AMTRAK throws 15 year old from the train

[fairviewroad]

As for being banned from the train until age 15;

Amtrak does not "ban" 15 year olds from the train. There is a specific procedure to follow, which the parents ignored either purposefully or by failing to properly

research Amtrak's policies. In this case, the parents could have driven the girls to the next staffed station and had her board there as an unaccompanied minor.

Or, they could have driven her all the way to Portland. Or, they could have hired a taxi. Or, they could have prevented her from going. Lots of options, yet they

chose the one that violated a clearly stated policy.

 

[IowaGirl]

Just as a matter of interest, at what age can youngsters drive a car, or own a gun, in America?

In my state of Iowa, a youth can obtain a learners permit at age 14. After passing the appropriate lessons and driving time, they can obtain a school permit to drive on their own at age 14.5 to school and back to home ONLY. At age 16 they can drive anywhere, with a restriction of only between the hours of 5:30 am and 12:30 am, unless they have a supervising adult with them. At age 17 they have a full license.

Federal gun laws allow the purchase of long guns and ammo to anyone (meeting a background check) over the age of 18. Age 21 for hand guns... This does not mean you have to be this old to use a firearm. My son had his first shotgun at the age of 12 and his first rifle at the age of 15. Technically, I purchased them, but they are his. He is responsible for them, under my supervision. They are kept in a locked gun safe, with the ammo kept in a different gun safe. He is schooled in gun safety and shoots competitively.

 

[DocJohnB]

I even suggested calling the police but what do you think their reaction would have been? Why are you bothering us?

I don't know what the mother does, but I have been in meetings where people have had their phones ring and/or vibrate. It is always an emergency and then they get distracted from what the meeting was about. I was in a meeting once that the client told another consultant straight out after his phone vibrated that if something is more important than this project, he was welcome to leave and they would find somebody else to work on the project. Also, many places of work have policies against cell phone use during work and you can't even have one with you.

Twelve may be a little young but by 14, a person should be able to travel alone. Also, I beleive some states have laws where kids can drive as ealy as 14.

For the sake of argument, I'll give you that mom was unavailable. There were still 3-5 parents who could have been contacted and these young ladies wait would have been lessened.

Too many folks here are giving this girls parents a free ride . . . . . . they don't deserve it for a number of reasons.

I'm sorry Benjibear, 14 is too damn young to be traveling alone as a rule. Too many hustlers, perverts, molesters in today's world. And 14, 15 year olds are not as, as a rule equipped to deal with them. But then of course, if one were to fall into the hands of such a person while riding on Amtrak, unaccompanied, it would be Amtrak's fault, wouldn't it?

 

[PRR 60]

Although many would also agree that letting them ride to Portland may also have been a better choice than putting them off the train.??

Bill,

I would never agree that letting them ride to Portland would have been the correct thing to do. In addition to the following posted by EB_OBS

Imagine this scenario. Amtrak takes said minor to Portland and parents, unaware their child took the train, raise holy hell and accuse Amtrak of violating their own policy by allowing the 15 year old onto the train and transporting her out of the state.

there is also the consideration that if the parents actually knew what they were doing and deliberately allowed her to travel figuring that no one would notice, now Amtrak has rewarded the parents bad behavior.

So no, I for one believe 100% that the correct course of action was putting them off at the very next station. The area for debate is just how the conductor did that.

For the record, these same three girls could have flown anywhere on American, Delta, Southwest, United or US Airways without restriction. Why would any parent assume these same girls would not be permitted to ride a train from Olympia to Portland? Is it remotely possible that Amtrak is the outlier in restricting travel by minors?

Amtrak should have a protocol to deal with what happens if an underage person (by Amtrak's definition) boards a train and is not detected until travel has commenced. Putting the child off at the next station unsupervised is not the answer.

 

[Michael061282]

supposing the worst happen, thank God it didn't but just supposed it had of, can you see the Conductor and the station agent try to explain themselves on the witness stand? "Well your honor, the parents didn't read the fine print rules, so I kicked the minors off the train at a station in the middle of the run, where they didn't know anyone and it would take their parents at least an hour to get to their aid, Clearly it's the parents fault" and "I'm going home to watch the big lumberjack contest on ESPN35. It's not my responsibility in the least! I can't watch or help someone in need.. I'm off the clock!"

Anyway you look at it, by the book or not, this is REALLY bad PR for Amtrak, no two ways about it.

 

[Michael061282]

if 14 is "too damn young to ride the train alone. Too many hustlers, perverts and molesters around" then its sure as hell too damn young to be dropped unattended at a station. as you said.

Is leaving them unattended in an unfamiliar station with no quick way to get out safer then riding the train where at least other passengers, if not the train crew, could stop any funny business that may happen??

I even suggested calling the police but what do you think their reaction would have been? Why are you bothering us?

I don't know what the mother does, but I have been in meetings where people have had their phones ring and/or vibrate. It is always an emergency and then they get distracted from what the meeting was about. I was in a meeting once that the client told another consultant straight out after his phone vibrated that if something is more important than this project, he was welcome to leave and they would find somebody else to work on the project. Also, many places of work have policies against cell phone use during work and you can't even have one with you.

Twelve may be a little young but by 14, a person should be able to travel alone. Also, I beleive some states have laws where kids can drive as ealy as 14.

For the sake of argument, I'll give you that mom was unavailable. There were still 3-5 parents who could have been contacted and these young ladies wait would have been lessened.

Too many folks here are giving this girls parents a free ride . . . . . . they don't deserve it for a number of reasons.

I'm sorry Benjibear, 14 is too damn young to be traveling alone as a rule. Too many hustlers, perverts, molesters in today's world. And 14, 15 year olds are not as, as a rule equipped to deal with them. But then of course, if one were to fall into the hands of such a person while riding on Amtrak, unaccompanied, it would be Amtrak's fault, wouldn't it?

 

[sechs]

To be frank, if I am a parent booking ticket for a 15-16 year old teenager for a short intercity train ride, it wouldn't even hit me to check the Unaccompanied Minors policy. I mean, come on, is traveling on Amtrak such a big deal that teenagers can't do it on their own? I wouldn't have thought they actually forbid anyone under 16 from traveling alone. I have traveled by trains alone (not on Amtrak though) from when I was as young as 12.

"I'm sending my minor unaccompanied on the train; I won't check for a policy on this." Doesn't seem smart.
I was under the impression that the policy was more about liability than protecting teenage hooligans.

 

[GG-1]

Amtrak should have a protocol to deal with what happens if an underage person (by Amtrak's definition) boards a train and is not detected until travel has commenced. Putting the child off at the next station unsupervised is not the answer.

Aloha

This is the best comment I have seen in this thread.

 

[benjibear]

By time a person is 14 and in some cases even younger, they are quite capable of taking care of themselves and are quite responsible. There are others that well above this age that are not responsible and have difficulty coping in life. For example my 42 year old sister and her 44 year old husband that call my parents whenever something goes wrong to get told what to do. "Our car has a flat tire and don't know what to do." "I have the diarrhea." On and on and on. Just for the record they are college educated abd my sister is quite smart.

Yes there are hustlers, perverts, and molesters but at some point you need to cut the cord and start giving kids freedoms. You just have to hope and pray that you have taught them how to handle themselves and make informed correct decisions. "How can are children become trustrworthy, if we don't trust them?"

 

[SubwayNut]

For the record, these same three girls could have flown anywhere on American, Delta, Southwest, United or US Airways without restriction. Why would any parent assume these same girls would not be permitted to ride a train from Olympia to Portland? Is it remotely possible that Amtrak is the outlier in restricting travel by minors?

Thank you, Amtrak is the ridiculous outlier here especially with there quite new policy. I for instance took my first cross-country trip on Amtrak at age 16 (and did Europe on a Eurail pass alone, staying in hostels at 17) all with my parents permission of course but I didn't carry any proof of permission. I did plenty of travel at 13, 14, and 15 more regionally (some on Amtrak without any of the paperwork, I can't remember if I was carrying my passport, my one id at the time or not, it definately came on my solo flights). At that time I was also commuting (free of charge with my Student MetroCard) on the NYC subway for 45 minutes alone to and from school.

I don't understand why crossing state lines makes it such a big deal in everyones opinion: there are plenty of local transit agencies that allow youngsters aboard that cross state lines. Metro-North for instance goes to Connecticut, Metra to Wisconsin. At 15 for instance me and friend took a day trip to Philly (to railfan) via NJ Transit to Trenton and then SEPTA Regional rail. It never occurred to either of us that there would be any policy of any transportation provider preventing us from traveling on a trip like that. I also rode every inch of Metro-North by the time I was 15.

In terms of flying I remember flying when I was 12 on JetBlue just post 9/11, after aging out of their UM program, I have noticed they have raised it to 14, (and nor did I or my parents feel the need to pay the $50-$100 to be escorted). I remember my Mother taking me to the airport, assuming that the agent wouldn't let her through security (but they offered and issued her a gate pass anyway so she did wait with me) but when I got to Syracuse I do remember walking until the post security area (where my grandparents met me) alone. I do remember my first UM flight was LGA-SYR on USAir(ways) (with all of the paperwork) when I was six and flew alone many more times on that route to see my grandparents. I still remember when the UM fees started towards the end of those days (I think around 2000 on US Airways, I guess you could say they were some of the first airline fees implemented) and my grandfather being furious that it was going to cost him an extra $50-$100 to have me and my brother escorted on and off the plane just one-way back to New York City (a 45 minute flight).

 

[AlanB]

Although many would also agree that letting them ride to Portland may also have been a better choice than putting them off the train.??

Bill,

I would never agree that letting them ride to Portland would have been the correct thing to do. In addition to the following posted by EB_OBS

Imagine this scenario. Amtrak takes said minor to Portland and parents, unaware their child took the train, raise holy hell and accuse Amtrak of violating their own policy by allowing the 15 year old onto the train and transporting her out of the state.

there is also the consideration that if the parents actually knew what they were doing and deliberately allowed her to travel figuring that no one would notice, now Amtrak has rewarded the parents bad behavior.

So no, I for one believe 100% that the correct course of action was putting them off at the very next station. The area for debate is just how the conductor did that.

For the record, these same three girls could have flown anywhere on American, Delta, Southwest, United or US Airways without restriction. Why would any parent assume these same girls would not be permitted to ride a train from Olympia to Portland? Is it remotely possible that Amtrak is the outlier in restricting travel by minors?

Well I wasn't commenting on whether or not Amtrak's policy made sense. I was simply saying that rewarding the parents by carrying the kids to Portland in violation of the policy did not make sense.

Amtrak should have a protocol to deal with what happens if an underage person (by Amtrak's definition) boards a train and is not detected until travel has commenced. Putting the child off at the next station unsupervised is not the answer.

I wouldn't argue this at all, and I suspect that Amtrak does have a policy for this. One that I suspect the conductor didn't follow.

 

[Swadian Hardcore]

I find that I must stand with the conductor on this. I woulds even go further to guard him in the lawsuit. The conductor did what he had to do. Anybody could have missed the 15 year old, and if someone discovered her on his train, the conductor would have been fired. As someone said, our conductor was stuck between a roch\k and a hard place. Except that one side had the backing of company policy, the other did not. So he asked the girl to leve the train. The news is trying to get more viewers through legal exaggeration or trying to passively slander Amtrak.

 

[EB_OBS]

I read quite a few comparisons to minors traveling alone on airlines in the thread. It really isn't a comparable environment in my opinion.

On and airliner you have a much smaller space with passengers all seated, in their assigned seats, for most of the flight. You have only a couple of restrooms on the plane and nowhere else to wander to. You can view virtually the entire passenger cabin, and thus every passenger, from anywhere in the aisle. A typical flight is what, three to five hours?

A train consist is a vastly different environment. You have multiple cars with, in some cases, many restrooms. There are plenty of places to wander off, especially on a long distance train. On Superliners you have both upper and lower levels and insecure lower-level baggage areas. You have coach attendants working two cars, manning doors and cleaning restrooms, while upwards of 150 passengers are traveling in their two cars. Unaccompanied minors are allowed to travel from 6am to 9pm. That's 15 hours. You cannot keep an eye on a minor the same as a flight attendant could on an airplane. It's just not the same thing.

I don't know what the airline's policy is. I've never put a child on an airplane or worked for an airline. At what age do you no longer have to inform the carrier that a person is a minor of whatever age?

As to comparing the realities of today to times gone by, i.e. twenty to forty years ago. Well, unfortunately the world is a much scarier place today. Not only the dangers of psychos and perverts but just the sheer speed at which things can happen now. Everything is faster.

I used to ride my bike to the store two miles across town when I was 10 years old. I crossed Route 66 to do so. I certainly would not allow my 10 year old daughter to do the same today. My son either for that matter. It's just not worth the risk to me. They'll grow up fast enough and I'll have to cut the cord, so to speak, eventually, but not today.

 

[tp49]

Let's back up and look at the facts. No laws were broken here. It was Amtraks own policy that dictates that 15 year olds cannot travel unescorted. All the conductor had to do was to conduct a citizens arrest of the 15 year old so that she was held in violation of Amtrak's regulations and in protective custody.

Congratulations, you've now subjected Amtrak to a lawsuit for false arrest...

 

[Devil's Advocate]

Amtrak should have a protocol to deal with what happens if an underage person (by Amtrak's definition) boards a train and is not detected until travel has commenced. Putting the child off at the next station unsupervised is not the answer.

This is the best comment I have seen in this thread.

Agreed.

Either the kids are old enough to take care of themselves, and can thus ride the train without issue, or they're not old enough to take care of themselves and thus cannot be left alone at a station they're not ticketed for. There is no combination of variables I can come up with where putting them off the train is the preferred outcome with the information we currently have available to us. Even the sue-happy legal fear angle doesn't explain how putting them off the train makes anything better for Amtrak.

Well, unfortunately the world is a much scarier place today.

How do you figure?

Not only the dangers of psychos and perverts but just the sheer speed at which things can happen now. Everything is faster.

I don't know about everything, but blind hysteria sure seems to be moving at a much faster rate than before.

 

[caravanman]

Hi,

I always enjoy a good discussion, and this one seems to have a lot of interesting views in it...

Maybe the child was travelling without the parents knowledge, maybe the full info is not available to us to judge the rights and wrongs...

It seems to me that the Conductor acted to the letter of the (Amtrak) rules, but not with the humanity or spirit of care towards a child that some might expect from a person in authority.

My feeling is that the Amtrak age restriction could be lowered to 14, in the UK a youngster can travel alone by train at age 12.

It could be a good thing to happen, if it publicises Amtrak rules, given that no lasting damage was done?

Ed

 

[Devil's Advocate]

My feeling is that the Amtrak age restriction could be lowered to 14, in the UK a youngster can travel alone by train at age 12. It could be a good thing to happen, if it publicises Amtrak rules, given that no lasting damage was done?

Are we sure Amtrak actually wants unaccompanied minors to ride their trains? At this point Amtrak's rules already exclude a majority of their published city pairs from UM service because you can't use unstaffed stations or leave too early or arrive too late or ride a bus or connect between two or more trains. I've certainly never seen any sort of advertisement suggesting any parent take Amtrak up on their extremely limited UM service. And then you have yahoos like this conductor who are apparently free to kick your kids off whenever (and wherever) something doesn't add up. Does it sound to you like Amtrak is trying to make their UM setup a practical option for today's parents? Or does it sound like maybe they'd just as soon scrap the program altogether and call it a day?

 

[jis]

For the record, these same three girls could have flown anywhere on American, Delta, Southwest, United or US Airways without restriction. Why would any parent assume these same girls would not be permitted to ride a train from Olympia to Portland? Is it remotely possible that Amtrak is the outlier in restricting travel by minors?

Amtrak should have a protocol to deal with what happens if an underage person (by Amtrak's definition) boards a train and is not detected until travel has commenced. Putting the child off at the next station unsupervised is not the answer.

I agree with your position. All this certainly makes Amtrak harder to use by one of its most natural groups. I think the policy is worth a rethink.

 

[RampWidget]

For the record, these same three girls could have flown anywhere on American, Delta, Southwest, United or US Airways without restriction. Why would any parent assume these same girls would not be permitted to ride a train from Olympia to Portland? Is it remotely possible that Amtrak is the outlier in restricting travel by minors?

Amtrak should have a protocol to deal with what happens if an underage person (by Amtrak's definition) boards a train and is not detected until travel has commenced. Putting the child off at the next station unsupervised is not the answer.

I agree with your position. All this certainly makes Amtrak harder to use by one of its most natural groups. I think the policy is worth a rethink.

Same here. Unaccompanied Minor policy at various airlines differs, but IIRC all of them are less restrictive than Amtrak's. I think American Airlines' is among the least restrictive, allowing 12-17 year olds to travel without restrictions, although the airline allows them to travel as UM if desired. I find it interesting that some people have criticized Southwest for NOT allowing children 12-17 to be booked as UM, even as an option. As a parent, I want my (now-adult) children to think and act independently (which they mostly have) hboy: but I never stop thinking about their safety.

Personally, if I knew where my daughter was going and who she was with, then fine. But it's also important to remember that the Conductor in this case is likely not given much, if any, latitude in applying Amtrak policies and rules. Whether or not that's desirable is a subject for another discussion. Putting myself in that position, I can understand why a Conductor would be reluctant to do anything except follow Amtrak's UM policy to the letter, knowing that if s/he does not, and something goes wrong, then any blame is going to fall squarely upon them.

 

[me_little_me]

Looks like lots of blame all around:

Amtrak if they have no policy to handle UM who improperly get on the train. If not, they need one, both if the minor is present or if they are disruptive. In neither case should they ever be just removed from the train. They should be turned over to local police or local agent if there is no alternative to taking them to their destination.

Parents who either failed to read Amtrak's UM policy or deliberately ignored it. Seems like that could be considered negligence or child endangerment.

Conductor who picked the absolute worst thing to do (either on his own or possibly after calling management for advice. He could have called parents, allowed her to continue on the train or turned her over to local police but simply leaving her at a station without turning her over to someone who would accept responsibility can only be described as ignorant and probably negligent. He needs to be retrained on his responsibilities and use of common sense. He could not have done anything worse both for Amtrak's embarrassment as well as for the child's safety. Can you imagine what would have happened if something had happened to her before she called her parents? He might have faced criminal charges.

Lots of blame to go around.

 

[VentureForth]

Don't forget:

Kids failure to check in with station agent.

 

[me_little_me]

Don't forget:

Kids failure to check in with station agent.

That's a Parent/Guardian responsibility. If it were your 15 year old or a 15 year old visiting you, wouldn't it be your responsibility to see that the child checks in and boards? Even the TSA allows an adult escort to enter the security zone after receiving a pass from an airline ticket agent in order to assure that UMs are turned over to an agent. I've done that a number of times when our nieces visited.

 

[Trogdor]

Don't forget:

Kids failure to check in with station agent.

That's a Parent/Guardian responsibility. If it were your 15 year old or a 15 year old visiting you, wouldn't it be your responsibility to see that the child checks in and boards? Even the TSA allows an adult escort to enter the security zone after receiving a pass from an airline ticket agent in order to assure that UMs are turned over to an agent. I've done that a number of times when our nieces visited.

VF meant when they got off the train. They got on at an unstaffed station. They got off at a staffed station, but there's no indication they made any attempt to talk to the agent at the station.

 

[amtrakwolverine]

I think the conductor should be charged with child endangerment since he put her off in a strange location without adult supervision. the teens she was with are not adults.Also why didn't the teens call there parents when the UM parents were at a meeting. You mean tell me that there are teenage girls out there without cell phones?

 

[EMDF9A]

Don't forget:

Kids failure to check in with station agent.

That's a Parent/Guardian responsibility. If it were your 15 year old or a 15 year old visiting you, wouldn't it be your responsibility to see that the child checks in and boards? Even the TSA allows an adult escort to enter the security zone after receiving a pass from an airline ticket agent in order to assure that UMs are turned over to an agent. I've done that a number of times when our nieces visited.

VF meant when they got off the train. They got on at an unstaffed station. They got off at a staffed station, but there's no indication they made any attempt to talk to the agent at the station.

What people who viewed the story on the KING5 link posted at the start of the thread didnt see was the Consumer Reporter (Jesse) talking with the anchors after the piece aired. During that time it was stated that the girls did approach the agent, who was busy handling baggage & told them that he was going off duty in less than 30 minutes & didnt have the time to deal with them.