Richard Anderson replacing Wick Moorman as Amtrak CEO

[Trogdor]

One of my biggest problems is that Amtrak can't have the luxury of operating as a utility. It needs to operate as a business....

Some parts of the status quo I actually like, for instance free bags and unassigned seats. Others, like the drab Amfleets I've come to find dull.

The fact is is that if Richard Anderson is being brought in to rip the soul out of Amtrak, that's something I take issue with. I used to think a rail advocate (and CNW alumnus) from Iowa was nuts. Now I think he's the Bernie Sanders of rail advocates.

Personally, I'm a bit of a socialist to the point I'd be happy to see a nationalized railway system, but that's another deal.

To get to the point: Amtrak is a public service. While it should be a proper steward of federal funds, this notion that Amtrak should be profitable erks me.

NO form of transportation in America is profitable.

But none of that has anything to do with Richard Anderson, his airline background, or anything else. The issues you cite have been in existence for 47 years (and long before that, as well).

I will also note that "run like a business" doesn't have to mean "profitable."

As far as being a proper steward of public money, I'd question whether that really describes Amtrak's operation of recent years. There's been a lot of wheel-spinning inside the company in the past (and even still today), lots of musical chairs, reorgs for the sake of reorgs. Reorging the reorgs before the first reorg was even finished (these are actual things that happened when I worked there).

This is stuff that passengers, railfans, rail advocates, etc. don't see, but causes a lot of problems that can extend to how the trains operate.

These are the things I am hopeful that an experienced and successful executive can fix. And that executive has to come from outside of Amtrak. They won't come from another railroad (unless they're retired and basically doing it as a short-term thing to do, like Wick) because most other railroad executives won't touch that job with a ten-foot pole (and even if they did, then folks on here would be complaining about how this "freight guy" doesn't understand how passengers work; if they came from the transit industry, then folks would be complaining about how this "transit guy" doesn't understand how long-distance trains work).

Amtrak needs to learn how to operate like a proper company.

 

[PRR 60]

I think everyone here can agree that Richard Anderson is trying to make Amtrak profitable at all costs, including ailenating the company's best customers, and in the end doing more harm than good.

Sent from my Moto Z2 Play using Amtrak Forum mobile app

Put me in the "I do not agree" column.

You think he has some redeeming qualities?
Sent from my Moto Z2 Play using Amtrak Forum mobile app

I sure do. He has the guts to question and reject the "that's the way we have always done it" mentality that is legendary at Amtrak. He wants to drag Amtrak kicking and screaming into the 21st century. Yes, he is the steward of federal funding, and he seems to be taking that responsibility seriously.

 

[AmtrakBlue]

^^ I agree with the disagreers.

Sent from my iPhone using Amtrak Forum

 

[Caesar La Rock]

I too disagree. Maintaining a status quo that hasn't worked for long period of time in transportation is insane. Especially in today's changing world where more people are depending on transportation now then ever before. I'm also pretty sure Richard Anderson has heard all of the excuses as to why he shouldn't run Amtrak. Nothing new being said here.

 

[keelhauled]

Also disagree. Amtrak, fundamentally, is a passenger transportation company. It happens that it transports passengers in trains, but that doesn't mean it should be run in the same vein as railroads from days gone by. And in many regards other modes of transportation (cough, airlines, cough) outclass Amtrak, such as but certainly not limited to consistency of service, reliability, and availability. There are of course other areas Amtrak has the advantage in, and I think if Anderson is able to transcribe the best characteristics of air travel onto rail service he will have elevated Amtrak into an exceptional transport provider when right now it is generally adequate.

I don't mean to say that Amtrak is doing a universally poor job, because I use it and generally enjoy it. But what I can generally say about my travel is that I choose the train because the positives (downtown access, price, most of the on board hard product, sometimes travel time) outweigh the negatives (inconsistent service from employees, timekeeping challenges, aging equipment). If those are addressed, and I think Anderson's airline background where consistency is holy will help, then I think Amtrak will be a competitive option for a larger part of the overall travel market.

 

[jebr]

I'm honestly somewhat excited to see what R. Anderson has up his sleeve. There's certainly a number of negative changes (the change in the refund policy being a particular sore point for me) but there's also some real positive changes (a 33% off sale that includes the LD trains has been unheard of in my time traveling Amtrak, especially since it was essentially any train with Saver fares.) From a fare management standpoint, if removing/reducing the everyday discounts means that Amtrak can offer semi-regular deeply discounted sales, I think that's a tradeoff worth making. Assigned seating would be amazing; even though I'm not terribly picky about a seat, being able to select a roomette online would be nice and, frankly, I wouldn't mind knowing exactly where I was seated when buying my ticket.

I don't think R. Anderson will be 100% positive for Amtrak, but I think his out-of-the-box thinking and willingness to rock the boat in order to try and push things forward is sorely needed at Amtrak. There's generally been too many CEOs lately that haven't really wanted to change the status quo, and I think there's a need to shake the status quo up a bit and see what sticks.

 

[cpotisch]

I think everyone here can agree that Richard Anderson is trying to make Amtrak profitable at all costs, including ailenating the company's best customers, and in the end doing more harm than good.

Sent from my Moto Z2 Play using Amtrak Forum mobile app

If I were you I'd be careful about saying that everyone agrees with one of your opinions. Done that a couple times on this forum and gotten torn apart for it. Just a tip.

 

[Northeastern292]

I think everyone here can agree that Richard Anderson is trying to make Amtrak profitable at all costs, including ailenating the company's best customers, and in the end doing more harm than good.

Sent from my Moto Z2 Play using Amtrak Forum mobile app

If I were you I'd be careful about saying that everyone agrees with one of your opinions. Done that a couple times on this forum and gotten torn apart for it. Just a tip.

Fair enough.
Sent from my Moto Z2 Play using Amtrak Forum mobile app

 

[Thirdrail7]

This thread is fascinating. A man that hasn't even been on the job for a full year or on his own for six months is being held up as a get thing done savior and a railroad killer in the same thread.

That being said

I think everyone here can agree that Richard Anderson is trying to make Amtrak profitable at all costs, including ailenating the company's best customers, and in the end doing more harm than good.

Sent from my Moto Z2 Play using Amtrak Forum mobile app

This is bizarre at best and alarmist. I'm not sure where you get these things from and some of the things you have stated have little to do with Mr. Anderson. Along those lines, let's address these:

. He has the guts to question and reject the "that's the way we have always done it" mentality that is legendary at Amtrak. He wants to drag Amtrak kicking and screaming into the 21st century. Yes, he is the steward of federal funding, and he seems to be taking that responsibility seriously.

I don't think R. Anderson will be 100% positive for Amtrak, but I think his out-of-the-box thinking and willingness to rock the boat in order to try and push things forward is sorely needed at Amtrak. There's generally been too many CEOs lately that haven't really wanted to change the status quo, and I think there's a need to shake the status quo up a bit and see what sticks.

Can you cite some examples of what Mr. Anderson has done vs what was already, planned, underway well before he arrived or in the process of ramping up upon his arrival? What are some of these "rejecting the way its already been done," "outside of the box" thoughts and willingness to rock the boat initiatives that are being driven by Mr. Anderson vs a continuation or ramping up version of things (as an example) Mr. Stadtler (who is still around for those of you who didn't know) has been pushing and implementing.

After all, if you are to believe Amtrak, they had another fiscal year(17) of record ridership, record revenue and came within a (relative) stone's throw of covering their operating expenses from farebox....all without Mr. Anderson doing a thing.

The turnaround had begun long before he arrived.

I'll ask the same for those who think Mr. Anderson is "driving away or chipping away" at Amtrak's base. Sure, he is in the position to take action if he think something is dramatically wrong, but he is still learning, trying and attempting to follow the law that is PRIIA. I would ask how much of this is driven by Mr. Anderson versus him not stopping initiatives that were already contemplated, planned and were awaiting execution.

Besides, most of the bad press come from people leaking information that was taken out of context, leading to WHOA IS ME, AALLL THE PRIVATE CARS AND CHARTERS ARE DOOOOOOOOOOMED type of threads.

Give the man a chance to actually DO something because remember, action speaks louder than words and you'll never know how someone performed until they leave. It may take YEARS to see how Mr. Anderson performed.

 

[Thirdrail7]

But none of that has anything to do with Richard Anderson, his airline background, or anything else. The issues you cite have been in existence for 47 years (and long before that, as well).

I will also note that "run like a business" doesn't have to mean "profitable."

As far as being a proper steward of public money, I'd question whether that really describes Amtrak's operation of recent years. There's been a lot of wheel-spinning inside the company in the past (and even still today), lots of musical chairs, reorgs for the sake of reorgs. Reorging the reorgs before the first reorg was even finished (these are actual things that happened when I worked there).

This is stuff that passengers, railfans, rail advocates, etc. don't see, but causes a lot of problems that can extend to how the trains operate.

These are the things I am hopeful that an experienced and successful executive can fix. And that executive has to come from outside of Amtrak. They won't come from another railroad (unless they're retired and basically doing it as a short-term thing to do, like Wick) because most other railroad executives won't touch that job with a ten-foot pole (and even if they did, then folks on here would be complaining about how this "freight guy" doesn't understand how passengers work; if they came from the transit industry, then folks would be complaining about how this "transit guy" doesn't understand how long-distance trains work).

Amtrak needs to learn how to operate like a proper company.

This is an interesting statement since for the last several years, Amtrak has increased ridership and narrowed the gap between operating expenses and losses...year, after year, after year.

While there is definitely fat, (there always is) and considering that Amtrak didn't CUT any routes, it seems that they have been operating much better since their losses have decreased and ridership has increased. If they had more equipment or the equipment they had was a bit more reliable (hopefully driving down expenses and maintenance costs,) that gap may have narrowed even more since you could grow your reach.

THAT is what I';m waiting to see from our new CEO. It is easier to shut things down than build things up. I want to see continued growth. How will they continue to expand ridership and attract new riders, markets while maintaining existing riders.

As for reorgs, there were 5 in the last 36 months, and three were in the last 18 months when the new regime took over.

 

[jis]

I agree with you Thirdrail, and pretty completely so.

What I said in response to you back in http://discuss.amtraktrains.com/index.php?/topic/70892-richard-anderson-replacing-wick-moorman-as-amtrak-ceo/?p=746663still holds. Some of the things that we are hearing tends to confirm my feeling that he is indeed focusing on things where he can make a huge difference rather than nibbling at the peripheries. If any thing, the utter consternation among the railfans strongly suggests that too.

But the jury is still out, and we'll see how it goes.

As for whether he is inside or outside the box, I just keep seeing visions of Schoredinger's Cat ... errr ... Anderson

Meanwhile the chicken little "sky is falling" shows carries on merrily!

 

[TiBike]

If all Anderson is doing is figuring out who in the company knows his/her stuff, and then let's them get on with it, he's doing his job well. Doesn't matter if it was his idea, or if he even understands it. Identifying and empowering talent is on the short list of genuine CEO responsibilities.

Another is clearly defining both the mission and those things that are irrelevant to it. He's done that:

"We must narrow our focus to running a great core railroad: safe, on time, clean cars, friendly service and great customer-facing technology". And he's put "a safe and reliable schedule" at the top of the list.

I agree, there's little in the way of actual accomplishments that can be directly credited to Anderson. But what he's saying, particularly the safe, clean, on time trains bit, is what I'm wishing for and I'm allowing myself enough optimism to start looking forward to seeing it.

 

[Northeastern292]

I guess, but I just worry that Amtrak will turn into another VIA Rail Canada.

Sent from my Moto Z2 Play using Amtrak Forum mobile app

 

[Seaboard92]

I guess, but I just worry that Amtrak will turn into another VIA Rail Canada.

Sent from my Moto Z2 Play using Amtrak Forum mobile app

In what regard VIA Rail to be honest is pretty damned good. Yes the equipment is old but the customer service is out of this world. And yes the frequencies suck to really suck in winter. But again you are getting a far superior hard product and soft product.

 

[cpotisch]

I guess, but I just worry that Amtrak will turn into another VIA Rail Canada.

Sent from my Moto Z2 Play using Amtrak Forum mobile app

In what regard VIA Rail to be honest is pretty damned good. Yes the equipment is old but the customer service is out of this world. And yes the frequencies suck to really suck in winter. But again you are getting a far superior hard product and soft product.

Yeah, VIA is vastly superior to Amtrak. The service, the food, the amenities all blow Amtrak out of the water. It’s like comparing a classic Ferrari to a beat up taxi. They’re not even in the same league.

 

[Northeastern292]

I guess, but I just worry that Amtrak will turn into another VIA Rail Canada.

Sent from my Moto Z2 Play using Amtrak Forum mobile app

In what regard VIA Rail to be honest is pretty damned good. Yes the equipment is old but the customer service is out of this world. And yes the frequencies suck to really suck in winter. But again you are getting a far superior hard product and soft product.

A fair argument. When I rode the Ocean back in 2015, the food was well prepared and despite the shortcomings of the Renaissance cars, it was a wonderful ride both ways. The Park car used that October had a clean but a tired interior.
I guess my concerns is getting rid of PV's, charters, etc will impede on Amtrak being able to handle service changes in general. Outside of it's hubs, Amtrak's long distance trains are like the Wild West- a good example is with the Empire Builder with Amtrak canceling the train between Thursday and Saturday. What Amtrak should do is at least run it between MSP and CHI (but when I just checked apparently the entire route will be affected by the storm).

Which begs the question: when did Amtrak stop being an all-weather railroad?

Sent from my Moto Z2 Play using Amtrak Forum mobile app

 

[Northeastern292]

I guess, but I just worry that Amtrak will turn into another VIA Rail Canada.

Sent from my Moto Z2 Play using Amtrak Forum mobile app

In what regard VIA Rail to be honest is pretty damned good. Yes the equipment is old but the customer service is out of this world. And yes the frequencies suck to really suck in winter. But again you are getting a far superior hard product and soft product.

Yeah, VIA vs Amtrak is sort of like a Ferrari vs a Taxi. They’re not even in the same league.

I won't lie and I'll admit that I've fallen in love with the late British Rail as of recent. Dull product, but it went just about everywhere.*
*Not counting the Beeching Axe, of course.

Sent from my Moto Z2 Play using Amtrak Forum mobile app

 

[Seaboard92]

I guess, but I just worry that Amtrak will turn into another VIA Rail Canada.

Sent from my Moto Z2 Play using Amtrak Forum mobile app

In what regard VIA Rail to be honest is pretty damned good. Yes the equipment is old but the customer service is out of this world. And yes the frequencies suck to really suck in winter. But again you are getting a far superior hard product and soft product.

A fair argument. When I rode the Ocean back in 2015, the food was well prepared and despite the shortcomings of the Renaissance cars, it was a wonderful ride both ways. The Park car used that October had a clean but a tired interior.
I guess my concerns is getting rid of PV's, charters, etc will impede on Amtrak being able to handle service changes in general. Outside of it's hubs, Amtrak's long distance trains are like the Wild West- a good example is with the Empire Builder with Amtrak canceling the train between Thursday and Saturday. What Amtrak should do is at least run it between MSP and CHI (but when I just checked apparently the entire route will be affected by the storm).

Which begs the question: when did Amtrak stop being an all-weather railroad?

Sent from my Moto Z2 Play using Amtrak Forum mobile app

VIA is also doing something Amtrak isn't doing and rebuilding their fleet and renovating. They just announced that today 25 more cars will be rebuilt. Even the pre prepared Ocean good beats the stuff on Amtrak. Which for the most case is pre prepared.

Don't get me started on charters and PVs as if you remember this is my career field. And I have plenty of data to prove its valuable.

 

[Northeastern292]

I guess, but I just worry that Amtrak will turn into another VIA Rail Canada.

Sent from my Moto Z2 Play using Amtrak Forum mobile app

In what regard VIA Rail to be honest is pretty damned good. Yes the equipment is old but the customer service is out of this world. And yes the frequencies suck to really suck in winter. But again you are getting a far superior hard product and soft product.

A fair argument. When I rode the Ocean back in 2015, the food was well prepared and despite the shortcomings of the Renaissance cars, it was a wonderful ride both ways. The Park car used that October had a clean but a tired interior.
I guess my concerns is getting rid of PV's, charters, etc will impede on Amtrak being able to handle service changes in general. Outside of it's hubs, Amtrak's long distance trains are like the Wild West- a good example is with the Empire Builder with Amtrak canceling the train between Thursday and Saturday. What Amtrak should do is at least run it between MSP and CHI (but when I just checked apparently the entire route will be affected by the storm).

Which begs the question: when did Amtrak stop being an all-weather railroad?

Sent from my Moto Z2 Play using Amtrak Forum mobile app

VIA is also doing something Amtrak isn't doing and rebuilding their fleet and renovating. They just announced that today 25 more cars will be rebuilt. Even the pre prepared Ocean good beats the stuff on Amtrak. Which for the most case is pre prepared.
Don't get me started on charters and PVs as if you remember this is my career field. And I have plenty of data to prove its valuable.

I remember!
Sent from my Moto Z2 Play using Amtrak Forum mobile app

 

[tricia]

Which begs the question: when did Amtrak stop being an all-weather railroad?

Several threads related to service cancellations this past winter have alluded to this. Maybe needs its own thread....

My sense is that Amtrak has been cancelling trains in recent months in weather conditions that wouldn't have caused cancellations in years past. I have zero statistics to back that up, but the anecdotal evidence seems strong.

Anyone here care to comment, either on whether this is happening, and/or why?

 

[crescent-zephyr]

Didn't the Canadian have quite the issue this winter with passengers being stranded? I wonder if that raised some red flags.

 

[Trogdor]

Drifting off-topic (all-weather railroad), but there are a number of reasons Amtrak may be more willing to cancel.

1) Severity of storms that can be better predicted in advance (yes, sometimes the predictions are wrong). In the past, even if weather modeling knew it was going to snow, they might not have known how much (granted, we still don't "know" but have better computer modeling to provide an estimate). Back then, the policy was to run it, and hope for the best.

1a) It's also possible that the storms in question are more severe than normal for recent times.

2) Despite the popular belief that railroading is "all-weather," severe weather does do a number on the operation. It makes trains very late, puts crews out of place, and can take a few days to recover from those delays. Meanwhile, costs of the delays increase (missed connections, bus charters, hotels, plus overtime for crews, recrewing T&E, etc.).

3) In some cases, these storms put entire cities/regions out of commission (particularly the recent winter storms in the northeast). What's the point of running if people can't get to your trains, or can't get anywhere once the train drops them off?

3a) When cities/regions are shut down, it can be difficult for employees to report to the stations / trains.

3b) If an emergency occurs on the train, you are putting stress on local emergency services in a time where they are already having difficulty managing local conditions

4) Liability concerns are probably much greater today than in the past. (Connected to 3b, if something happens and the situation can't be dealt with in a timely manner, even if Amtrak ultimately isn't found liable in court...and it's not clear that they would or would not...the trouble of dealing with such may exceed any benefit from having tried to run the train.)

5) Any major delay could make it all over the media (traditional and/or social), and give Amtrak another public black eye. It doesn't matter what the reason for the delay.

6) (Possibly linked to 4 or 5): Extended weather delays "stranded in the middle of nowhere" could lead to new regulation causing more harm than good (congressfolk are good at that). Airlines got slapped with fines after a couple of incidents where bad weather prevented them from letting passengers off the plane (because staff couldn't get to the airport, so there was nobody available to operate the ground equipment necessary to park the planes at the gates, and/or nobody to move the already-parked planes away to allow another plane to park), and now airlines cancel entire days' worth of flights at the drop of a hat, partly to avoid these kinds of delays. While such hasn't happened to Amtrak yet, have a snowbound train stranded for 12 hours and get enough passengers tweeting at the media and see what happens.

So, you face all of those issues, some with unknown and potentially majorly negative outcomes...or you just cancel a run, give folks their money back and tell them to come back tomorrow.

 

[jis]

Railways as an "all weather" thing is just a popular romantic fantasy anyway. It has always been so.

 

[Northeastern292]

Drifting off-topic (all-weather railroad), but there are a number of reasons Amtrak may be more willing to cancel.

1) Severity of storms that can be better predicted in advance (yes, sometimes the predictions are wrong). In the past, even if weather modeling knew it was going to snow, they might not have known how much (granted, we still don't "know" but have better computer modeling to provide an estimate). Back then, the policy was to run it, and hope for the best.

1a) It's also possible that the storms in question are more severe than normal for recent times.

2) Despite the popular belief that railroading is "all-weather," severe weather does do a number on the operation. It makes trains very late, puts crews out of place, and can take a few days to recover from those delays. Meanwhile, costs of the delays increase (missed connections, bus charters, hotels, plus overtime for crews, recrewing T&E, etc.).

3) In some cases, these storms put entire cities/regions out of commission (particularly the recent winter storms in the northeast). What's the point of running if people can't get to your trains, or can't get anywhere once the train drops them off?

3a) When cities/regions are shut down, it can be difficult for employees to report to the stations / trains.

3b) If an emergency occurs on the train, you are putting stress on local emergency services in a time where they are already having difficulty managing local conditions

4) Liability concerns are probably much greater today than in the past. (Connected to 3b, if something happens and the situation can't be dealt with in a timely manner, even if Amtrak ultimately isn't found liable in court...and it's not clear that they would or would not...the trouble of dealing with such may exceed any benefit from having tried to run the train.)

5) Any major delay could make it all over the media (traditional and/or social), and give Amtrak another public black eye. It doesn't matter what the reason for the delay.

6) (Possibly linked to 4 or 5): Extended weather delays "stranded in the middle of nowhere" could lead to new regulation causing more harm than good (congressfolk are good at that). Airlines got slapped with fines after a couple of incidents where bad weather prevented them from letting passengers off the plane (because staff couldn't get to the airport, so there was nobody available to operate the ground equipment necessary to park the planes at the gates, and/or nobody to move the already-parked planes away to allow another plane to park), and now airlines cancel entire days' worth of flights at the drop of a hat, partly to avoid these kinds of delays. While such hasn't happened to Amtrak yet, have a snowbound train stranded for 12 hours and get enough passengers tweeting at the media and see what happens.

So, you face all of those issues, some with unknown and potentially majorly negative outcomes...or you just cancel a run, give folks their money back and tell them to come back tomorrow.

I've recently come out strongly in favor of liability reform. No other country I think has the liability laws we have. Even using the toilet is a liability.
Sent from my Moto Z2 Play using Amtrak Forum mobile app

 

[jis]

OTOH, the typical European Passenger Bill of Rights puts anything vaguely resembling that in this country to utter shame. Amtrak basically has none. Airlines face a relatively weak one.