother recalls a trip on the Super Chief among her very fondest memories. This also would have been in the early 1960s. She had an accomodation all to herself (not sure what the smallest available private room was).

Amtrak has successfully put the "ghost of Penn Central past" to rest but in most places will probably never approach anything like what the ATSF once offerred in the Turquoise Room.

For my own part I've been fortunate enough to travel end to end in FirstClass aboard the Acela. It is an experience unlike almost any other and does justice to the classic Northeastern premium fare train service.

What Acela FirstClass lacks in luxe or charm it makes up for in friendly, consistent service, a strong schedule and a station experience (including lounges) that is clearly superior to the legacy era.

[ExCon90]

That's true about the lounges--there was nothing like that for first-class passengers. Even Super Chief passengers mingled with the C&WI commuters in Dearborn Station until they boarded. LAUPT probably had the best waiting area anywhere, but available to all passengers. There was a special waiting room in Washington for the President, but that was about it.

[SouthernRailway]

I’ve taken Acela first class. It’s the same as airline first class, roughly.

Frightening that there were no station lounges before Amtrak, but who needs them for a train, since you should be able to arrive just before the train leaves?

Amtrak should have better on-board lounges for first-class passengers: a room plus a 1974 middle school cafeteria car (Amfleet) does not cut it.

[eolesen]

But... airline employees are unionized, too. In my experience, I've never seen airline employees treat passengers with the indifference shown by some Amtrak employees. So, there's something else going on.

Most US airline employees understand that their customers have choices.... Amtrak has no meaningful competition aside from other modes of travel.

[Tadman]

Most European stations have a small premium lounge that seems to be a recent thing spurred by air competition. The concept of a waiting room in general is not a thing in Europe. Most stations have assorted benches but no climate controlled room, let alone a grand hall. You show up, you get on the train. Of course this also means no Mickey Mouse parading around behind an Amtrak employee either.