Refused Red Cap boarding because I'm not old or disabled

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.
Status
Not open for further replies.
Look at Southwest Airlines. They have open seating, you don't see cabin crew block off rows of seats for families, or assign seat numbers at the gate at their own whim. You either give everyone assigned seats, or no one. Forcing people boarding from Chicago into seats decided by attendant, but letting passengers boarding one station down to pick their own seats is nonsense.
I think the South West model is a total disaster. It has the worst features of Amtraks open-seating, and reserved seating used in other transport.

First of all, it is not really open-seating. It starts with the business-select group, then the upgraded boarding group, then the early check-in group. These tiers all cost more money. Then "families". Then in order that everyone did the normal check in.

So many people try to game the system that its far, far worse then amtrak. I've seen groups of 9-10 with ONE child, hoping to jump to the front of the line. I've seen groups with ONE person pay for priority boarding that hold seats until the rest show up. Or they do the "puffy jacket", or "fake sleeping" tricks you see on trains. or the person who jumps the line, and pretends to be confused, or convenient lack of english.

Each airport handles this mess differently. Some super strict, some are total madness. It sucks for me, as I have 6 kids. On our last trip, they told us. Only kids under six, with a parent, can board early. So the 4 siblings that were over 6 had to board seperatly, and none of them sat together. We weren't willing to do the dirty tricks above.

Amtraks systems, however, its simple. If sitting together is important, show up early, try to board at a terminus, and use a redcap when possible.
Southwest is supposedly getting stricter about priority boarding for younger children. One parent for one child. That may not stop seat saving, which they've publicly punted on. They say there's no specific policy, although I suppose anyone claiming to save seats for nonexistent group members to have a bunch of seats won't go well. It of course won't work if a flight is nearly full.
 
Best compromise approach I've seen is on a recent CZ. Within each car, singles to the front half, pairs to the rear half. No further seat assignment.
I saw the same sort of thing on the EB on one occasion. I being a single traveler sat in the proper section, while several single travelers spread over two or three seats each in the section for groups. This was in Seattle, and at the next stop, Edmonds, a family of four got on and found no room in the sections reserved for groups, so they had to find seats in the section for singles. The car attendant asked several people to move to accomodate them. None did, so she ordered me to move out of my window seat. No asking about it. Instead of making the singles in the section for groups move. :angry: Then she promised to find me a window seat and made no effort to do so. Finally the conductor made me take an aisle seat. When I complained to the car attendant, she huffily told me I could have a window seat at Spokane. When she knew darned well I was getting off there. :angry:
If that happened to me, I would be livid, and probably have to swallow my anger, to avoid being ejected from the train....once I calmed down, and accepted my misfortune, I would write a very detailed and polite letter to the Company, and see what response I got. If they did not satisfy my expectations, I would probably think long and hard about trying their service again.

Writing this, I am reminded of that great picture "The Out of Towner's" (the original version with Jack Lemmon), and I have to smile at his constantly getting dissed and demanding the name of the offender to write it down and report... :)
 
Honestly in their position I would be wondering what you wanted from the redcap service. It doesn't sound like you had a bag that you couldn't handle yourself or needed to be checked in.
I have a friend who has severe rheumatoid arthritis, for more than 15 years now. Thanks to modern medicine, she gets regular treatments for it which enable her to lead a largely independent and functional life. Still, on her best days she can walk without assistance but it gets tiring after awhile. On her so-so days, she needs a cane; on her bad days, she really needs a wheelchair for anything other than the trip from the car to the door of a building; and on her worst days, she's flat on her back.

If she was having a good day and presented herself to the Red Cap station with no assistive device and just a purse or beach bag (and, to be evenhanded about the example, wasn't 5'7" on tiptoes, was a few years younger, and perhaps, wasn't female) in what universe would the response from the attendant be acceptable? She wouldn't be able to walk the distance from the new Metropolitan Lounge to a train on the far end of the station with the uppermost track numbers.

The point being, once again, that not all disabilities are visible and that is why any pre-qualifiers are verboten when it comes to customer service, particularly when it may relate to the Americans With Disabilities Act. The actions of the attendant show an incredible lack of awareness and training on such issues. This is what makes the example so outrageous. Anyone presenting with a desire for assistance should be presumed to have need of that assistance. Even if it's a gangly teenager who appears to be walking and carrying nothing more than a backpack and using their iPhone just fine (bearing in mind that even teenagers are afflicted with conditions like arthritis).
 
Honestly in their position I would be wondering what you wanted from the redcap service. It doesn't sound like you had a bag that you couldn't handle yourself or needed to be checked in.
I have a friend who has severe rheumatoid arthritis, for more than 15 years now. Thanks to modern medicine, she gets regular treatments for it which enable her to lead a largely independent and functional life. Still, on her best days she can walk without assistance but it gets tiring after awhile. On her so-so days, she needs a cane; on her bad days, she really needs a wheelchair for anything other than the trip from the car to the door of a building; and on her worst days, she's flat on her back.

If she was having a good day and presented herself to the Red Cap station with no assistive device and just a purse or beach bag (and, to be evenhanded about the example, wasn't 5'7" on tiptoes, was a few years younger, and perhaps, wasn't female) in what universe would the response from the attendant be acceptable? She wouldn't be able to walk the distance from the new Metropolitan Lounge to a train on the far end of the station with the uppermost track numbers.

The point being, once again, that not all disabilities are visible and that is why any pre-qualifiers are verboten when it comes to customer service, particularly when it may relate to the Americans With Disabilities Act. The actions of the attendant show an incredible lack of awareness and training on such issues. This is what makes the example so outrageous. Anyone presenting with a desire for assistance should be presumed to have need of that assistance. Even if it's a gangly teenager who appears to be walking and carrying nothing more than a backpack and using their iPhone just fine (bearing in mind that even teenagers are afflicted with conditions like arthritis).
Yeah - I get that a rude response to a request for aid is unacceptable. However, I can't imagine that certain resources can be requested by anyone without question. If my six year old asks to use a fold-out wheelchair ramp just for the heck of it, do they assume there's a disability involved just because a request was made? A red cap's duties aren't simply to provide baggage service for the elderly or disabled, so asking for assistance isn't solely about the elderly or disabled. I personally don't get why someone otherwise capable of handling a small carry-on size piece through a station would want need baggage handling, but I now get that seeking a red cap can mean priority boarding.

If I needed any aid for a condition that wasn't apparent, I would say I have a disability where I need help. I've never heard of any kind of ADA guidelines where someone couldn't be asked if they had a disability that required assistance. Maybe it's unacceptable to ask what the specific disability is.
 
OK, I've declined using a red cap when I had an opportunity. I was under the impression that the reasons were for baggage handling and directions, but I didn't really understand that priority boarding could be requested.
That's one of the major reasons for requesting a red cap. It's still a free service. If the red cap wasn't assisting a customer, then he should have helped. I would have gone to customer service and demanded a red cap or asked them to take me to the train.
 
A quick look and I look like an average passenger. But I have two prosthetic legs but wear long pants that hide the fact. (not embarrassed just like to blend) Add a low light vision issue and Chicago platforms are dangerous for me. I have never had any issue or questions about Red Cap service.

Assigning seats in coach is based on the total trip seating....so at times you do not get to sit were you want.....when was the last time a airline had free form seating??
 
Assigning seats in coach is based on the total trip seating....so at times you do not get to sit were you want.....when was the last time a airline had free form seating??
Southwest Airlines does it that way. The passenger is assigned a boarding number at check in. There's a strong incentive to check in at the first opportunity to get the best number. People Express used to have that. In fact I understood that it was possible to pay on the plane after reserving by phone.

A lot of Amtrak routes only have open seating or start with open seating near the beginning of the route. There's also flexibility to move passengers during the trip.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Of course, SW also offers you the opportunity to pay extra to be in the first boarding group.
Several ways. Their highest fares are Business Select, which guarantees an A1-A15 boarding number. Then there's early bird check in, which really mean automatic check in. Even then, there can be a lot of people paying that such that one can still be in the second or even third boarding group. It used to be a real free for all back when you had to pick up a plastic boarding pass at the gate. And even then 1-30 was the first group and passengers didn't have to line up in order, just in the group.

Amtrak just seems to do it so many different ways. Open seating. Assigned car and you pick a seat at the origin station. Assigned seat at the origin station. Assigned seating during the middle. I've seen it where the conductor had a clipboard and my assigned seat was written down, as well as when the conductor looked at a diagram and wrote my name in.
 
Assigning seats in coach is based on the total trip seating....so at times you do not get to sit were you want.....when was the last time a airline had free form seating??
Southwest Airlines does it that way. The passenger is assigned a boarding number at check in. There's a strong incentive to check in at the first opportunity to get the best number.
Southwest Airlines doesn't make the extensive intermediate stops which Amtrak does; There are further much greater differences in passenger accommodation needs and requirements between train and plane (a train isn't just a plane with no wings). It is largely an apples to oranges comparison.
 
Assigning seats in coach is based on the total trip seating....so at times you do not get to sit were you want.....when was the last time a airline had free form seating??
Southwest Airlines does it that way. The passenger is assigned a boarding number at check in. There's a strong incentive to check in at the first opportunity to get the best number.
Southwest Airlines doesn't make the extensive intermediate stops which Amtrak does; There are further much greater differences in passenger accommodation needs and requirements between train and plane (a train isn't just a plane with no wings). It is largely an apples to oranges comparison.
I understand that, and several of my posts in this thread acknowledge that difference. In my experience on long-distance Amtrak trains I've always had a seat assignment before I boarded. In Seattle on the CS it was being assigned a car at the station, then a seat (seat number written on a seat check) from an attendant with a clipboard before boarding. I had to cancel, but I was going to take the CZ from Emeryville, where I understand passengers are given a car assignment, but then can choose seats. It's only later when the attendants start assigning seats or even adjusting the seating depending on needs.

However, regional trains or commuter trains generally operate on an open seating basis. Open seating with air travel is actually pretty rare but pretty common on trains.
 
As I understand it, Southwest's rationale for using open seating instead of assigned seating is that it enables them to board the plane faster (which means faster turnaround time between arrival and departure, which means more revenue per plane per day).

But speed of boarding is less of an issue for trains than for planes: Trains have multiple doors (so passengers don't have to board one by one in a single-file line) and wider aisles (so it's not totally impossible to walk past someone who's still putting their bags above their seat), and a train can start moving when passengers are boarded but not yet seated (so in an assigned-seating system, if you board at one end of the train but discover that your assigned seat is at the other end, that's not a problem).
 
As I understand it, Southwest's rationale for using open seating instead of assigned seating is that it enables them to board the plane faster (which means faster turnaround time between arrival and departure, which means more revenue per plane per day).

But speed of boarding is less of an issue for trains than for planes: Trains have multiple doors (so passengers don't have to board one by one in a single-file line) and wider aisles (so it's not totally impossible to walk past someone who's still putting their bags above their seat), and a train can start moving when passengers are boarded but not yet seated (so in an assigned-seating system, if you board at one end of the train but discover that your assigned seat is at the other end, that's not a problem).
The fastest way to board is to charge for carry-on sized luggage, but charge less for checked-in luggage. Even with assigned seating, I found that boarding a plane on Spirit was the fastest because there was hardly any use of the overhead bins. They absolutely enforce that anything that's not paid for (i.e. a "personal item") goes under the seat.

And it really depends with trains. Superliner cars have to be individually opened. When I've taken an LD train at a lightly used station, the boarding was solely through a single door for coach and a single door for sleepers. I know at major stations they might open multiple doors.
 
As I understand it, Southwest's rationale for using open seating instead of assigned seating is that it enables them to board the plane faster (which means faster turnaround time between arrival and departure, which means more revenue per plane per day).

But speed of boarding is less of an issue for trains than for planes: Trains have multiple doors (so passengers don't have to board one by one in a single-file line) and wider aisles (so it's not totally impossible to walk past someone who's still putting their bags above their seat), and a train can start moving when passengers are boarded but not yet seated (so in an assigned-seating system, if you board at one end of the train but discover that your assigned seat is at the other end, that's not a problem).
The fastest way to board is to charge for carry-on sized luggage, but charge less for checked-in luggage. Even with assigned seating, I found that boarding a plane on Spirit was the fastest because there was hardly any use of the overhead bins. They absolutely enforce that anything that's not paid for (i.e. a "personal item") goes under the seat.

And it really depends with trains. Superliner cars have to be individually opened. When I've taken an LD train at a lightly used station, the boarding was solely through a single door for coach and a single door for sleepers. I know at major stations they might open multiple doors.
Less luggage certainly helps. While I am very far from an expert in the area of airport operations, I would also question whether the Southwest model is actually the fastest way of loading a plane and even if it were, whether it really makes that much of a difference overall (too many other sources for delay or which just take time on the ground). If turning the plane quickly is so dependent on passenger boarding, seems like you'd have at least long-term plans for terminals to load from more than one door.

This thread seems to have derailed. Why am I not surprised?
The thread has not derailed; Rather, it has momentarily "lost contact with the rails". :)

Actually, while we are off on a bit of a tangent, the method of seat selection does have a bearing on the use (or need) for Red Cap services.
 
As I understand it, Southwest's rationale for using open seating instead of assigned seating is that it enables them to board the plane faster (which means faster turnaround time between arrival and departure, which means more revenue per plane per day).

But speed of boarding is less of an issue for trains than for planes: Trains have multiple doors (so passengers don't have to board one by one in a single-file line) and wider aisles (so it's not totally impossible to walk past someone who's still putting their bags above their seat), and a train can start moving when passengers are boarded but not yet seated (so in an assigned-seating system, if you board at one end of the train but discover that your assigned seat is at the other end, that's not a problem).
The fastest way to board is to charge for carry-on sized luggage, but charge less for checked-in luggage. Even with assigned seating, I found that boarding a plane on Spirit was the fastest because there was hardly any use of the overhead bins. They absolutely enforce that anything that's not paid for (i.e. a "personal item") goes under the seat.

And it really depends with trains. Superliner cars have to be individually opened. When I've taken an LD train at a lightly used station, the boarding was solely through a single door for coach and a single door for sleepers. I know at major stations they might open multiple doors.
Less luggage certainly helps. While I am very far from an expert in the area of airport operations, I would also question whether the Southwest model is actually the fastest way of loading a plane and even if it were, whether it really makes that much of a difference overall (too many other sources for delay or which just take time on the ground). If turning the plane quickly is so dependent on passenger boarding, seems like you'd have at least long-term plans for terminals to load from more than one door.
Some airports where passengers walk on the the tarmac bring out two sets of stairs/ramps and use one of the rear doors. This is more like how many trains do it by opening every door on one side. I wonder if they could also open the middle. I'm not sure if they actually board on both ends, but I'd think that exiting would be done using both ends.

o.jpg


And of course there's the A380 that loads/unloads from two levels. I just saw one a few days ago, and it was freaking huge.
 
The "Red Cap" has no way of knowing if you need assistance or not. Last summer, I was required by my doctors not to lift more that 10 pounds for several weeks. I had a train trip scheduled, so I took it, but took along my oldest granddaughter to manage the bags. It was all I could do to get up the stairs. By appearances, i looked healthy, except to those who knew me, so how would a Red Cap be able to judge your need or infer your capacity to tip. You can never judge anyone by their looks.
 
I had a Red Cap in Chicago ask me if I'd mind getting off the cart so an elderly lady could take my place. I did but also told him that I actually needed him. He thanked me & said he would return. He did & I tipped him more for being so considerate (I don't look disabled, but can't walk far at all)!!! I've also had some of the most rude Red Caps I've ever encountered, in Chicago!!!
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Some airports where passengers walk on the the tarmac bring out two sets of stairs/ramps and use one of the rear doors. This is more like how many trains do it by opening every door on one side. I wonder if they could also open the middle. I'm not sure if they actually board on both ends, but I'd think that exiting would be done using both ends.
I can personally verify that, at Burbank, Southwest does indeed both board and deplane using both doors. (The "middle" is impossible, as that's an over-wing exit window.) There probably aren't too many other airports on their route system that still use stairs instead of jetways.
 
To really load a passenger plane faster, the military method should be used. That is, board the rear seats first and move forward. Much more efficient as my Army relatives inform me.

Of course, that messes up all the first class/biz class/loyalty programs boarding first deal that the airlines use, so unlikely to be adopted except in emergencies.
 
Some airports where passengers walk on the the tarmac bring out two sets of stairs/ramps and use one of the rear doors. This is more like how many trains do it by opening every door on one side. I wonder if they could also open the middle. I'm not sure if they actually board on both ends, but I'd think that exiting would be done using both ends.
I can personally verify that, at Burbank, Southwest does indeed both board and deplane using both doors. (The "middle" is impossible, as that's an over-wing exit window.) There probably aren't too many other airports on their route system that still use stairs instead of jetways.
Long Beach. They might start flying to Kona in a few years.
 
It's pretty ordinary to see back and front exiting/boarding anywhere you deplane onto the tarmac. Lots of regional jets work that way -- Alaska/Horizon for example. Air NZ does it too.

I fly Southwest a lot, and their system works pretty well. Not as painless as flying an RJ or turboprop out of a small airport, but pretty close. Except on the rare occasions when I have a tight connection and 3 or 4 extra minutes might matter, I just head right to the back of the plane. Most people seem to freak out about sitting as close to the front as possible, so the back is the last place that fills up. Unless it's a full flight, I usually have at least an empty middle seat next to me.

Southwest's corporate attitude is great -- informal, friendly, but very direct when necessary. They work really well with infrequent flyers. No BS.

Amtrak could learn a lot from them.

I can personally verify that, at Burbank, Southwest does indeed both board and deplane using both doors. (The "middle" is impossible, as that's an over-wing exit window.) There probably aren't too many other airports on their route system that still use stairs instead of jetways.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top