From: Is there a way to buy a one day pass to the metro lounge?

[ColdRain&Snow]

Nothing new. Nothing insightful. Nothing informative. Cue the yawn.

Same here.

Give it a rest Alan. Seriously!

 

[ColdRain&Snow]

I'll repeat myself again.

Yes, this has been one of your consistent hallmarks throughout this topic, and your defense of the practice doesn't get better with age or become any more compelling as you recycle it over and over and over again. When you can prove that the practice never results in delaying and/or denigrating service levels to those actually needing it, then you may have a leg to stand on. Until then, I hope you will allow the interests of others in need to override your own self-serving interests which are driving your affinity for this practice, the latest of which is that you're lazy per your own admission to Bill last night.    

 

[ColdRain&Snow]

Things don't work that way here in America.

If you're going to try and claim that someone isn't allowed to do something, the burden of proof is on you to show that it's necessary.

The disconnect is at a very fundamental level. You claim that unless the activity is specifically permitted by Amtrak, it's against "the rules".

My claim is that unless it is expressly forbidden, Red Caps are allowed to serve whomever they please.

Nope, you had it wrong the first time and merely repeating your claim it doesn't substantiate its efficacy. I'm not asking for proof that it can't be done. I'm asking for proof that when one makes this choice, they are acting with 100% certainty every time that they are in no way ever negatively impacting others in need. And if they can't provide this guarantee 100% of the time, then I am saying to put the interests of others ahead of their own self-interests. It's nothing most of us haven't heard through our chosen faiths throughout our lifetimes.  

 

[ColdRain&Snow]

  If it's impossible to know for sure how much you're negatively impacting others, why not just err on the side of putting the needs of others ahead of your own self-interests, some of which are awfully hard to defend such as laziness? It's just not a major sacrifice to make. Not in my book anyway.     

 

[ColdRain&Snow]

If it's impossible to know for sure how much you're negatively impacting others, why not just err on the side of putting the needs of others ahead of your own self-interests, some of which are awfully hard to defend such as laziness? It's just not a major sacrifice to make. Not in my book anyway.

Because, once again, I do know for sure that I'm not negatively impacting others in Boston. Not withstanding your refusal to believe me, I'm quite sure that I'm not impacting others when I ask for help in Boston.

You have decided otherwise and have made accusations about me and my character. In this country we believe in the standard that people are innocent until proven guilty. To date you have offered no proof of anything, only your wild accusations. You will either cease commenting in this topic or your will provide absolute proof, not your observations.

Let me be perfectly clear here so that there is no misunderstanding. You will NOT post again in this topic unless it is to offer absolute proof!

Playing the Admin card now. And deleting posts you didn't like just because you can. A new low in this discussion.

 

[ColdRain&Snow]

If it's impossible to know for sure how much you're negatively impacting others, why not just err on the side of putting the needs of others ahead of your own self-interests, some of which are awfully hard to defend such as laziness? It's just not a major sacrifice to make. Not in my book anyway.

So I should never sit on the lower level of a Superliner, because that might harm some theoretical passenger with limited mobility? I should never book the family bedroom because that might inconvenience a possible family that would prefer to book that room? Heck, I shouldn't even book a bedroom because that might push the price up past what some imaginary couple can afford to pay?

Your rectitude seems excessively fastidious to me. In my experience redcaps (including those in Boston) are very good at setting priorities, and helping those in order of need.

Conductors will move you out of Lower Level if they determine the space is needed for mobility impaired passengers, so I don't think that's an issue. That's fair that your observations have shown that Red Caps are prioritizing correctly. My observations have shown me differently at times, hence my concerns. 

 

[ColdRain&Snow]

I haven't seen any name-calling going on here. But as one poster pointed out earlier today about whether using help when you don't need it delays or denigrates service levels to those who do, "There is no way to prove in this court of public opinion which is true." I agree that it cannot be ruled out. And that's enough for me to have strong concerns about putting one's self ahead of others here. Insofar as Conductors moving a passenger so someone with mobility problems can take their seat in the LL, my thinking was more along the lines of the obvious. If I'm sitting in the LL with no other seats available and someone with crutches boards, I agree that our conscience should demand that we move out of consideration for that passenger. But if we refuse to do that, a Conductor wouldn't think twice about making it happen. As it should be.

 

[ColdRain&Snow]

I haven't seen any name-calling going on here. But as one poster pointed out earlier today about whether using help when you don't need it delays or denigrates service levels to those who do, "There is no way to prove in this court of public opinion which is true." I agree that it cannot be ruled out. And that's enough for me to have strong concerns about putting one's self ahead of others here. Insofar as Conductors moving a passenger so someone with mobility problems can take their seat in the LL, my thinking was more along the lines of the obvious. If I'm sitting in the LL with no other seats available and someone with crutches boards, I agree that our conscience should demand that we move out of consideration for that passenger. But if we refuse to do that, a Conductor wouldn't think twice about making it happen. As it should be.

ColdRain&Snow' some people just cant do the long walk,

i use red caps in chicago just to avoid the long walk into the station

my legs are not great so the red cap ride into the amtrak station from the train

helps me, i am not gonna walk if i dont have to

If you're having problems with your legs or they are not serving you at the standard of a normal, healthy, functioning adult, then that would certainly constitute a genuine need in my mind. You do need the help in this case, and you're asking for and getting it. I don't see a problem there.      

 

[ColdRain&Snow]

I haven't seen any name-calling going on here. But as one poster pointed out earlier today about whether using help when you don't need it delays or denigrates service levels to those who do, "There is no way to prove in this court of public opinion which is true." I agree that it cannot be ruled out. And that's enough for me to have strong concerns about putting one's self ahead of others here. Insofar as Conductors moving a passenger so someone with mobility problems can take their seat in the LL, my thinking was more along the lines of the obvious. If I'm sitting in the LL with no other seats available and someone with crutches boards, I agree that our conscience should demand that we move out of consideration for that passenger. But if we refuse to do that, a Conductor wouldn't think twice about making it happen. As it should be.

ColdRain&Snow' some people just cant do the long walk,

i use red caps in chicago just to avoid the long walk into the station

my legs are not great so the red cap ride into the amtrak station from the train

helps me, i am not gonna walk if i dont have to

If you're having problems with your legs or they are not serving you at the standard of a normal, healthy, functioning adult, then that would certainly constitute a genuine need in my mind. You do need the help in this case, and you're asking for and getting it. I don't see a problem there.

dont know about ny or boston but in chicago the train is a half mile walk to the station so anyone takeing a red cap is justified dont matter if they are able bodied or not

I do respect your opinion here. My take on that is that if Amtrak truly believed that the distances to its trains were an oppressive obstacle for its general boarding population, they would long ago have instituted a mass-pax system for moving them back and forth. Airports have done this where gates and terminals have been established in disparate locations from one another. It appears that Amtrak has decided that these distances are reasonable for most passengers, and for those who need the extra assistance to be brought out to the trains, Red Caps are there to serve them.   

 

[ColdRain&Snow]

Not to assert the obvious, but the experiences of a small number of people from AU -- regardless of which side of the debate they fall on -- cannot possibly be used to infer what's happening across the tens or hundreds of thousands of people using Red Caps around the Amtrak network. Short of omniscience, there's simply no way to truly know the negative impact that this practice may be having on others in need, and that's the problem with running on the blind assumption that there isn't any. So then the question becomes whether or not your own self-interest should override its potential to negatively impact others who do need the help.

 

[ColdRain&Snow]

Not to assert the obvious, but the experiences of a very small number of people from AU -- regardless of which side of the debate they fall on -- cannot possibly be used to infer what's happening across the tens or hundreds of thousands of people using Red Caps around the Amtrak network. Short of omniscience, there's simply no way to truly know the negative impact that this practice may be having on others in need, and that's the problem with running on the blind assumption that there isn't any. So then the question becomes whether or not your own self-interest should override its potential to negatively impact others who do need the help.

 

[ColdRain&Snow]

Not to assert the obvious, but the experiences of a very small number of people from AU

Those "small number of people" represent thousands of trips covering hundreds of thousands (probably millions of miles) of Amtrak travel. Heck, in this thread you've talked about how well travelled you are, yet can't produce anything.

---Oh, I've got plenty of anecdotes/observations to draw from, including one from just days ago that I did provide details on (the guy from Seattle explaining to me his "trick" over breakfast vs. the 4 elderly folks with a ton of baggage who wondered why they were being made to wait for the guy who later admitted to me that he had no need for a Red Cap other than to preempt everyone else). Otherwise, I wouldn't have spoken up. Taking the many hours necessary to catalogue all of my observations here is simply time prohibitive, especially since I am traveling now.

Short of omniscience, there's simply no way to truly know the negative impact that this practice may be having on others in need

And therein lies the difference between you and I (and the whole reason that I felt compelled to join the conversation). Given that lack of knowledge, you're casting a heck of a lot of judgment on folks here based on nothing but a gut feeling. That ain't cool.---We don't know the collective impact of this practice on others. Since we don't know that, by not invoking this practice, you then become 100% sure that it isn't impacting others in a negative way. Otherwise, you are invoking the practice and possibly affecting others negatively by doing so. Are your self-interests that important that they should override this risk?

So then the question becomes whether or not your own self-interest should override its potential to negatively impact others who do need the help.

Given that the potential is virtually non-existant, I'm OK with it.

---We certainly don't know that for sure. Having seen it myself enough, I do know that it does happen. And since it does happen, should your self-interest override its potential to bring this negative impact onto others, even if it's just making those in need wait while you're being served? We seem to be answering that question differently. Maybe it's only happening once every 10 times, but it should really never be allowed to happen. Sadly, I think Saxman hit the mark that there is no other way to "prove" each side's claims other than by personal anecdote/observation. And that is of course an unacceptable standard of proof in the end that is met with predictable skepticism by the other side. I guess that's our deadlock here. For me, since I know it does happen, I will never use a Red Cap in that way. For others who have never seen it happen and therefore assume it's impossible, I'm under no allusions that they will change anything that they're doing. I see an impasse here, and that's unfortunate, but it is what it is. I suppose there's nothing left I can say on this, so I will sign off on this topic here.

That said, I got to the train first and got a pair of seats the old fashioned way in PHL by standing in line for the half hour between when the track was posted and when we got let down there.