This Week at Amtrak 2006-06-02
Print This Post
Volume 3 Number 24
- Things are beginning to get interesting. Amtrak’s embattled employee unions are taking note of some of the changes either being proposed or being wrought by Amtrak’s Board of Directors. Most of these changes are very good, but the unions, who have been so victimized by previous Amtrak leadership, are looking at everything with a jaundiced eye.One of the best innovations (advocated for a long time by URPA) is a study to see what benefits will be generated by outsourcing Amtrak’s two telephone reservation centers, one in Riverside, California, and the other in the Philadelphia, Pennsylvania area.
There are two ways to look at this situation. One (and this is often the most overlooked factor from a union standpoint), if the company is not healthy, all jobs will simply disappear because unhealthy companies disappear. Two, when you are talking about eliminating jobs, you are talking about major disruptions in the lives of real people – the employees – which have often been loyal to their company for many, many years. That creates a true conundrum, as our Canadian cousins say, and there are few easy answers. Add to the mix the incorrect attitude of many that Amtrak is “not a real company” because it is a hybrid child of government, and therefore, does not have to be profitable, so it doesn’t matter if it is a huge federal government welfare and jobs program.
Something for all to consider is if some painful steps are taken now to eliminate the horrid status quo of Amtrak as it has dysfunctionally existed for the past 35 years, the company may have an opportunity to grow and prosper, and become a larger, most successful company that will require more employees paid better wages and benefits.
The question of outsourcing the work of the res centers is a pretty easy question to answer. Many private companies can perform the same function with at least, if not better, performance than the current res centers, and at a lower cost. Both res centers are politically located in cities and states where there is a high cost of living and high payroll taxes, some of the few taxes Amtrak has to pay.
As to the question of hired gun employees replacing Amtrak employees, when you visit and work with the res center employees (as this writer has done in past years as a consultant), you learn those employees don’t know much more about riding a train than what they have learned in a classroom. Seldom do these employees get out on the railroad and have first hand experience with the product they are selling. Certainly, outsourced agents probably have as good of a chance to become railroad passengers as current Amtrak res center employees.
Also, maintaining a high tech infrastructure for a well functioning res center is expensive, and outsourcing the function carries the same logic as operating over someone else’s railroad – you only lease the space and equipment you need versus paying the cost of overhead and ownership.
In a separate note, in New Jersey, the Brotherhood of Maintenance of Way Employees, part of the AFL-CIO, staged a short demonstration this week at the start of a minor league baseball game in Little Falls where a team was playing that is owned by Amtrak Board of Directors member Floyd Hall.
The stunt was staged to gain Mr. Hall’s attention that the union feels Amtrak has not been bargaining in good faith, and a new contract hasn’t been signed in over six years. Certainly, the union has some good points to make, and from a “fun” public relations stunt standpoint, the short demonstration gained some attention for the union, and certainly took the fringes of the negotiations directly in the face of Mr. Hall. From a practical standpoint, however, one has to rationally consider whether or not Mr. Hall was either amused or moved to make any change in posture since the union made an embarrassing stand in a totally unrelated venue. Perhaps the union forgot the old adage of “pick your battles wisely.”
- Still in the headlines this week was last week’s Northeast Corridor power outage during a morning rush hour. Plenty of politicians, lead by New York’s premier Senator for huffing and puffing, Charles Schumer, used this instance to beat up on everyone in sight about the fact that in their opinion, Amtrak is grossly underfunded, neglected, and put upon to the point the Republic will not stand if something isn’t done about Amtrak.More rational minds, however, know this was really an opportunistic demonstration of how Amtrak doesn’t need to be in the track hosting business for lots of commuter rail agencies that mostly get a free ride on Amtrak’s infrastructure budget.
Matt Wald of The New York Times and other reporters did some good reporting on the situation, and, by sorting through all of the news reports, it appears the power outage was more a product of “one of those things” freak accident rather than a product of neglected infrastructure. We will know more when routine investigations are complete, but it’s tough to jump to the conclusion this outage happened just because of the usual and incorrect suspect of not enough free federal money is being poured into the black hole commonly referred to as the NEC.
- Alfred Runte, Ph.D., the author of the new book Allies of the Earth: Railroad and the Soul of Preservation, previously reviewed in this space two weeks ago, wrote a fascinating op-ed piece for the Seattle Times this week. Dr. Runte, a respected historian who specializes in making people think about options and the real reasons things occur versus accepted myth, makes an interesting case for the redevelopment of passenger rail in the United States.TWA is always pleased to present the thoughts of other distinguished Americans such as Dr. Runte for consideration in the overall discussion of passenger rail. The material is reproduced here with the permission of Dr. Runte and the Seattle Times newspaper.
Forget gas; we need a plan to keep passenger trains rolling
By Alfred Runte
Here we go again — blaming everything on the oil companies for the spiraling cost of gasoline. How about we try something positive for a change, say, restoring our passenger trains?
For decades, Europe has paid double what the U.S. pays for gas, and just look at the trains they have. Every day, thousands of passenger trains — conventional and high-speed — whisk tourists and business people across the continent.
Of course, Europe has a plan for trains. Addiction prevents that here. So addicted have Americans become to the automobile we have forgotten all that railroads were — and could be again.
Indeed, our plan would begin with some national soul-searching about why we lost our passenger trains in the first place. On May 1, 1971, the railroads deeded to Amtrak just 180 trains. As late as 1960, the railroads had operated at least 5,000.
Simply, a new generation of railroad executives wished to downsize, dropping passengers for more profitable freight. Freight trains, or so the railroads also argued, did not need faster, double track.
The inescapable irony is that America abandoned the passenger train just when the environment needed it most. Need any American be convinced of that, watching the march of asphalt and urban sprawl?
Again, our plan to restore railroads would include why to restore them — the preservation of America the Beautiful. Like Europe, when American passenger trains were in their glory, we knew to appreciate the entire landscape. Westbound from Chicago to Seattle, the Northern Pacific Railway invited passengers to “Count the Mountains!” From the Hudson River to the Great Lakes, railroads invited the same.
Today, most of Europe may not be wilderness, but its countryside still has that magic. Even high-speed railroads will slow and curve gracefully to protect a lakeside or patch of forest. A railroad technology — often powered by hydroelectricity — has been mastered for every landscape.
Europe’s secret is that its railroads never downsized; double track still abounds. Restoring that flexibility, our plan would pursue the same. Now that American freight trains are long and heavy, Amtrak is always in the way of one of them. Worse for passengers, there is so much freight crossing the continent — containers from Asia and coal from Wyoming — that the railroads argue they have no room left.
Then it is time to make the room. Believing in conservation — wanting beauty — we would never give up on trains.
A single railroad track, just 6 feet across, has the capacity of a superhighway 10 times wider. As for energy savings, even the most conservative studies give trains an advantage of 4 to 1 over cars and airplanes.
In short, we would not allow our plan to die protesting the “economics.” Sure, railroads cost money to build and operate, but has anyone looked at the airlines lately — $36 billion in losses just since 9/11.
Moreover, how about the cost of highways? In 2005, Congress authorized $286 billion for them, even as critics pounced on Amtrak for losing $1 billion.
Our plan would end such double standards. If operating railroads means to “lose” money, then operating highways means the same. Asphalt breeds red ink, too. Conversely, if Americans consider highway construction an investment, so is the cost of saving trains.
Granted, not even railroads are a panacea. The point is that having them would give us a real alternative in place of the false promises we have now. Ethanol? Oil shale? Tar sands? Gasifying coal? Really, do we want all our agriculture to be for energy, even as we turn the beauty of the West inside out?
It all gets back to admitting that some technologies are good for the environment, and others not as good. Here, then, is the rest of our plan:
Like Europe, we demand that our railroads act like public utilities — which they are. We break up their current monopolies and restore true competition. We insist that competition include serving passengers as the privilege for hauling freight.
As taxpayers, we give to railroads what we give to highways and airports, provided that railroads serve the public. That means intercity passenger trains every hour, not once or twice a day.
Like Europe, we accept that our frontier is at an end. We insist that everyone, including corporations, contribute to the greatest good of civilization.
In the 1970s, two energy crises taught us little compared to what Europe learned. We went right back to our selfish plan — gas-guzzling SUVs. This time, we need a railroad plan. If truly we believe in the need for beauty and balance, the time for action — and good trains — is now.
Alfred Runte of Seattle writes on the environment and transportation. His new book is “Allies of the Earth: Railroads and the Soul of Preservation” (Truman State University Press).Copyright © 2006 The Seattle Times Company