HAMDEN, Conn. — The union official who represents Amtrak engineers has taken exception to a claim by Metropolitan Transportation Authority CEO Janno Lieber that Amtrak “feared the competition” when it withdrew support for proposed Metro-North service between New York City and Albany, N.Y.
“The issue is not about competition,” wrote Patrick W. Darcy Jr., general chairman for the Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers and Trainmen, Amtrak General Committee of Adjustment, in a statement to Trains. He represents more than 1,500 Amtrak engineers, including those based out of Division 752 in Albany. “It is about statutory authority and mandatory labor protections, which have been ignored by the MTA and Metro-North from the onset.”
Lieber’s comment came during a podcast earlier this month rom public broadcaster WCNY in which he said the MTA remained interested in extending Metro-North service to Albany [see “Amtrak fear of competition may have torpedoed …,” Trains.com, Feb. 5, 2026]. The idea was proposed last October when Amtrak reduced service between New York and Albany because of the East River Tunnel Rehabilitation Project [see “Amtrak, Metro-North to provide …,”Trains.com, Oct. 20, 2025].
But when New York Gov. Kathy Hochul announced in January that Amtrak had agreed to restore all New York City-Albany service as of March, her statement also said Amtrak indicated it “will no longer sanction” the Metro-North operation. [See “Amtrak to restore full Empire Service …,” Trains.com Jan. 27, 2026]. That led to Lieber’s comments, which included a statement that “a lot of bureaucratic stuff” would need to be overcome for Metro-North to serve Albany, “but there’s nothing to stop it from happening promptly if all the political forces agree.”
Darcy strongly disagreed, saying, “That assertion is legally incorrect for many reasons.” He cited federal law establishing Amtrak as the only authorized entity for national intercity rail service, as well as the statute addressing replacement intercity service. It requires conditions including priority hiring for affected employees, negotiation of pay, rules, and working conditions, and binding arbitration if the sides cannot reach agreement.
“These are not simply ‘bureaucratic issues,’” Darcy writes. “They are explicit congressional requirements enacted to prevent displacement of federally protected rail labor when intercity passenger rail service is transferred from Amtrak to another entity.” He also notes that state law limits Metro-North to commuter service within a 12-county district including New York’s five boroughs. On the route in question, the district’s northern boundary is in Dutchess County, which includes Poughkeepsie.
Darcy writes that Lieber’s “lack of understanding, or knowledge” of the laws involved “should be troubling,” and that Darcy’s office included him in three separate emails “that clearly explained and outlined the applicable labor protective statutes.”
Rather than being about competition, Darcy writes, the matter is one of “is about a public entity attempting to expand beyond its defined statutory limits, infringe upon the rights of another work group with no regard to labor, and its ignorance over laws which were repeatedly explained and outlined from the onset.” He calls Lieber’s statement “ill-advised, unsubstantiated, fabricated testimony.”
Darcy’s full statement is available here.
— To report news or errors, contact trainsnewswire@firecrown.com.
