This is a general opinion as far as I can see, but will this philosophy be applied to the maximum degree, given that we are a large company with many segments and not all of them are revenue-makers, but we all know that these parts provide the necessary support for the parts that do make money directly. Are people in parts of the company that don’t generate income directly in more danger?
6 replies (most recent on top)
To answer the original question: Yes, those involved in parts of the company that do not directly make money are far more likely to be cut and have their job outsourced to an exterior vendor.
That means: IT, any kind of mechanic, track/signal/structures maintanance, bridge inspections, potentially track inspections, any kind of design engineer, construction managers, marketing.... If it can be done by someone outside UP, it does not matter really how much it costs, because that receipt is billed as a capital cost.
You are indeed only looked at as a tractor, desk, or engine; if they could fire all of us and replace us with a bunch of vendors where the C-suite was getting direct billed for the costs and getting direct deposits from customers they would gladly do it.
Therefore, it does not hit the operating budget, which makes the operating ratio go down, and some guy in NYC writes a blurb on how the OR is improving, stock value goes up, and the board members along with the C suite have higher value stocks. Then, these same people trigger another share buyback plan, borrow money on UP's credit line, and buy stock from themselves.
As a management level employee, I understand why unionized employees don't like any fresh college graduates in the field. This is because these people add very little value to the processes they oversee. However, in a virtuous system, these fresh faces would have slots for them back in the office where their engineering or financial degree is truly required and they would plow that field knowledge into office positions that require said knowledge but cannot be accomplished by unionized employees. Down the road, these same people would return to the field and have a well rounded view of the entire organization which does, frankly, require a proper university degree.
Unfortunately, once you demolish a corporation's professional staff, then there is no place for a manager of blank to go where his or her degree is really needed. At which point, he or she does indeed become an appendage in the field. At which point, the only leadership you have are either foremen, or the C-Suite, with a real gap in well rounded individuals between the two levels. There are at least two railroads I can think of that have that problem and UPRR is boldly joining their ranks.
This is affecting transportation also.
If thats the case, every department but transportation is an expense not a money maker. Guess everyone but them are screwed....
Its easy to be the axeman when everyone is already beat down after years of poor leaderahip. Not saying that is a excuse to lay down on the job, but the culture was pretty broken
Right foremens fg1s managers mops just sit in nice suv pick ups and drive around and sit behind a desk
I still see them leaving a lot of waste, MYOs, MTOs, and MOPs are absolutely useless. Instead of going after the crafts that actually move freight or repair locos and cars, how about cutting off all lower management? Much more return on investment from a welder or trainman than a local manager.