Fire Richard Anderson Campaign?

Advertise with us
shop deals on amazon
Shop deals on ebay
Amtrak Unlimited Discussion Forum

Help Support Amtrak Unlimited Discussion Forum:

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.
NSC1109 said:
Amtrak has declined to operate the annual Toys for Tots train, saying it “doesn’t fit with the business model”.
Click to expand...

giphy.gif


Yes, two engines, a trio of baggage cars and a cafe were really breaking the bank and curtailing service.
default_mad.gif
I mean, it's not like we need good customer and public relations or anything. Amtrak can toss these kinds of things aside since it provides a superior and consistent product and that is all the advertising they need.
default_mad.gif
default_mad.gif
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Well said Thirdrail 7. And yet there are still people who will post; "give him some time and he may turn things around." A lot of negativity as a result of Mr. Anderson's various moves. It's a tough choice, but this may be the worst.
 
We're almost a year into the Anderson regime. He's already been pushing things in one direction, so I don't see any logical reason why we should give him time and wait for him to go the other way. If he's had this job long enough to cut dining service on the LSL and CL, to try and chop up the SWC, etc, then he's had the job long enough to do the opposite. If he hadn't done anything at this point, it might make sense to be optimistic that when he does make changes, it will be to improve service, amenities, and the LD network. But the boulder is already rolling downhill, and I don't see why it's going to stop.
 
cpotisch said:
We're almost a year into the Anderson regime. He's already been pushing things in one direction, so I don't see any logical reason why we should give him time and wait for him to go the other way. If he's had this job long enough to cut dining service on the LSL and CL, to try and chop up the SWC, etc, then he's had the job long enough to do the opposite. If he hadn't done anything at this point, it might make sense to be optimistic that when he does make changes, it will be to improve service, amenities, and the LD network. But the boulder is already rolling downhill, and I don't see why it's going to stop.
Click to expand...
That's very well said. And honestly we need more people like you in the advocacy world. We need more young guns.
 
Evidence suggests that one of Anderson's goals is to provoke everyone into action of some sort or the other. At least Congress is now talking more about Amtrak than it has done in quite a while, which may or may not be a good or bad thing. But at least if they make specific service parameters part of the law then there will be less wiggle room towards cutting service. An unintended consequence may be less wiggle room towards increasing service too. This is something we will need to watch out for and oppose if it comes to pass. As we all know too well, getting Congress to micro-manage is a two edged sword.
 
cpotisch said:
I don't think Anderson should be fired, since a lot of the blame/credit for some of the recent changes isn't just for him. And I feel like a campaign like this, which wants the CEO kicked out altogether, really delegitimizes those of us who (somewhat) understand the challenges involved in maintaining quality of service and amenities in this climate. And even if a bunch of people really do feel like kicking out Anderson is the best choice, an angry roadside campaign most likely will get written of as just that, whereas a letter campaign or something like that can really let the people in power know what you want. Just my opinion.
Click to expand...
This corrupt CEO absolutely needs to be fired, as well as the entire corrupt and derelict board, who is failing in their duty, BY LAW, to "run a NATIONAL system of trains...."

For a CEO who so often quotes "the law," he needs to obey the Amtrak law, which states the system is a NATIONAL -- not solely regional-- system.

This sorry excuse for a CEO has made more changes that will forever harm U.S. train travel.

His firing is long overdue.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Unfortunately the phrase "National System" is subject to very broad interpretation. So just screaming about it is neither here, nor there. The actual meaning of the phrase can unfortunately only be settled in court, and what is worse is that apparently only the Attorney General has the standing to challenge whatever Amtrak wants to interpret it as, or alternatively Congress can clarify by more clearly stating what it means. They have an opportunity to do so in the 2019 appropriation, but apparently have no intention to go there at least so far.

As usual life is more complicated than we would like. But it is what it is.
 
Is it true that Anderson is taking no salary? Is there some kind of monetary bonus to reach certain milestones like a professional sports player? Is his incentive to chop things up related to his personal financial gain? Why is he otherwise even doing this job?
 
cocojacoby said:
Is it true that Anderson is taking no salary? Is there some kind of monetary bonus to reach certain milestones like a professional sports player? Is his incentive to chop things up related to his personal financial gain? Why is he otherwise even doing this job?
Click to expand...
Anderson doesn't take a salary but the board decides on his bonus. If they think he did a good job, whatever that might mean, he'll get more dough.
 
cocojacoby said:
Is it true that Anderson is taking no salary? Is there some kind of monetary bonus to reach certain milestones like a professional sports player? Is his incentive to chop things up related to his personal financial gain? Why is he otherwise even doing this job?
Click to expand...
He is not taking any salary.

He has a significant (like way more than you or I could make in several years
default_wink.png
) performance bonus based on meeting goals set for him by the Board of Directors. His contract spells out the amount of the bonus, which I do not recall off the top of my head. It is not some arbitrary number that the Board can cook up post-facto. The exact terms and amount are spelled out in the contract.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
The most recent issue of Passenger Train Journal had an editorial by Don Phillips advocating getting rid of Anderson.  But I'm not sure how to do this.  Who exactly does he report to and whom can we contact recommending this?

Although PTJ did not specifically mention it, I noticed in their Amtrak stats that Anderson's numbers are starting to look bad, as well.  Amtrak ridership and revenues had kinda been on a roll there for a few years - before Anderson took over.  As PTJ mentioned it, "Anderson was never right for Amtrak" and I think he really needs to go.  But how?

Regards,

Fred M. Cain
 
fredmcain said:
The most recent issue of Passenger Train Journal had an editorial by Don Phillips advocating getting rid of Anderson.  But I'm not sure how to do this.  Who exactly does he report to and whom can we contact recommending this?

Although PTJ did not specifically mention it, I noticed in their Amtrak stats that Anderson's numbers are starting to look bad, as well.  Amtrak ridership and revenues had kinda been on a roll there for a few years - before Anderson took over.  As PTJ mentioned it, "Anderson was never right for Amtrak" and I think he really needs to go.  But how?

Regards,

Fred M. Cain
Click to expand...
Anderson reports to Amtrak’s Board of Directors who I believe in turn report to Congress. The President appoints new members to Amtrak’s board. 

Best way I can think to voice your displeasure is to contact your representative. I’m not sure how or even if you can contact the BoD.
 
Also remember that not only did the Board appoint him, but they are on record stating that they approve of Anderson's performance. If you are into bashing your head against a concrete wall feel free to complain to the Board. Otherwise express your opinion to your representatives in Congress.

As I have explained elsewhere, merely getting rid of Anderson won't change a thing. The source of the current state of affairs is elsewhere.
 
Ultimately, changing the CEO won't change much because a new CEO will come in and in order to acquaint themselves with how Amtrak works, they'll ask qualified people to get advice. Which on paper means asking Gardner (VP of operations, helped write PRIAA, on paper great qualifications), which then gives the same feedback loop the current (and probably past) CEO is in now. Anderson having no prior experience on a passenger railroad just gave Gardner a much freer hand to carry out that vision and plan.
 
jis said:
Also remember that not only did the Board appoint him, but they are on record stating that they approve of Anderson's performance. If you are into bashing your head against a concrete wall feel free to complain to the Board. Otherwise express your opinion to your representatives in Congress. As I have explained elsewhere, merely getting rid of Anderson won't change a thing. The source of the current state of affairs is elsewhere.
Click to expand...
If the board is undermining their own credibility then it's perfectly within the rights of customers and stakeholders to criticize them.  Citizen advocacy rarely follows a clear and obvious path to success.  A series of complaints written to an otherwise indifferent board member might spark a concerned underling or whistle blower to release previously unknown data to a third party journalist who decides to write a story that is used to help sway a congressional staffer to bring the issue to the attention of an important Senator or Representative who endeavors to make moves toward righting the ship.  We live in a society that is already predisposed toward perpetual indifference.  If someone feels like letting the board know that they're unhappy with the product and process they've overseen there is no reason to dissuade them.  My advice would be to start with congress but rather than stop there continue writing, calling, and visiting with everyone in a position to help, even if they're not inclined to do so.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Devil's Advocate said:
If the board is undermining their own credibility then it's perfectly within the rights of customers and stakeholders to criticize them.  The idea that the board should be off limits simply because they are unlikely to change course is nothing but low effort reasoning.  Citizen advocacy rarely follows a clear and obvious path to success.  A series of complaints written to a proudly indifferent board member might spark a concerned underling or whistle blower to release previously unknown data to a third party journalist who decides to write a story that is used to help sway a congressional staffer to bring the issue to the attention of an important Senator or Representative who endeavors to make moves toward righting the ship.
Click to expand...
I did not mean to say do not bash your head against a concrete wall. Please go ahead. I was merely suggesting what might be more effective.
 
No offense I think a VP of Operations needs to come from I don't know maybe the operations department. People who've worked themselves up from being a conductor to engineer and then into management. Those people actually know what operations is. While someone who has spent three years supposedly as a brakeman-dispatcher at Buckingham Branch and concurrently serving as a dispatcher-trainmen with another railroad in Maine before jumping over to congress.

But then I'm personally a large opponent of Stephen Gardner but even without my personal biases against him I do think a VP of Operations needs to have several years preferably over a decade of experience on the ground.
 
You might not have noticed that Gardner is not VP of Operations. His title is Executive VP and Chief Commercial Officer. He oversees the Product Development and Customer Experience; Corporate Planning; and Government Affairs and Corporate Communications departments, as well as the State Supported, Northeast Corridor and Long Distance Service Lines.

The guy with the title Executive VP and Chief Operating Officer is Scot Naparstek. He oversees the Engineering, Mechanical, Transportation and Network Support departments.

Looks like Gardner is more into the Commercial side of things whereas Naparstek has the Operations side of things.
 
jis said:
You might not have noticed that Gardner is not VP of Operations. His title is Executive VP and Chief Commercial Officer. He oversees the Product Development and Customer Experience; Corporate Planning; and Government Affairs and Corporate Communications departments, as well as the State Supported, Northeast Corridor and Long Distance Service Lines.

The guy with the title Executive VP and Chief Operating Officer is Scot Naparstek. He oversees the Engineering, Mechanical, Transportation and Network Support departments.

Looks like Gardner is more into the Commercial side of things whereas Naparstek has the Operations side of things.
Click to expand...
Does that make it any better?
 
Gardner still is the one that gets the laws written and deals with Government Affairs. I don;t think Amtrak's core problem is "operations" though many of the symptoms of the overall problems manifest in various operational practices. The core problem is that of governance and accounting.

I am sure it is better for someone, but not necessarily for us that want to improve Amtrak.
 
jis said:
Gardner still is the one that gets the laws written and deals with Government Affairs. I don;t think Amtrak's core problem is "operations" though many of the symptoms of the overall problems manifest in various operational practices. The core problem is that of governance and accounting.

I am sure it is better for someone, but not necessarily for us that want to improve Amtrak.
Click to expand...
So, JIS, how do we "fix" Amtrak then?  Or, is it just plain un-fixable?

Regards,

Fred M. Cain
 

Latest posts

Back
Top