Amtrak Pennsylvanian service may end (Philadelphia, McDonald: minimum wage, living, cost of)

[Kevin1813]

Originally Posted by UKyank

It is however a good representation of the overall Amtrak problem as perennially needing lots of subsidies just to operate with minimal service & can assure itself to never have any capital required to expand infrastructure due to its highly inefficient manner of operation. I love rail travel but Amtrak sucks at it.

Even more than subsidies, is the inefficient boarding system. I've never seen a train boarding system like they have anywhere else in the world. For some reason they want to treat the train as you would a plane at the airport. This along with Amtrak's "requirement" to show up half an hour early for the train really hurts their competiveness here in Philly. The Northeast Regional takes an hour and a half to go from Philly to NYC vs 2 hours and 45 min for the local rail. If you suddenly add in that extra half hour plus the inflexibility of buying tickets less than 2 weeks in advance and you have a system that is not at all competitive.

[Merge]

Originally Posted by UKyank

It is however a good representation of the overall Amtrak problem as perennially needing lots of subsidies just to operate with minimal service & can assure itself to never have any capital required to expand infrastructure due to its highly inefficient manner of operation. I love rail travel but Amtrak sucks at it.

All modes of transportation are heavily subsidized by our national government and our tax dollars. The airline industry has been consistently propped up by the federal government since its inception. The highway system relies on both HUGE outlays of government funds and access to cheap gasoline (itself enabled by large government subsidies to oil companies making record profits, along with an exorbitantly expensive foreign policy to stabilize our access to said resource). Yet you and others want to single out Amtrak for inefficiency? I think that illustrates a flawed perspective.

[UKyank]

Originally Posted by Merge

All modes of transportation are heavily subsidized by our national government and our tax dollars. The airline industry has been consistently propped up by the federal government since its inception. The highway system relies on both HUGE outlays of government funds and access to cheap gasoline (itself enabled by large government subsidies to oil companies making record profits, along with an exorbitantly expensive foreign policy to stabilize our access to said resource). Yet you and others want to single out Amtrak for inefficiency? I think that illustrates a flawed perspective.

No, the topic was Amtrak so that why it was singled out in this thread; much as I've discussed the problem with highway subsidies in relevant highway threads. I've used many rail systems around the world & they are universally better at providing travel then is Amtrak. Pointing out an un-necessary high labor costs & inneficient operation & wishing for a better system isn't completely out of left field. It's all rather embarrassing that you could get to Philly by train quicker in 1885 then you can in 2015.

[Merge]

Originally Posted by UKyank

No, the topic was Amtrak so that why it was singled out in this thread; much as I've discussed the problem with highway subsidies in relevant highway threads. I've used many rail systems around the world & they are universally better at providing travel then is Amtrak. Pointing out an un-necessary high labor costs & inneficient operation & wishing for a better system isn't completely out of left field. It's all rather embarrassing that you could get to Philly by train quicker in 1885 then you can in 2015.

Ok... there's nothing wrong with wanting better rail service. I think that's a noble goal. However, the singling out of a waiter's compensation as a symbol for the general inefficiency of a transportation system is disingenuous and (as stated previously) absurdly reductionist.

[ny789987]

Originally Posted by Merge

Ok... there's nothing wrong with wanting better rail service. I think that's a noble goal. However, the singling out of a waiter's compensation as a symbol for the general inefficiency of a transportation system is disingenuous and (as stated previously) absurdly reductionist.

It is not reductionist. Overinflated labor costs is the major reason why long distant Amtrak train travel loses money. Amtrak needs to decide whether it wants to be a welfare to work jobs program for unions or a reliable long distant travel network. As it stands now because of inflated labor costs, Amtrak doesn't have the money to invest in capital improvements. As I said earlier, budget bunk bed style rolling stock would go a long way into making long distant train travel more attractive to younger and middle class consumers. An overnight reasonably priced ticket that offered access to a bunk and a clean bathroom with an early morning NYC arrival would be widely popular.

[Merge]

Originally Posted by ny789987

It is not reductionist. Overinflated labor costs is the major reason why long distant Amtrak train travel loses money. Amtrak needs to decide whether it wants to be a welfare to work jobs program for unions or a reliable long distant travel network. As it stands now because of inflated labor costs, Amtrak doesn't have the money to invest in capital improvements. As I said earlier, budget bunk bed style rolling stock would go a long way into making long distant train travel more attractive to younger and middle class consumers. An overnight reasonably priced ticket that offered access to a bunk and a clean bathroom with an early morning NYC arrival would be widely popular.

Do you work for the railroads? If you have access to sources that prove your point that Amtrak's labor costs in paying their wait staff are the primary source of its financial frustrations , then go ahead and provide them.

[UKyank]

Originally Posted by Merge

Do you work for the railroads? If you have access to sources that prove your point that Amtrak's labor costs in paying their wait staff are the primary source of its financial frustrations , then go ahead and provide them.

All of Amtrak's labor costs are fully disclosed; the example of the overpayed waitstaff is indicative of the overall labor cost problem within the system. Of course the high pay of any single position itself alone is never going to be the sole source of Amtraks high labor cost but rather all the overpayed positions (plus legacy costs associated with them) taken as a whole are the primary source of the financial frustration. But of course you already knew that.

[Lobick]

Originally Posted by UKyank

All of Amtrak's labor costs are fully disclosed; the example of the overpayed waitstaff is indicative of the overall labor cost problem within the system. Of course the high pay of any single position itself alone is never going to be the sole source of Amtraks high labor cost but rather all the overpayed positions (plus legacy costs associated with them) taken as a whole are the primary source of the financial frustration. But of course you already knew that.

Shouldn't we compare Amtrak's finances (costs, subsidies, etc.) to those of the rail systems around the world to which we are envious? In a vacuum, I'm not sure what this tells us. Labor costs are "high" as compared to what exactly?

[UKyank]

Originally Posted by Lobick

Shouldn't we compare Amtrak's finances (costs, subsidies, etc.) to those of the rail systems around the world to which we are envious? In a vacuum, I'm not sure what this tells us. Labor costs are "high" as compared to what exactly?

I think this is a good breakdown:

Amtrak Bill Continues History of Wasted Subsidies | Economics21

Amtrak’s largest expense is labor, salary, and benefits, which cost over $2 billion in 2014. Maintaining fully-staffed trains on infrequently-traveled routes has contributed to high labor costs, but the pay rate of Amtrak’s employees raise its costs substantially. The average onboard employee made $41.19 an hour on Amtrak in 2012, while railroads that contracted out services to private companies paid their employees $7.75 to $13.00 an hour.
Base pay may already be substantial, but regulations and poor oversight allowed employees to pocket $185 million in overtime pay in 2013.

Note: I'm not saying Amtrak should receive no subsidies, but it should likewise be accountable to its waste too.

[Lobick]

Originally Posted by UKyank

I think this is a good breakdown:

Amtrak Bill Continues History of Wasted Subsidies | Economics21

Note: I'm not saying Amtrak should receive no subsidies, but it should likewise be accountable to its waste too.

With all due respect, the analysis of a conservative/ libertarian think-tank on Amtrak's performance isn't particularly enlightening. We get it, it's a government owned/ run enterprise so it sucks. If you don't support a robust, government run/ subsidized passenger rail system, I'm sure that type of a breakdown is very confirmative. Of course, as with all economic concerns, waste and efficiency should continually be addressed.

My question is more angled towards comparison to like entities. How does Amtrak's finances compare to Deutsche Bahn for example? I honestly have no idea.