How many sleepers can a diner handle?

[AlanB]

The part that always surprises me is how often the diner is only seated to about half of its capacity on trains that are nearly sold out. Maybe that's part of the reason why they're always losing money?

That comes back to the SDS plan. Originally crews filled up the entire dining car and on a full train, offered 3 seating times. SDS changed all that, with the reduced crews they could no longer handle that mass decent upon the dining car. So we got the staggard seating schedule, where tables are all at various and different points in the meal, of seating X tables every 15 minutes.

As I mentioned earlier I believe, Amtrak has been increasing crew sizes, and therefore increasing the X number seated at each interval. But still the base plan remains that you use the staggard seating schedule, not the old way of filling the entire car at once, even on a full train and with a full crew. That should be changed IMHO. If they have a nearly sold out train, 2 cooks, and 3 SA's on board, then they should just fill the diner and go for max capacity.

I will say that while it would help the bottom line with the extra revenue, the diner will still lose money no matter what. That has always been the case. The reason that the freight RR's tolerated the losses on the dining cars was that the alternative, having the train sit in the station for 3 or 4 hours while everyone ran to the Harvey House for a meal, creates too many other problems and expenses. The dining car solved that problem, and it gave the customer a better travel experience too.

 

[Anderson]

.............So based upon those two examples, I have to conclude that 3 Superliner sleepers is really the max that a Superliner diner can handle if you still want coach passengers to have a chance at getting into the diner. If you take coach out of the picture, then you could manage 4 sleepers. Alan, that's assuming that you don't increase the crew size in the diner, correct? Before the first SDS. I think Amtrak called it "Modified Meal Service" or something, If memory serves me, in the summer peak travel time, Amtrak staffed the Superliner diners with 5 wait staff, and a steward on top, and a full compliment of staff in the kitchen: Chef, Cook, Prep Cook, Dishwasher (I know, I worked that ungrateful job, at least it we had AC), and sometimes more. Even though we had a "ton" of staff downstairs, it never felt too cramped like the single-level kitchens.

Don't you think they could handle an add'l sleeper, and coach, if they "staffed-up" the waiter/waiteress up top?

Now if we go look at the single level side, both the Meteor and the LSL run with 3 sleepers. And both with SDS cannot handle more. Beef up the staff back to pre-SDS levels and you might be able to get capacity up enough to handle 4 sleepers. But you're not going to push it beyond that, unless you have overflow seating in a cafe car or you totally eliminate coach passengers in the diner. And latter choice would still be pushing things considerably.

The Superliner dining car has a rated capacity of 72 people. Unfortunately the upstairs prep area really is too small for the needs. So most crews take away at least 2 tables. I'll say, give them only 1 which drops the capacity to 68 people. If they run 3 seatings, that a total of 204 passengers that can be served.

If we assume an average sleeper occupancy of 35, they hold 44 when all rooms are at max capacity, that means that with 4 sleepers they're going to see 140 people in the dining car. That only leaves 60 slots now for coach passengers. One Superliner coach at max capacity holds 75 passengers. That means that on a train with 3 coaches, not even 1/3rd of the coach passengers can get into the dining car.

So adding a 5th sleeper would now only leave about 30 seats for coach passengers.

The only way around that would be to do 4 seatings at say 4:30, 6:00, 7:30, & 9:00. And that might not be possible to do in terms of whether or not the car can carry that many meals on a 2 night trip.

Alan,

Couldn't Amtrak solve that by sticking limited commissary services in one or more midpoint cities? For example, on the SWC you could do a restock both ways in ABQ; on the Zephyr, you'd probably need to do the restock in DEN westbound and SLC eastbound; on the EB, you're probably looking at MSP and who-knows-where; and on the TE/SL, SAS is always an option. In the cases of SAS and ABQ, you have the added bonus of the stop being quite extended under normal circumstances (ABQ is a water refill stop for the SWC, as it was for the old Super Chief if I recall correctly)...so you can probably fudge at least those two. Yes, I know this would require added infrastructure, but if you were willing to press part of the lounge car into service (the diner-style tables could be taken over, and IIRC that's another 24 seats...or 72 more table slots), I think it would work as long as you had the staff. Granted, some folks might get grumpy at being booted from those tables, but I think that's not the worst thing in the world.

I think the four seating route might be the most viable path to maxing out dinner capacity...4:30 is a bit early, but it's probably workable in a crunch.

Edit: Ok, it's 8 tables, which translates into 32 seats/96 extra slots on three seatings. That's actually more than the fourth seating offers up even under ideal circumstances. Obviously, there would be probable logistics issues getting that much food through the door, but it could definitely be worse.

Of course, a realistic question here is "coach uptake" on the diner: How many coach pax choose to eat in the diner, given the choice? I know it's a respectable percentage on a long haul trip...but even then, are we even getting to 50% on a good day? Granted, a lot of my conversations have been with fellow twenty-somethings making trips to/from college (and therefore not about to spring $30 on a steak dinner), but I know that not everyone on one of those long haul trips wants to go to the diner.

 

[AlanB]

Alan,

Couldn't Amtrak solve that by sticking limited commissary services in one or more midpoint cities? For example, on the SWC you could do a restock both ways in ABQ; on the Zephyr, you'd probably need to do the restock in DEN westbound and SLC eastbound; on the EB, you're probably looking at MSP and who-knows-where; and on the TE/SL, SAS is always an option. In the cases of SAS and ABQ, you have the added bonus of the stop being quite extended under normal circumstances (ABQ is a water refill stop for the SWC, as it was for the old Super Chief if I recall correctly)...so you can probably fudge at least those two. Yes, I know this would require added infrastructure, but if you were willing to press part of the lounge car into service (the diner-style tables could be taken over, and IIRC that's another 24 seats...or 72 more table slots), I think it would work as long as you had the staff. Granted, some folks might get grumpy at being booted from those tables, but I think that's not the worst thing in the world.

I think the four seating route might be the most viable path to maxing out dinner capacity...4:30 is a bit early, but it's probably workable in a crunch.

Sure, but at considerable expense. Amtrak closed its commissary in Albany to help cut costs and that Commissary served multiple trains per day. Now we're adding 3 commissary's on just 2 LD routes, each to serve only 1 or 2 trains a day. Doesn't seem practical to me, especially when the dining cars already don't make money and won't make money even with the increased capacity.

 

[VentureForth]

The concept that diners lose money is almost the exact same premise that restaurants are destined to lose money.

Every business has a cost associated with it.

I would love to see what Amtrak can do in 8 hours with a Waffle House crew (making Waffle House wages) serving the same quality and menu of items in a Diner.

Come to think of it, have you ever been in a Waffle House? They don't seat much more than a diner, and they have a staff of up to 8 people at any given time. I'm sure they have an equivalent cooking area and storage. They make money because they pay a pawltry wage and the staff relies on gratuities. The restaurant still has to pay for the building, the utilities and the stock.

 

[Anderson]

The concept that diners lose money is almost the exact same premise that restaurants are destined to lose money.

Every business has a cost associated with it.

I would love to see what Amtrak can do in 8 hours with a Waffle House crew (making Waffle House wages) serving the same quality and menu of items in a Diner.

Come to think of it, have you ever been in a Waffle House? They don't seat much more than a diner, and they have a staff of up to 8 people at any given time. I'm sure they have an equivalent cooking area and storage. They make money because they pay a pawltry wage and the staff relies on gratuities. The restaurant still has to pay for the building, the utilities and the stock.

Yes, but a Waffle House doesn't ride on wheels halfway across the country twice a week, which makes a nightmare out of maintenance. With that said, I think there is some merit in discussing the pay/benefits situation (particularly the benefits side of things)...but also don't forget that your Waffle House staff gets to go home at the end of the day, rather than having to work 2-3 days of consecutive three-meal shifts.

 

[VentureForth]

My Waffle House has a crew of about 12 that work 24-hours a day, 7 days a week and probably would foam at the mouth to get a solid hourly wage, plus tips, and a bed to sleep on for 8 of every 24 hours for probably much more than 2 or 3 days at a time.

What about Cruise Line employees that don't get to go home once in a 6-month contract? Who's quarters are about the size of two roomettes sharing a shower with two more roomettes? Who barely get a living wage (but no expenses), and deal with schedule changes, reroutes, bad weather, and cranky guests?

Seriously, Amtrak's wage and benefits package is what is destroying their bottom line. I'll betcha you fire everyone and tell the coach crew they make $10/hr with a matching 3% 401(k), and the OBS crew makes $3/hr plus tips and a matching 3% 401(k) they contribute to all with travel benefits, and I can guarantee you there will be no positions available. Maybe not the same staff that is on there today, but with eager folks willing to serve - with a smile.

Amtrak employees are spoiled rotten and many of them don't even care to do their job well. Many DO appreciate their jobs and are phenomenal.

Whenever the Goverment is involved in paying directly or indirectly for individuals wages, politics always speak louder than viability and rational business sense.

 

[GlobalistPotato]

The concept that diners lose money is almost the exact same premise that restaurants are destined to lose money.

Every business has a cost associated with it.

I would love to see what Amtrak can do in 8 hours with a Waffle House crew (making Waffle House wages) serving the same quality and menu of items in a Diner.

Come to think of it, have you ever been in a Waffle House? They don't seat much more than a diner, and they have a staff of up to 8 people at any given time. I'm sure they have an equivalent cooking area and storage. They make money because they pay a pawltry wage and the staff relies on gratuities. The restaurant still has to pay for the building, the utilities and the stock.

Well, isn't that the idea of contracting a private restaurant for serving food in the diner? Those cooks aren't being payed on Amtrak's wages, nor are the wages as big as Amtrak's. (How big, IDK. I could say "they're union wages!" but they could still be lower than I would estimate)

 

[Devil's Advocate]

I like the idea of having a Waffle House crew running and managing the diner. Heck, even a Subway (restaurant) crew would be nice for a change. Or any number of other fresher restaurant style businesses vying for a chance to run the dining car as they see fit with the goal of making an actual profit. Give it a try on the Texas Eagle or the Sunset Limited and I'll be happy to give them a shot. This is where Amtrak tends to disappoint me the most often, so I'd be pretty excited about seeing something new in the diner.

 

[AlanB]

Seriously, Amtrak's wage and benefits package is what is destroying their bottom line. I'll betcha you fire everyone and tell the coach crew they make $10/hr with a matching 3% 401(k), and the OBS crew makes $3/hr plus tips and a matching 3% 401(k) they contribute to all with travel benefits, and I can guarantee you there will be no positions available. Maybe not the same staff that is on there today, but with eager folks willing to serve - with a smile.

Can't do that. Railroad workers have to be a part of the RR retirement system by Federal law. And as much as the freight RR's don't like Amtrak, not a one of them will support such a change were Congress to even consider it, because it would place a greater financial burden on the freight RR's.

And while you might be able to fill all those coach positions with those wages although I have major doubts, if you think things are bad right now in terms of service, just wait till you see what's going to happen with those wages.

Whenever the Goverment is involved in paying directly or indirectly for individuals wages, politics always speak louder than viability and rational business sense.

This isn't a government thing, these contracts were inherited by Amtrak from the freight RR's. Could Amtrak perhaps have tried to negotiate lower increases over the years? Sure. But again, he basic contracts were in place before Amtrak was formed, so we can't put all the blame on Government.

 

[VentureForth]

I thought this thread was sounding pretty familiar. It's been three years, but funny how Waffle House came up on this old thread (by me!).

Could've just resurrected THIS THREAD. LOL

 

[VentureForth]

Alan, I understand. It is a diservice to the population at large whenever Government allows for any class of individual to have benefits by law - whether it is by race, creed, origin, gender, political orientation, or job selection. I don't know what the circumstances were at the time to secure such favoritism for railroads by the Federal government other than perhaps national security.

The ratified contracts of just a couple years ago are a reminder. I'm glad they got a contract so there is no more "wondering". But at the same time, I think they were given the world.

As for wage-customer service correlation, I know from being there that I was happiest making $7/hr because it was a job I loved and was good at. Most of all, I had a job that made others happy. What you have with a $24+ hour job can include those with so much seniority that management can't touch them, and they (perhaps accurately) feel that they are literally entitled to their job over anyone else. That, more than wages in my humble opinion, is more detrimental to customer service than wages.

 

[AlanB]

Alan, I understand. It is a diservice to the population at large whenever Government allows for any class of individual to have benefits by law - whether it is by race, creed, origin, gender, political orientation, or job selection. I don't know what the circumstances were at the time to secure such favoritism for railroads by the Federal government other than perhaps national security.

I'm not sure why or how things worked out the way that they did, perhaps it had something to do with the fact that the RR's already had some sort of plan, I just don't know. What I do know is that both the Railroad Retirement Board was created in 1935, just like Social Security was. Just how they differed then, much less how they've morphed since then, I have no idea. But the basic concepts were the same, provide for retirement.

The ratified contracts of just a couple years ago are a reminder. I'm glad they got a contract so there is no more "wondering". But at the same time, I think they were given the world.

They weren't given the world by Amtrak. It was the Presidential Emergency Board (PEB) that gave the workers the world, assuming that one actually believes that they were given the world. According to the PEB, most Amtrak workers were simply brought up to comparative wages in similar craft fields.

As for wage-customer service correlation, I know from being there that I was happiest making $7/hr because it was a job I loved and was good at. Most of all, I had a job that made others happy. What you have with a $24+ hour job can include those with so much seniority that management can't touch them, and they (perhaps accurately) feel that they are literally entitled to their job over anyone else. That, more than wages in my humble opinion, is more detrimental to customer service than wages.

Well my wife is a retail store manager and I can tell you without a doubt that if she's not watching those workers making $7/hr like a hawk, most are off doing nothing. Amtrak already has a problem with lack of onboard supervision, so the problem will only get worse.

I'm not saying that there aren't changes that Amtrak could & should make to better police the crew and get rid of the dead wood. But I don't for a second believe that firing everyone and rehiring new workers at a lower wage is going to make things better.

 

[jis]

At least in the New York area, among the various passenger railroads that operate around here, Amtrak's salaries are the lowest in general.

Coming back to Diners, VIA Rail on the Canadian seems to do at most 5 Sleepers per Diner, usually with three seatings per meal AFAICT. But on the plus side the whole thing is much more predictable because they have individuals assigned to specific Diners and they do reservations way ahead of the meal, and stick to them meticulously.

 

[rrdude]

At least in the New York area, among the various passenger railroads that operate around here, Amtrak's salaries are the lowest in general.

Coming back to Diners, VIA Rail on the Canadian seems to do at most 5 Sleepers per Diner, usually with three seatings per meal AFAICT. But on the plus side the whole thing is much more predictable because they have individuals assigned to specific Diners and they do reservations way ahead of the meal, and stick to them meticulously.

And VIA prepares fresh, real food, that taste good, and is served by a (usually) polite and courteous staff!
Amtrak? Hey a one outa-four-chance for the same ain't bad. That's my experience at least, about one-in-four Amtrak diner experiences will be "worth writing home about".

One-outa-four will make you want to swear off Amtrak forever. (or at least eating in the diner) and the other half are just kinda "meh". Got food, stomach full, no big shakes. Unfortunately, many travelers today are satisfied with a "meh" dinner. Personally, I'm not.

MEH: "The verbal equivalent of a shrug of the shoulders."

 

[Devil's Advocate]

It's sad when the "salads" are nothing more than some iceberg lettuce and a couple tiny tomatoes. Maybe a crouton here or there. If you can't even get something as simple as a salad right then maybe it's time to close the kitchen and convert it into another sleeper or something. I wonder if the people who can't stop complimenting Amtrak's food quality are riding the Acela or something. If they're riding the TE or SL then I honestly have no idea why they would be so impressed with such sub-par food. Yeah, we all eat it. There's not much else to do on board and it's hard to go multiple days without any food, but that doesn't mean it's any good. At least not to me it isn't. I hope to try VIA sometime this year.

 

[Tim]

When calculating the number of people using the diner, please take into consideration that all PAX don't go there. Some have their meais in their rooms, especially the elderly and the handicapped and I would hope families with unruly children as well.

I have no idea what percentage prefer to do this, but it does create extra space in the diner.

That I’ll never happens! Why would a parent/parents with unruly children subject themselves to trying to have dinner with just when they being locked up in a small moving room with their little monsters then they can turn them loses on the rest of us! What were you thinking LOL ?

 

[Guest]

I presume that varies both with the crowd on board and with the amount of effort the staff puts into mentioning "Hey, folks, we do offer a full-service dinner in a dining car, not just cafe food!" to the coach pax boarding after Newark.

From what I can tell out here in TE/SL land it's not about advertising that the diner exists so much as overtly refusing to allow reservations for coach passengers beyond the first tiny handful that may luck out mopping up whatever the sleeper pax have left available. The last sleeper car gets maybe two seating times to choose from and then the first coach car gets maybe one single seating time beyond the non-reserved breakfast service. If sleeper passengers fail to materialize then coach passengers may get a break if they ignore the formal reservation process and simply show up anyway. Or maybe they'll get shouted at and belittled for even attempting to secure a meal without a reservation ticket. When I'm in coach I rarely attempt anything beyond breakfast.

I am amazed at the fact the I have seen several crews (City of New Orleans) tell coach passengers that the dinner service is for sleeping car passenger only and refuse to serve them (at times quite directly and rude). I really think its passive or maybe not so passive aggression for Amtrak’s SDS service and it policies redirected at passengers and this on a train that (if I’m not mistaken) has one of the lowest diner sales numbers in the country.

 

[Anderson]

I presume that varies both with the crowd on board and with the amount of effort the staff puts into mentioning "Hey, folks, we do offer a full-service dinner in a dining car, not just cafe food!" to the coach pax boarding after Newark.

From what I can tell out here in TE/SL land it's not about advertising that the diner exists so much as overtly refusing to allow reservations for coach passengers beyond the first tiny handful that may luck out mopping up whatever the sleeper pax have left available. The last sleeper car gets maybe two seating times to choose from and then the first coach car gets maybe one single seating time beyond the non-reserved breakfast service. If sleeper passengers fail to materialize then coach passengers may get a break if they ignore the formal reservation process and simply show up anyway. Or maybe they'll get shouted at and belittled for even attempting to secure a meal without a reservation ticket. When I'm in coach I rarely attempt anything beyond breakfast.

I am amazed at the fact the I have seen several crews (City of New Orleans) tell coach passengers that the dinner service is for sleeping car passenger only and refuse to serve them (at times quite directly and rude). I really think its passive or maybe not so passive aggression for Amtrak's SDS service and it policies redirected at passengers and this on a train that (if I'm not mistaken) has one of the lowest diner sales numbers in the country.

If that ever happens to me...oh, so help me I will raise so much hell with customer service. I respect a sold-out diner, and I can even respect being asked to leave space for longer-distance passengers (such as Florida-bound pax on the Meteor, or Denver-bound pax on the CZ when I'm only going to RVR or OSC on those trains). I can even respect the mess that happened on the Cap last Boxing Day, and my recognition of what happened there is reflected in my decision not to report that crew to management. But "the diner is for sleeper pax only" is not company policy and I will make Amtrak abundantly aware of that sort of misbehavior. And if the diner ends up half-empty while they're doing this, I will take pictures and post them here as well as forwarding them to the proper folks "upstairs".

And yes, I will do this even if I am in the sleeper at the time. There is no excuse for that sort of behavior from the crew.

 

[GlobalistPotato]

Perhaps Amtrak should try focusing on sending reserved meals to the sleeper pax so that the coach passengers can have a chance to eat in the diner.

But what it seems like to be is that Amtrak's diner can store and serve more food for three meals a day than how many seats can be served. So logically, a fully loaded and staffed diner could serve passengers directly in the diner, plus sleeper pax in their room and overflow in the lounge car.

 

[JayPea]

Perhaps Amtrak should try focusing on sending reserved meals to the sleeper pax so that the coach passengers can have a chance to eat in the diner.

But what it seems like to be is that Amtrak's diner can store and serve more food for three meals a day than how many seats can be served. So logically, a fully loaded and staffed diner could serve passengers directly in the diner, plus sleeper pax in their room and overflow in the lounge car.

A large part of the dining experience is the community seating arrangement in which total strangers are seated at a table together. To me that is very enjoyable, and I wouldn't want my meal served to me in the sleepers. I suspect an overwhelming number of sleeper passengers wouldn't, either. Maybe I haven't looked too hard but I don't recall at any time seing coach passengers being discouraged from eating in the diner. And, personally, it's never happened to me, save for one time on the CONO from Champaign to Chicago when I was in coach and was unable to use the dining car due to an equipment malfunction and only sleeping car passengers were able to be served. It's Amtrak; it happens. Again, though, it's never been my experience that coach passengers were discouraged from eating in the diner. I'm not doubting it's happened; it just has never been my experience.

 

[AlanB]

I for one would not want to be forced to eat my meal in my room. I want to be in the dining car for multiple reasons, including but not limited to; refills, food is hotter, interaction with other passengers, and I want the chance to get out of my room and be in different places.

Plus you're not going to get everyone from coach to come to the diner either. Yes, it's a shame when those in coach are turned away because the diner is booked. But still I'd be surprised if more than 1/3rd of the people in coach would come to the diner.

 

[Anderson]

I'm with Alan on this. For the record, I've been turned away once, on a sold-out CZ...and come to think about it, that was actually not a real "turn away"...it was simply that the only dining time(s) available came too close to my Osceola arrival to be safe. The only time I've seen a massive turn-away also deserves an explanation: I was on the Capitol Limited and the diner had been bad-ordered at the last minute and half of the staff was brand new (the Cap has real seniority issues come Christmas, since the normal teams are almost all way up the seniority rosters)...and they were one person short in the kitchen, which I believe was set up for a CCC (or staffed as if it were one, or something like that). So they were only using half of the diner, meal times were falling catastrophically behind (they started about 45 minutes behind and only got worse), and I think they had supply issues. The food was still solid, but it was a real mess.

Breakfast was even worse. I had the good sense to hop in and eat as early as I could and got good service to wonderful views of ice waterfalls in the mountains. They were still serving breakfast right up until they closed the diner heading into DC, and even then I don't think they cleared the waiting list. I did my best to tip well and be as low-maintenance as I could under the circumstances (I remember saying, at the end of dinner, "If I could get a refill on my milk, I'll get out of your hair"...and it wasn't me being patronizing: I could tell they were stretched thin. I'd had the same LSA before, and he was not himself, and I got the picture). This isn't how things ought to be, but...well, it's one of those things that happens.

And yes, the experience is a big part of the trip. I've sat with everyone from one sci-fi author whose work I've enjoyed over the years (45 minutes of face time with a highly-respected author is something you can't buy) to some people who I strongly suspect did not have their papers entirely in order to people who I dared not press on what they did for a living because you could tell that you did not want to know. The experiences I've had eating on the train are something which I will always treasure...they're something which I can't get anywhere else in America.

 

[GlobalistPotato]

Okay, okay, okay. Fine then. I dunno. Guess it wasn't such a good idea.

I just hear that the diner is super-full and the coach pax don't get to eat, then I hear that the diner is half full on a sold-out train. What's going on? :blink:

 

[Devil's Advocate]

Okay, okay, okay. Fine then. I dunno. Guess it wasn't such a good idea. I just hear that the diner is super-full and the coach pax don't get to eat, then I hear that the diner is half full on a sold-out train. What's going on?

Hey, anything that tries to improve the quality and/or efficiency of the diner is a worthy suggestion in my book. Unlike so many other aspects of the Amtrak equation the diner should be relatively easy to change. Try a new idea on one route, maybe even just one train, and see if it takes off. No need to get approval from Union Pacific or anyone else. Just do what you can to reduce costs and improve quality. Maybe Amtrak should re-outsource from Aramark to an actual restaurant chain that knows how to secure and prepare fresh food for a change.

 

[AlanB]

Okay, okay, okay. Fine then. I dunno. Guess it wasn't such a good idea. I just hear that the diner is super-full and the coach pax don't get to eat, then I hear that the diner is half full on a sold-out train. What's going on?

Hey, anything that tries to improve the quality and/or efficiency of the diner is a worthy suggestion in my book. Unlike so many other aspects of the Amtrak equation the diner should be relatively easy to change. Try a new idea on one route, maybe even just one train, and see if it takes off. No need to get approval from Union Pacific or anyone else.

I agree, new ideas are always worthy of considering. That doesn't mean that they always will work or make sense, but not thinking and dreaming at least a bit, means nothing changes.

And there are cases of Amtrak trying something on just one route. For example the Pacific Parlour Car. Sadly neither the funding, nor additional cars, for other routes was ever found.

They also tried something new with the Empire Builder several years ago un David Gunn. That experiment worked very well too and ridership soared. Small parts of what was tried on the builder have now been expanded to a few other routes. Unfortunately, a major expansion of those ideas is going to require funding that for now isn't forthcoming from Congress.

Just do what you can to reduce costs and improve quality. Maybe Amtrak should re-outsource from Aramark to an actual restaurant chain that knows how to secure and prepare fresh food for a change.

Aramark is a step up from the last caterer; a considerable step up. And the menus are being planned by world class chefs. In fact, some were in DC (and other cities) for NTD showing off the very recipes that are used to prepare the food you get on the trains.

And I know of no restaurant chains that could possibly handle the volume demanded by Amtrak each day, much less do it at a better price than what Amtrak is currently being charged by Aramark. Again, I appreciate the thinking out of the box, but I don't see how they could possibly do it cheaper. Unless of course we're going to start talking McDonalds type food.