The California High-Speed Rail Authority has published an Operations and Peer Review document (ht Caltrain-HSR Compatibility blog). The document envisions operational procedures in the proposed CA High-Speed rail project.
The “Peer Review” is truly depressing. The inescapable conclusion is that this is high-speed rail as envisioned by Amtrak foamers, ignorant of global industry best-practices.
If you read the document, pay particular attention to Table 11: Required Manpower Staffing – Transportation Operations. Labor costs make up a huge chunk of the operational expense of running a passenger railroad. Thus, rail operators who care about operating costs want to minimize manpower overhead as much as possible.
And yet, look at how much staff will be riding on trains in revenue service: two conductors, “Special Services” attendants, and two ticket punchers. Even the non-revenue trains require an on-board conductor. It is just as bad at the stations: the plan envisions ticket sellers, and possibly baggage porters and TSA security.
This level of staffing is typical of Amtrak-style operations, which are notorious for low labor productivity. It makes one wonder how this thing is supposed to achieve operational profitability.
Great post–thanks for shedding some light on this. Kind of makes me want to pull my hair out.
What is the counterargument defending the need for the manpower? My guesses are some combo of a) desire to provide a high service/luxury experience–you know, the sepia-toned nostalgia for when rail = cosmopolitanism, b) inflating the number of jobs the project will create, c) reducing the capital costs (and overall project price tag) by avoiding automated ticketing, or other automated systems.
But all there any really legit reasons why they would plan for that kind of labor? Because in addition to being total speculation, the above are each shortsighted in obvious ways.
Two-person train crews (engineer + conductor) are common on all North American railroads, including the freight operators. Even in the case of the Montana Rail Link, which has done away with the conductor position, trains still run with two-person train crews- an engineer and an “assistant engineer.” The presence of conductors on non-revenue HSRA trains would be on par with the rest of the North American railroad industry.
As far as the revenue labour loads, those are well above what Amtrak (who you so deride for over-staffing their trains) runs. On board Amtrak trains, there’s typically a three-man train crew- Conductor, Asst. Conductor and Engineer. They handle ticket-checking duties. On-board services staff vary with the level of service provided by the train, but on the California corridor services (the San Joaquins, Capitol Corridor and Pacific Surfliner) there’s only one Cafe Car attendant. Doesn’t sound excessive to me, nor do I think CAHSR should run with more crew than the San Joaquins do on the same route unless there’s a very good reason.
And at stations- are you sure those aren’t just staff requirements for large stations? Because at major city stations, I’d certainly expect there to be ticket sellers, baggage handlers, etc. At smaller stations en route, there’s no reason that they can’t be unstaffed, with naught but an automated machine standing there selling tickets.
High-speed rail is not a freight railroad, and has different needs: for one, it doesn’t have the exorbitant fuel costs of a large freight train, which make staffing levels a less pressing question. The waste that comes from adhering to North American railroading practices is much more pronounced on passenger trains.
Best industry practice for HSR is three people per train: one engineer, one conductor, and one person going through the train with a cart selling food. Cafe cars are a waste of space: at the high predicted ridership of CAHSR, they reduce capacity to the point that more trains are needed, raising operating costs.
[...] of authority has attracted both radical leftists and right-wingers: the complaints about train overstaffing and government incompetence appeal to conservatives and libertarians, while the unfavorable [...]
[...] years ago, when this blog criticized the CHSRA for its Amtrak-style practices, it was meant mainly as a joke. Who knew they would actually go out and hire Amtrak’s Chief [...]