Will things get better or worse with MH running the company? Any opinions?
13 replies (most recent on top)
@2g1 and that is why everyone hates them :)
@2e7 And they all laugh at your net worth.
@2bb so you can read books and pass tests?
Nothing an LLM couldn’t do these days. None of this means you are actually good at anything.
The reality is a CEO is paid to bring returns to shareholders. This is not rocket science - reduce costs, labour, and cut corners enough so that the customers don’t go elsewhere. Even easier when it’s a monopoly like Enbridge. You don’t even need to care about customer experience then. Then raise prices with inflation indexes. Every 2 years secure capital and buy another business so you can show growth and pump stock price.
That’s all that Harvard teaches you. I’ve met many people from Harvard and other Ivy League schools - and most don’t know how tie their own shoes.
@vw Engineer, Lawyer for sure, and Harvard as well. Was also named in the list of most powerful executive women in Canada.
The only people who make a comments like these are most likely the least educated.
Culture is a funny thing. Don't nobody stand up in a town hall and say "we're gonna reward folks for staying quiet." What happens instead is smaller and meaner — the man who flags a corroded section gets called "not a team player," loses his project to "better fit," and everybody watching learns the lesson without a word said direct.
That's how Enron did it too. Wasn't a memo. Was Skilling rolling his eyes at one analyst's question, and every employee figured out which way the wind blew.
Give it a few years, and the paperwork starts saying what upstairs wants instead of what the pipe's doing. Findings get reclassified, "urgent" to "monitor." Maintenance windows slip "just this once" till once is policy. The folks who know better either get pushed out or stop speaking up.
That's the real danger — not one bad decision, but the whole warning system getting dismantled quiet, piece by piece.
Then reality shows up anyway. Regulator opens a formal probe. Ratings get shaved, borrowing gets pricier. Board draws a line between "the culture" and "the person" they just fired. A whistleblower with paperwork and a lawyer becomes the story.
That's how Enron went from respected to gone in eight months. Company like that don't fade slow. Gets a cliff.
@pz is she an engineer? Just because she has a degree doesn’t mean she is good at it. As far as I can see she has not ever used that knowledge. She has been in management all her life.
Degrees and pieces of paper are useless these days. They don’t mean you know what you are doing
She oversaw the OEB (Ontario
GDS' most important stakeholder) coming along and blindsiding the company, an integration of Union Gas and EGI that is still completely fragmented and an internal Engineering department that is he-l bent on blowing project timelines and costs for nonsensical standards.
She’s an engineer and lawyer. Good luck to anyone fooling her. I think/hope it is a positive. And spot on about the comments of directors/VPs shown the door at GDS.
@h1, @fz - this sound FABULOUS and SPOT ON to what this company needs if it is truly going to be sustainable for the “next 75”!! The hard questions need to be asked and we need resources in the right places vs all these “kingdoms”! Time to hold leadership and everyone else accountable! Let’s get this party started and see if we can finally start to drive real improvements instead of lip service, smoke and mirrors to pat ourselves on the back of how good we are, and pretty bright lipstick on pigs!
@fz this is spot on from my time working under her. The consistent thing you hear is that she asks leaders a lot of questions they haven’t had to answer before. There is going to be a scramble to find people to blame when that starts to happen, stay clear of the bus they will try to throw everyone under. If you look at GDS under her tenure I don’t think I’ve seen so many VP’s and Directors get ran out the door at a corporation of this size.
Here's what I figure she does first — not who she is, what she does. She don't call a big meeting, don't announce a new direction. First thing, she starts asking for numbers nobody's had to hand over in a while — project by project, what it's actually costing versus what it was supposed to. Real polite questions. The kind that don't sound like a threat till you're the one who can't answer 'em straight.
Six months in, some VP who's been coasting on a good relationship with Ebel finds his project's under review by somebody who used to run a gas utility and knows exactly what padding looks like. He won't get fired. He'll just find his budget's smaller next quarter, and the quarter after, till he's managing something a lot less important than what he started with.
That's how she does it. Not a purge. A thousand small conversations where the old guard keeps losing a little ground, till one day they look up and the org chart's already rewritten and nobody remembers exactly when.
Calgary don't lose the letterhead, but it loses the weight. Houston's where the real conversations happen now. She didn't fire anybody personally. Didn't need to. Just stopped inviting them to the meetings that mattered.
@OP as long as PM continues to eliminate existing talent in favor of AI and/or contract work, I don’t see how things are going to get better with MH. The morale nearly everywhere is at all times low.
I think PM will continue ki-ling off accounting and finance. I don’t know if anybody else ca