gokeefe wrote:Agreed that this should be changed. I'm just stumped at the thought of Worcester still having a manned ticket booth after all these years. There are stations on the Downeaster with far greater ridership which have never had anything more than a Quik-Trak machine.
I would imagine that it is in fact due to the need for checked baggage but it is still a jaw dropping expense nonetheless. I remember Kansas City Union Station having a very similar arrangements but at least there you had more than just "one a day each way".
I think one fact that is illustrated here is the absurdity of current service levels in this market. It's obvious that Worcester should have more service and that it could be supported on a variety of corridors and routes going through the area.
Can you quantify this expense before calling it "jaw dropping"? There are a lot of Amshacks out in podunk little outposts of lesser ridership that are staffed as well as costing Amtrak 100% of the utility bills, and those don't have the economy of scale that comes with sharing space at a Regional Transit Authority's HQ building and busy MBTA terminal. If the cost were so onerous, the position would've been cut like so many others. Springfield's lost a lot of staff over the years because of need to cut costs. Worcester hasn't. Is it a testable theory that maybe the expense is not so "jaw dropping"? Or that the building owners Worcester Redevelopment Authority are possibly underwriting some of that cost?
At any rate, if the Inlands are still on the planning front-burner as they appear to be, they certainly aren't going to get rid of the agent now. They won't get it back when they need it if they make the purely short-term decision, "jaw dropping" savings or not. They'll keep the placeholder for the future even if Amtrak has to hit up the state with a tin cup to keep the tix window open. An ask it does not appear they're are making at this very moment.