Thread regarding Union Pacific Corp. layoffs

Why does this company problem solve like this?

Years ago problem was too many managers were voluntarily stepping back down to their seniority, instead of fixing the causes why managers w/ actual craft experience would rather demote themselves out of management, they just hire inexperienced people off the street straight into management. This lead to this new problem of these inexperienced managers not being able to manage the pickup / delivery part of moving freight. Once again instead of FIXING this, they decide to just shove this problem onto someone else. Does upper management not see and then correlate them hearing from the employees who keep reporting over and over that managers dont know how to perform the work they are overseeing? Now customers will get the added complexity of short line saying they havent gotten xy&z from UP, UP managers claiming its the shortlines fault.
Etc, etc, etc.

Bumping from @b6+1jrdqe8jd, well said.

by
| 2401 views | | 13 replies (last November 22) | Reply
Post ID: @OP+1jthwe1s7

13 replies (most recent on top)

Easy ! The problem isn’t meant to be fixed When words such as Shareholder value , Dividends , Stock Options, Operating Ratio are used the answer is right between your ears …Hedge Funds , Yes Men/Women CEOs and inexperienced managers are the new norm . Customer Service , Employees ,On time Performance are now dirty little words …

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @wfk+1jthwe1s7

It’s “yes maser”!

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @w85+1jthwe1s7

@dd+1jthwe1s7 having fewer employees to pay benefits for must be rather appealing to the little guy, vena. We have been working mandatory overtime since last year, about 8-9 months now, because “it’s cheaper to make you work overtime than it is to hire people”. So, I believe, the draw to short lines is the same as it is to scab out a UP shop. UP is infamous for stepping over a dollar to pick up a dime.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @1sm+1jthwe1s7

Yet again people describe everything that's wrong with the UP. THE MANAGEMENT! To the executives, it's easier to promote the folks that'll do exactly what they want them to do. Those that were promoted to management, then inflict those orders on the lower people. Then when all that goes to $hit, the lower management has someone to blame. I don't know of a single manager that doesn't lie all the time. The good management that actually stood up for their people, are no longer with the company. If you want to rid the company of the liars, then you set them up. Assign that management to a task that is easy to do and have no reason to lie about it. then see what their reaction is when it doesn't get done. If that management can't do the task and they blamed it all on the lower people, then it's C-YA LATER! I know it's deceptive, but the deception would go away entirely on it's own once enough of the poor management was gone. It's a he11 of an idea, except for the part where it would be conducted by the same people who started all of the problems to begin with. So yeah the idea would fail almost immediately. The UP has an executive team that just can't be trusted at all! The management teams are as dishonest as they could possibly get. You can't sweep everything under the rug forever! Eventually someone is going to lift up that rug to see what they tripped over, and then everything will be in the open for the world to see.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @p7+1jthwe1s7

After over 20yrs of watching various people get promoted Ive seen the following become more and more prevalent. Many would get promoted by cutting corners, taking risks, shortcuts, etc and lie about it. They would get a reputation as a “go getter”. They then got promoted, they looked for others (dishonest) like them to promote beneath them. When the liars had to work with those who followed the rules and procedures and those who followed the rules were slower and the slow ones became threats bcuz they were doing the right thing, the wrong doers had to get rid of the truthful ones. The wrongdoers also always want as much insulation from the actual work as they can get. So they wrongfully climb the ladder, then they sit from the their tower writing more rules, making jobs more complicated, cutting headcount, etc etc etc. Then when the results of their decisions start to cause problems they want scapegoats to take the blame that is 100% theirs.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @ng+1jthwe1s7

I'm not sure why we have so many layers of "management." Most of them do not manage anything. They are reporters to other reporters who report to bigger reporters. The questions from the top are always d-mb and if you are in that position, you should already know the answer. Why do we need directors, and AVPs? What do they really do besides absorb high compensation for harassing people so they can report to the other reporters? But hey, let's cut mechanical and let the money making part of the business fall apart.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @mx+1jthwe1s7

Who said the company is solving problems?

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @hk+1jthwe1s7

99% of UP managers cannot “manage” (bcuz they don’t know what needs to be done nor how to do the needed tasks) so they learn to AVOID. Avoid cost, avoid consequences, avoid obvious results, avoid the truth, avoid responsibility, etc. The few UP managers that might still know how to do the tasks still won’t tell the truth to AVOID upsetting a manager above them that wants to avoid the cost of railroading safely and correctly. So now it’s let’s avoid the first mile and the last mile.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @gh+1jthwe1s7

UP likes to hire young managers off the street because they will do anything for less pay. They don’t have a backup craft job to fall back on. “You will do as we say, or else”.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @fv+1jthwe1s7

Because 28 yr olds with a college diploma know more than we do........

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @de+1jthwe1s7

Thats the thing about a spreadsheet, you can cherry pick your data for awhile. But eventually the bottom line gets reached. UP I think is at that point, and instead of FIXING everything bad management decisions have sc--wed up they just want to hand the 1st mile and the last mile to someone else?
“Oh here’s the mess I made, bye bye”.
Which fine (I dont care anymore) if little jimmies just wants to lease all of the property to a third parties, fine cuz I dont care anymore. But I wonder what will happen to the customers? How is integrating a whole new company(s) between A to Z going to affect the customers prices? Does lil jimz plan to keep charging the same amount from points B to Y? Will the customers then have to pay one shortline from A-B and another from Y-Z? Or is UP going to pay the shortline at the pickup and dropoff? How are the customers cost to ship by rail not going to increase by the added complexity of involving more railroads? Are the shortlines not expecting profits for themselves? Where exactly is the money savings in shortlines? What will the shortlines operating ratios be? Dont give me the worn out “we will save money by paying shortline employees less”. The wage discrepancies are not big enough for there to be any meaningful cost differences. Its not like UP is over maintaining (quite the exact opposite) anything anywhere systemwide and a shortline would be able to negate any costs there. I suspect this is only another snake oil ploy to try and trick investors into buying stock. There is no upside to inserting shortlines except maybe the shortline employees might be happier than UP employees. In the end I think a bigger mess is what lays ahead for UP.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @dd+1jthwe1s7

GW and Omnitrax are just waiting to jump on those yard assignments and local and manifest hauling jobs
Big time!

Bust those SMART and BLET Unions.

They will all get paid off.

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @ch+1jthwe1s7

Because it's run by 'Spreadsheet Railroaders' in fancy suits

by
| | Reply
Post ID: @c8+1jthwe1s7

Post a reply

: