VIA Rail

[crs1026]

I keep repeating myself, but even a European or Japanese railway company (or any airline, for that matter) would come up with boarding and detraining procedures which are not that different from those of VIA, when faced with the same infrastructure, just like VIA‘s procedures would closely resemble those of aforementioned railroads and airlines, if it had the luxury of using such purpose-built and customer-centric infrastructure…

And I keep repeating also - they might not be able to do better, but they would likely try harder to try to innovate rather than dismissing the matter as "it's the best we can do"

I appreciate just how constraining the environment is..... anybody who can figure out how to queue people conveniently in the Departures Concourse at Toronto Union deserves a Nobel Prize.... different things have been tried there over the years without any real success. However there are obvious things that would improve the process, such as better localised PA announcements and not using a gate that is tucked away around the corner in a back passageway. The staff were polite and organized, but the passengers had no idea what the plan was. Similarly, the method of shuttling Business Class passengers from lounge to gate is ineffective given the volumes of people along the way.... what starts as an organized line devolves.

When I took the Ocean recently out of Montreal, the agent who handed out dinner reservations was seated at a poorly signed desk that was neither in the Business Lounge nor at the gate. No announcement was made to tell passengers they should check in with that agent if they wanted a dinner booking. It was a case of guesswork and hide-and-seek.

The passenger only sees the chaos and not the root cause. I do think ViA needs to worry more about this even if the best solutions aren't possible.

- Paul

 

[Urban Sky]

I don‘t think anyone would disagree that as difficult as it is to change current boarding procedures, there certainly is room for improvement in providing information explaining them. The North American approach to rail/transit passenger information is generally subterranean…

 

[kEiThZ]

I‘m not stressing out over this, I‘m just seeing the danger that if this bid was selected that endless litigation would delay or even derail the project. However, if these conflicts of interest get recognized and lead to a different bid getting selected, I would be very happy…

It's not the US. Anybody suing would have to show real damage caused by illegal activity. That's actually really hard in this case. Air-rail integration and codeshare isn't illegal. Nor is it illegal for Porter customers to simply prefer rail for Corridor travel.

 

[Urban Sky]

It's not the US. Anybody suing would have to show real damage caused by illegal activity. That's actually really hard in this case. Air-rail integration and codeshare isn't illegal. Nor is it illegal for Porter customers to simply prefer rail for Corridor travel.

I‘m not that familiar with competitive (or any) law in this country, but considering how anxious some people here are about PP cancelling HFR, the enthusiasm for an alliance with ex-monopolist AC which could shut down out and harm private competitors like Porter and WestJet strikes me as rather surprising…

 

[kEiThZ]

I‘m not that familiar with competitive (or any) law in this country, but considering how anxious some people here are about PP cancelling HFR, the enthusiasm for an alliance with ex-monopolist AC which could shut down out and harm private competitors like Porter and WestJet strikes me as rather surprising…

To be clear, it's not they I'm enthusiastic for Cadence . I just think it probably helps the case that the airline that probably lobbied most against rail in the Corridor (before Porter) is getting onboard. And it's mostly driven by real infrastructure and HR constraints they face. It's a rather unique alignment.

The real threat to this project, is probably Porter at this point. It's the airline that stands to lose the most.

As for the political threat, I still think PP may cancel this project. But at least airline lobbying will be split on this, instead of 100% opposed to rail.