Coach passengers allowed in Sleeper?

Amtrak Unlimited Discussion Forum

Help Support Amtrak Unlimited Discussion Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
This may be off the main idea of this thread but if the sleepers are on the rear,  it is not uncommon for the attendants to allow coach passengers access to the rail fan window if you're quiet.
 
This may be off the main idea of this thread but if the sleepers are on the rear,  it is not uncommon for the attendants to allow coach passengers access to the rail fan window if you're quiet.
I can't answer for the other trains, but on the AutoTrain, the coach cars were always in the rear, northbound, and in the front Southbound.
 
I can't answer for the other trains, but on the AutoTrain, the coach cars were always in the rear, northbound, and in the front Southbound.
Whether the coaches or sleepers are on the rear or front is irrelevant on the Auto Pain because in either case, the auto carriers bring up the rear.

Their presence would seem to render the rail fan window useless.
 
Maybe I was in a combative mood yesterday, and I do now understand that the rule of no coach passengers in sleepers is a genuine Amtrak rule.

The strict "no way can you get into your husbands room with a just coach ticket" tone surprised me, as I could not see why a Conductor could not allow it in this case.

Consider the "rules are rules" folks to have won this argument and educated me, a "why is this rule so important" person, to have lost his argument.  :D

Hmm, now what do folk think of me as a coach passenger sleeping on the floor of the lounge car overnight?   :p

Ed.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Maybe I was in a combative mood yesterday, and I do now understand that the rule of no coach passengers in sleepers is a genuine Amtrak rule.

The strict "no way can you get into your husbands room with a just coach ticket" tone surprised me, as I could not see why a Conductor could not allow it in this case.

Consider the "rules are rules" folks to have won this argument and educated me, a "why is this rule so important" person, to have lost his argument.  :D

Hmm, now what do folk think of me as a coach passenger sleeping on the floor of the lounge car overnight?   :p

Ed.


Honestly, I get from where you are coming.  And I can understand your frustration.   It would seem so very simple a thing.  But nothing is ever that simple "where 2 or 3 are gathered together." 

I think the biggest obstacles to your suggestion would be: 1) Having to allow the practice for "all" if you allow it for one... I think the people who paid in full for a sleeper ticket would complain loudly that coach people are able to use that service "at a discount," as well as other coach people complaining that they should be allowed to do the same if the one person can;   2) Profit - Amtrak would lose money if it were to allow the practice. Not only would they not collect the extra revenue from an "open sleeper" ticket, but it would then leave an extra seat open in coach that they might have been able to fill, otherwise... that and whatever additional costs there might be with having extra people in the sleeper section that didn't pay the sleeper level fares; 3) Security/Safety concerns - passengers not being in the place they're expected (supposed) to be... God forbid there's an accident and half the train derails. The manifest would show that X number of "souls on board" should have been in coach vs. the sleeper section... might complicate things when attempting to account for all the passengers.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
It's also an extra burden for the SCAs.  They work hard enough.
Gosh, you must have had very different SCA's than I have, only one or two ever "worked hard" in my opinion...

I think the people who paid in full for a sleeper ticket would complain loudly that coach people are able to use that service "at a discount,"
How is it a discount? Two booked persons in a roomette would pay the same total fares as one booked person and a coach seat passenger, and the coach seat passenger would not get any meals? 

I am only suggesting that if you met someone you knew in the lounge, and could offer them a berth, with the Conductors permission, it should not be such a major no-no.

To avoid repeating the same stuff, I propose to leave it there, unless prodded into action again. :D
 
Gosh, you must have had very different SCA's than I have, only one or two ever "worked hard" in my opinion...
No doubt your statistical sample size is larger than mine, so I am happy to defer to your judgment on this issue.
 
Gosh, you must have had very different SCA's than I have, only one or two ever "worked hard" in my opinion...

How is it a discount? Two booked persons in a roomette would pay the same total fares as one booked person and a coach seat passenger, and the coach seat passenger would not get any meals? 

I am only suggesting that if you met someone you knew in the lounge, and could offer them a berth, with the Conductors permission, it should not be such a major no-no.

To avoid repeating the same stuff, I propose to leave it there, unless prodded into action again. :D
sailorsign.jpg

No further comment....
 
How is it a discount? Two booked persons in a roomette would pay the same total fares as one booked person and a coach seat passenger, and the coach seat passenger would not get any meals?
I'm not so sure that the total fare for two roomette persons is the same as one roomette person + 1 coach person in a roomette. If that is true, then I think something is definitely wrong with Amtrak's cost accounting model.  Intuitively, a sleeper person costs Amtrak more than a coach person. Those costs include SCA pay, additional costs for linens, shower usage, additional wear & tear on the accommodation itself (especially the toilets in a viewliner II), any "general freebies" offered sleeper passengers and, of course, the meals. Honestly, I don't see how one could enforce denying those "coach" pax. a sleeper meal, as there are a number of ways around it. By hook or by crook, they'll get it, or the Service staff will look really bad attempting to enforce the restriction.  I wouldn't think it worth the bad PR to try to enforce it. It's human nature.

I currently do a "customer service/tech support" job where I have to listen to people complaining about the service & equipment my firm offers and trying to help them solve their problems. When the customer needs a service techician to come out to fix a problem, in most cases, we have to impose a "house call" fee... just as with a service tech that comes to fix the refrigerator, or HAVC, etc.  That said, if the customer complains loudly enough, or threatens to cancel their service, or badmouth us on the Internet, etc. etc. we can waive that service call fee. Better to have a "content/agreeable" customer if not a happy one.  However, once we do that for a customer, and even though we warn them it will be imposed, "next time,"  the damage has been done... the customer knows all they have to do to get the trip fee waived is to pitch a royal fit.  And they do.  I can see the same thing happening here if the service staff attempts to deny a meal to that coach pax.  Even worse, as the pax and staff are "face to face..."   and not behind a telephone/computer. 

You may be right.... the fares may end up being the same.  But, if that's the case, then it's no wonder Amtrak is loosing a ton of $$$ in the process.
 
Bottom line: There's a reason "open sleeper tickets" exist.

Honestly, they should be bookable online.  I know it's a little tricky to implement, but you should be able to book an open sleeper by entering the res # of the ordinary sleeper ticket with which it is associated, and then having the owner of that ticket confirm it online.

Wait, no, this is better:  Have an "add a passenger to my sleeper" button for the person with the sleeper ticket.  The person with the sleeper ticket then enters the res # of the person with the coach ticket, and it converts the coach ticket to an open sleeper for the overlapping segment.

I know Amtrak's IT is nowhere near good enough to handle this, but it would make sense.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Just make sure that the system is set up so that the added passenger can ride between points which may not be the same as the originally ticketed sleeper passenger, or perhaps one-way when the sleeper reservation was round-trip. That's the issue I ran into when I tried to add a friend, one way, to my round-trip sleeper reservation in May 2017...the agent insisted that I had to add him to the original round-trip reservation. It was only after I pitched a fit and asked for a supervisor that she relented and agreed to ticket him as an open sleeper; she said (and this is pretty much an exact quote), "Yes, we can do it that way but we don't like to because it's a lot of work."
 
Over my dead body should a coach rider be allowed to invade the confines of a sleeper car. It's almost unconstitutional.


Hmm, now what do folk think of me as a coach passenger sleeping on the floor of the lounge car overnight?   :p

Ed.
I think all of this is secondary to the real problem on board the trains. If you want coach passengers shacking up with the sleeping car passengers, go for it. If Caravan wants to pass out on the lounge car overnight, we'll step right over him.

However, when you all get your acts together and stop nitpicking, you'd  and everyone else better not wear PJs  in the dining car, damn it!!!!

Carry on.
 
I'm not so sure that the total fare for two roomette persons is the same as one roomette person + 1 coach person in a roomette. If that is true, then I think something is definitely wrong with Amtrak's cost accounting model.
You are incorrect. Sleeper pricing is the accommodation charge for the room + the “rail fare” of each person occupying it. Accounting-wise, the accommodation charge includes the cost of meals and amenities and such, while the rail fare is just supposed to represent the cost of the travel itself.

In fact, since the rail fare is automatically the lowest possible Value coach seat fare, the “total fare for two Roomette persons” will in some cases be cheaper than “one Roomette person + 1 coach person in a Roomette”. This would be the case if the coach person in a Roomette didn’t get the lowest bucket fare on their coach seat.

All of this is why it is much more economical (per person) for two people to travel in a Roomette than one person, and why many members advocate for some type of cheaper single-person accommodation.
 
Long before I knew about Open Sleeper tickets (February, 2004), my sister and nephew (traveling on coach tickets) joined my wife and me in our Bedroom.  We were traveling Seattle to Los Angeles, and they were going to Portland.  The SCA even opened up the adjoining room for us so we had a suite.  We had lunch in the Dining Car, and they paid for theirs while my wife and I charged ours to our room.

We were prepared to sit with them in the Lounge Car, but it was much more comfortable to have a private space. 
 
You are incorrect. Sleeper pricing is the accommodation charge for the room + the “rail fare” of each person occupying it. Accounting-wise, the accommodation charge includes the cost of meals and amenities and such, while the rail fare is just supposed to represent the cost of the travel itself.
So, the "accommodation charge" is based on a '"double occupancy" standard (similar to hotels)?  In that case, then it wouldn't cost Amtrak any more for the additional occupancy in sleeper. I would wonder, though, why then is it necessary to have an "open sleeper" ticket if the coach passenger already paid the coach fare for their seat, and the accomdation charge is based on double occupancy of each unit?
 
This is a tough call for me, but I fall on the side of not letting coach passengers into the sleeper section.  What tips the scale for me is that it is easy for a sleeper passenger to visit a coach passenger in the lounge.  So there just isn't a need for the coach passenger to enter into the sleeper section.
Well...

If they are looking for some privacy, the lounge isn't the place to get it nor would most of us be in favor of that.  :rolleyes:
 
So, the "accommodation charge" is based on a '"double occupancy" standard (similar to hotels)?  In that case, then it wouldn't cost Amtrak any more for the additional occupancy in sleeper. I would wonder, though, why then is it necessary to have an "open sleeper" ticket if the coach passenger already paid the coach fare for their seat, and the accomdation charge is based on double occupancy of each unit?
Well, if the passenger is using the coach ticket on a full train Amtrak has lost the opportunity to sell that seat to another (high bucket) coach passenger. In which case, the opportunity cost of using an open sleeper ticket more than offsets the cost of providing the comped meals to the second passenger.
 
So, the "accommodation charge" is based on a '"double occupancy" standard (similar to hotels)? 
Essentially, yes.

In that case, then it wouldn't cost Amtrak any more for the additional occupancy in sleeper. I would wonder, though, why then is it necessary to have an "open sleeper" ticket if the coach passenger already paid the coach fare for their seat, and the accomdation charge is based on double occupancy of each unit?
Because the crew shouldn’t have to figure out which ticketed coach passenger is with which sleeper passenger, and what the capacity situation is in each room (you don’t want to have a coach passenger who would have otherwise had to pay for an additional room, receive the perks of sleeper travel at no extra cost). It just gets complicated, and I don’t think it’s worth it considering it really isn’t difficult at all for a person to just get an open sleeper ticket instead of a coach ticket.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Back
Top