Coach passengers allowed in Sleeper?

[Cho Cho Charlie]

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.

I would be quite upset if a coach ticketed passenger got to enjoy the extra comfort of sleeper class, while I had to pay for it; a lot more for it.

 

[caravanman]

I would be quite upset if a coach ticketed passenger got to enjoy the extra comfort of sleeper class, while I had to pay for it; a lot more for it.

Well I guess that is your privilege to be upset, although it does not cost you a penny piece more to see someone have that bed for the night than a coach seat.

You would be happier in yourself for the berth to go unused. 

Ed

 

[ehbowen]

Well I guess that is your privilege to be upset, although it does not cost you a penny piece more to see someone have that bed for the night than a coach seat.

You would be happier in yourself for the berth to go unused. 

Ed

Well, we could go the whole European route and sell sleepers by the berth, forcing strangers to share rooms....

(Which has never flown on this side of the Pond, going back all the way to the days when George M. Pullman was getting his own two hands dirty.)

 

[the_traveler]

Over my dead body should a coach rider be allowed to invade the confines of a sleeper car. It's almost unconstitutional.

When 807/808 operates on the Builder between CHI and MSP, it is placed BEHIND the 30 sleeper (the PDX sleeper). Thus those COACH passengers have no choice but to go through the 30 car if they want to go to the SSL, cafe or Dining Car.

 

[zephyr17]

I would be quite upset if a coach ticketed passenger got to enjoy the extra comfort of sleeper class, while I had to pay for it; a lot more for it.

Well, really the booked sleeper passenger has paid for the whole room, so it IS paid for.  Amtrak has still gotten the same revenue.  In terms of who pays for what, someone with a coach ticket sharing the room with a sleeper passenger is indistinguishable from an open sleeper ticket (actually, Amtrak may get MORE revenue, since the open sleeper ticket will have been a the lowest value bucket, where the coach ticket may have been at a higher bucket).  So it is in no way unfair to other passengers in terms of what they were charged.

From a security viewpoint, it is problematic, and personally I would not feel comfortable sharing my room overnight with someone I have just met.  Passing the time of day with a new friend in the sleeper for awhile is different and in some ways it is not different than inviting someone to your hotel room.  However, unlike a hotel, the other doors are not lockable except from the inside and there is luggage on an open rack, I think from a security standpoint a firm rule against passengers without a sleeper ticket is justified.

By the way, until the streamline era starting in the 1930s, private rooms in Pullmans were very much the exception and not the rule.  Standard Pullmans were 14-1, IIRC, 14 sections, one compartment or drawing room.  The berths WERE sold individually, so complete strangers could be and were in the upper and lower berths (still are on the Canadian).  So in George's day, sharing common space in sleepers was the way things were "on this side of Pond".

 

[Bob Dylan]

Same for the 321/322 STL-CHI Coach when the421/ 422 Sleeper is on the rear into STL.

 

[ehbowen]

Well, really the booked sleeper passenger has paid for the whole room, so it IS paid for.  Amtrak has still gotten the same revenue.  In terms of who pays for what, someone with a coach ticket sharing the room with a sleeper passenger is indistinguishable from an open sleeper ticket (actually, Amtrak may get MORE revenue, since the open sleeper ticket will have been a the lowest value bucket, where the coach ticket may have been at a higher bucket).  So it is in no way unfair to other passengers in terms of what they were charged.

From a security viewpoint, it is problematic, and personally I would not feel comfortable sharing my room overnight with someone I have just met.  Passing the time of day with a new friend in the sleeper for awhile is different and in some ways it is not different than inviting someone to your hotel room.  However, unlike a hotel, the other doors are not lockable except from the inside and there is luggage on an open rack, I think from a security standpoint a firm rule against passengers without a sleeper ticket is justified.

By the way, until the streamline era starting in the 1930s, private rooms in Pullmans were very much the exception and not the rule.  Standard Pullmans were 14-1, IIRC, 14 sections, one compartment or drawing room.  The berths WERE sold individually, so complete strangers could be and were in the upper and lower berths (still are on the Canadian).  So in George's day, sharing common space in sleepers was the way things were "on this side of Pond".

Uh, no. While the open sections were shared, the berths were always private with heavy curtains. Strangers sharing a private sleeping accommodation has never been done successfully in the States.

 

[zephyr17]

Never said berths were shared, just that they were sharing common space and not in private rooms.  Sections were NOT private accommodations, but provided a berth with a curtain and shared seating during the day.

Which is why they became unpopular and were universally cut back on American railroads following World War II when private rooms in various forms, became much more common and "all private rooms" became a selling point for name trains.

 

[caravanman]

All of this strangers stuff is well off the point. I am referring to meeting someone you know, a friend or relative, who you meet by chance on the train. 

Just as a matter of interest, what does an "open sleeper ticket" consist of? I have searched the internet but can't find any mention of it on Amtrak, only on A.U.

Does it have the additional passengers name on it?

Ed. 

 

[neroden]

Yes, it has the passenger's name.  An "open sleeper" ticket is a ticket for a passenger which specifies that they are in sleeper, not in coach, but does not assign a room exclusively to their reservation. (because they will be sharing someone else's room by prior arrangement).  Particularly useful when someone is joining you partway through a trip.

I've never tried having different people join and leave me on different portions of the same trip. (e.g. I have a roomette from Chicago to Seattle, one person joins me from Chicago to Minneapolis and a different person joins me from Spokane to Seattle).  Theoretically possible.

 

[ehbowen]

Never said berths were shared, just that they were sharing common space and not in private rooms.  Sections were NOT private accommodations, but provided a berth with a curtain and shared seating during the day.

Which is why they became unpopular and were universally cut back on American railroads following World War II when private rooms in various forms, became much more common and "all private rooms" became a selling point for name trains.

Well, it's a question of terminology. Sections were shared, but they were not private. Private rooms, over here, have never been shared (by strangers, at any rate). ("Enclosed sections" were tried for a [very] short time, but they were not successful.) And once private roomettes for single passengers became generally available, open sections withered away quickly.

Americans, in general, like their privacy. There have been a number of people on AU calling for an Amtrak equivalent of the European couchette...but I very strongly suspect that they would not appeal to American passengers unless they were sold at a discount to standard coach fares.

 

[Devil's Advocate]

Americans, in general, like their privacy. There have been a number of people on AU calling for an Amtrak equivalent of the European couchette...but I very strongly suspect that they would not appeal to American passengers unless they were sold at a discount to standard coach fares.

Modern Americans, in general, have made it clear that we could not care less about our privacy.  Among industrialized nations we have the fewest protections from private details being collected, used, and abused by our retailers, service providers, employers, and insurers.  Our culture is the birthplace and epicenter of the modern social media movement, where private details small and large are repeatedly disseminated to all and sundry.  For most of our country's existence even choosing who we slept with has remained under the control of our state governments.  One of the last remaining vestiges of our private life (that cannot be named here) is on the fast path to being irrevocably invalidated.  Even our supposedly powerful HIPAA law is full of easily abused exceptions and loopholes.  Modern Americans, in general, have no rational concept of "privacy" and by our own actions (and inaction) we have made it clear we couldn't care less where our private information goes or how it's used against us.

 

[ehbowen]

Modern Americans, in general, have made it clear that we could not care less about our privacy.  Among industrialized nations we have the fewest protections from private details being collected, used, and abused by our retailers, service providers, employers, and insurers.  Our culture is the birthplace and epicenter of the modern social media movement, where private details small and large are repeatedly disseminated to all and sundry.  For most of our country's existence even choosing who we slept with has remained under the control of our state governments.  One of the last remaining vestiges of our private life (that cannot be named here) is on the fast path to being irrevocably invalidated.  Even our supposedly powerful HIPAA law is full of easily abused exceptions and loopholes.  Modern Americans, in general, have no rational concept of "privacy" and by our own actions (and inaction) we have made it clear we couldn't care less where our private information goes or how it's used against us.

Well, I would say that there is a difference between immediately perceived privacy...which we guard jealously...and the more important but also less immediately perceived threat of Big Brother (actually, the little brothers who don't need to even pay lip service to the Fourth Amendment) and dossiers and "tracking" and such. If more people realized just how badly they were being violated 24/7 you might see a backlash...if not a full-blown revolution.

In other words, I agree with your major point completely and then some. But, when it come to perceptible issues that we perceive that we have some degree of control of...Americans like their privacy.

(It really creeps me out when Google pops up on my Android phone asking me for a "review" whenever I walk into a McDonald's...especially when my "location services" are supposed to be TURNED OFF!)

 

[Cho Cho Charlie]

Well, really the booked sleeper passenger has paid for the whole room, so it IS paid for.  Amtrak has still gotten the same revenue.  In terms of who pays for what, someone with a coach ticket sharing the room with a sleeper passenger is indistinguishable from an open sleeper ticket (actually, Amtrak may get MORE revenue, since the open sleeper ticket will have been a the lowest value bucket, where the coach ticket may have been at a higher bucket).  So it is in no way unfair to other passengers in terms of what they were charged.

Well, no.

That's the same very flawed argument someone could make claiming that a coach seat would have otherwise gone empty.   Therefore, they have every right to ride in it for free.  As you argue, is OK because Amtrak would still get the same revenue; zero for the empty seat vs. zero for this person using it.

However, it is stealing.    It is theft of services, be it someone riding in a coach seat without paying for it or be it someone enjoying a bed for the night in a Sleeper, without their own paid ticket for it.

 

[Skyline]

Modern Americans, in general, have made it clear that we could not care less about our privacy.  Among industrialized nations we have the fewest protections from private details being collected, used, and abused by our retailers, service providers, employers, and insurers.  Our culture is the birthplace and epicenter of the modern social media movement, where private details small and large are repeatedly disseminated to all and sundry.  For most of our country's existence even choosing who we slept with has remained under the control of our state governments.  One of the last remaining vestiges of our private life (that cannot be named here) is on the fast path to being irrevocably invalidated.  Even our supposedly powerful HIPAA law is full of easily abused exceptions and loopholes.  Modern Americans, in general, have no rational concept of "privacy" and by our own actions (and inaction) we have made it clear we couldn't care less where our private information goes or how it's used against us.

I'm with you on the cyber privacy and issues like that. But I think most Americans are dead set against getting too close (intimate?) with strangers unless both parties consent of course. And that's why two-person upper/lower berths don't exist any longer on US trains. Other cultures aren't so squeamish about that, so they still exist elsewhere. They do exist on the Canadian still, but are not that popular where strangers are involved, and are typically used by two people who know each other well (enough).

 

[mcropod]

Fascinating discussion!

I'm due on an overnighter between Melbourne and Sydney next year and opted for a sleeper, which is one berth in a two-berth room.  There's no guarantee that the second berth will be left vacant unless I also pay for that. (I'm Scottish-born, so I didn't - I'll take a $120 bet that demand will not require it.)

The railway provider will book another passenger into that berth, with the only proviso that it be someone of the same gender as I.  I thought of booking as a woman, but I think they'd quickly see through that lurk.

I remember an overnight train from Mallaig in Scotland also brought that to potential travellers' attention at the booking phase when a sleeping berth was requested, as that train's beds were also two singles per room.

One last issue - there's a lovely old sleeping car in the Sacramento Railway Museum which has double bunk berths which convert to space for four seats during day-running.  The guide mentioned that each of the four seats was sold separately.  So not only would you potentially be in the same room as a stranger, but the same bed too!

They were a much racier lot in the old days, eh?  

 

[ehbowen]

One last issue - there's a lovely old sleeping car in the Sacramento Railway Museum which has double bunk berths which convert to space for four seats during day-running.  The guide mentioned that each of the four seats was sold separately.  So not only would you potentially be in the same room as a stranger, but the same bed too!

They were a much racier lot in the old days, eh?  

If you're referring to an emigrant car then, yes, they were sold that way. I suppose it's possible that some operators (Pullman had competitors...Wagner, and others...in the early years) tried that as a business model. Ultimately, in this country, it didn't work.

 

[caravanman]

Well, no.

That's the same very flawed argument someone could make claiming that a coach seat would have otherwise gone empty.   Therefore, they have every right to ride in it for free.  As you argue, is OK because Amtrak would still get the same revenue; zero for the empty seat vs. zero for this person using it.

However, it is stealing.    It is theft of services, be it someone riding in a coach seat without paying for it or be it someone enjoying a bed for the night in a Sleeper, without their own paid ticket for it.

I find it very hard to follow your "logic". If a person books a roomette and meets a friend on the way to the station, and the friend pays for an open sleeper ticket, entitling them to share the roomette and have meals, that is fine with you?

But if they met later on the train and persuaded the Conductor to allow the same thing but without the included meals, that would amount to a  "theft" and you would be very upset...

 

[ehbowen]

I find it very hard to follow your "logic". If a person books a roomette and meets a friend on the way to the station, and the friend pays for an open sleeper ticket, entitling them to share the roomette and have meals, that is fine with you?

But if they met later on the train and persuaded the Conductor to allow the same thing but without the included meals, that would amount to a  "theft" and you would be very upset...

My logic is that rules need to be administered fairly, but wise administration includes recognizing the proper time to make exceptions. I think that in situations where (like the Original Original Poster) you have a wife who has bought a coach ticket on the same train where her husband has a sleeper or if you have two friends who, unbeknownst to each other, have booked the same train and happen to meet in the diner or lounge then a wise conductor would grant the exception. But judiciously. I'm reminded of the story related on another forum of a biker lady who booked the family bedroom on one train and lay there, clad only in a towel, with door open, ready to welcome all comers. Would you really be in favor of letting her go back and forth to the lounge with her latest "friend of the moment?"

Again, we're talking extremes. But the thing about extremes is that they do crop up now and then. I still say that the proper way is to set and enforce the policy...but grant your front-line employees the authority to make exceptions when called for. And hope that they have the wisdom to use that authority and not to let anyone abuse it.

 

[caravanman]

I'm due on an overnighter between Melbourne and Sydney next year and opted for a sleeper, which is one berth in a two-berth room.  There's no guarantee that the second berth will be left vacant unless I also pay for that. (I'm Scottish-born, so I didn't - I'll take a $120 bet that demand will not require it.)

The railway provider will book another passenger into that berth, with the only proviso that it be someone of the same gender as I.  I thought of booking as a woman, but I think they'd quickly see through that lurk.

I remember an overnight train from Mallaig in Scotland also brought that to potential travellers' attention at the booking phase when a sleeping berth was requested, as that train's beds were also two singles per room.

Indeed, the European night trains have much the same deal, never used the 2 berths, but with 4 or 6 berth there was always a mix of male and female, except in Spain, where sexes are segregated. In India one sleeps in a coach with forty other people in open berths. 

I think the majority of AU members almost always travel long distance only in sleepers, so there is a bit of an "us and them" battle to keep the coachies out of the sleepers.

I just like to add a little fuel to the fire now and again.

 

[caravanman]

I'm reminded of the story related on another forum of a biker lady who booked the family bedroom on one train and lay there, clad only in a towel, with door open, ready to welcome all comers. Would you really be in favor of letting her go back and forth to the lounge with her latest "friend of the moment?"

Strange story, I wonder if it was true? Was it an Amtrak towel, that would certainly be breaking some rule, I am sure!

 

[mcropod]

Indeed, the European night trains have much the same deal, never used the 2 berths, but with 4 or 6 berth there was always a mix of male and female, except in Spain, where sexes are segregated. In India one sleeps in a coach with forty other people in open berths. 

I think the majority of AU members almost always travel long distance only in sleepers, so there is a bit of an "us and them" battle to keep the coachies out of the sleepers.

I just like to add a little fuel to the fire now and again.

But you've identified another cultural difference between a large segment of our US friends and much of the ROTW - a tendency to being uneasy with and discomforted by strangers, especially in close uninvited proximity.

I remember reading loads of train reviews from US travellers when researching my trip of earlier this year, where the writer mentioned how prepared one should be to cope with the unsettling idea that you might have to sit with "random strangers" at mealtimes.

Those places when it's just not possible to go about one's daily life without being amongst and sharing small spaces with strangers, like India in your travels, or across much of Europe by train, sharing a room is just part and parcel of things.  You cope.  You maintain whatever privacy you want, it's just that you share a space.

 

[ehbowen]

But you've identified another cultural difference between a large segment of our US friends and much of the ROTW - a tendency to being uneasy with and discomforted by strangers, especially in close uninvited proximity.

Very true. North Americans, in general, have a very different definition of "personal space" than those from European, Mediterranean, or Middle Eastern cultures. When a person of Mediterranean...say, Greek or Italian...origin is feeling gregarious and engages an American in personal conversation, he's likely to stand at the distance at which he is most comfortable...which is probably much closer than the American is comfortable with. The Italian is being friendly; the American thinks he is being intrusive and backs away. The italian feels as though he has been personally rejected and steps closer again. The American feels that he's on the verge of being assaulted and the cycle continues, ending in hard feelings...unless one or the other of them knows enough about the phenomenon to recognize what is happening and make the adjustment.

 

[jis]

Actually, I am one of those AU people that travels pretty much always in Sleeper on Amtrak. In fact I will not travel by Coach LD on Amtrak (unless it is just for a few stops, e.g. Kissimmee to Tampa) because inevitably the most helpful Coach attendant always shuffles me around to the worst seats, sometimes involving several moves in a single journey (another reason I would like to have the option of reserving an assigned seat). My insistence on traveling Sleeper in Amtrak has more to do with the odd arrangement at Amtrak which involves treating single travelers like scatology, unless you are able to firmly lay claim to a specific accommodation, and the only way you can do that in LD service is in Sleeper.

But I have no problem sharing a compartment with 4 or six people, or sleeping in either 2 or 3 Tier Sleepers as found in India (BTW caravanman in 3 Tier it would be more like 65 people, and there are no curtains in 3 Tier Sleepers). Heck all my early train travel was either in Chair Cars, or in such shared sleeping space, when there was sleeping space involved. There were a few also in the more intimate setting of crush loaded unreserved second class too. Specially there was a memorable one Delhi Jn. to Howrah (Kolkata) during a railroad strike.

 

[cpotisch]

The railway provider will book another passenger into that berth, with the only proviso that it be someone of the same gender as I.  I thought of booking as a woman, but I think they'd quickly see through that lurk.

I’m sorry, what? That seems like a bit of a problematic thing to apparently have considered doing... :unsure: