Canadian Railroads > Working night shift at CP: Look out for President Keith Creel

At CP's 2015Q2 Financial Analysts' Conference Call,
President Keith Creel illustrated his hands-on approach to managing the railway.

He described a recent visit to the Winnipeg yard in the middle of the night,
"arriving unannounced about 2 o'clock in the morning, with my rental car and my handset, my radio in hand, monitoring the activity in the yard.  
Needless to say, after I watched the team work for about an hour, I went to the tower and spent the next 16 hours in the operation.  
I was able to identify quite a few productivity improvements...."

He stated, "I firmly believe that to run a high performance operation, you have to create and maintain a constructive tension of operating accountability within the culture..."

Keith evidently read the "Dear Leader"'s book. EHH describes doing exactly the same at CN's Symington yard in Winnipeg a decade ago, with similar observations.

As have David Gunn, both Claytors, Stanley crane, etc

"Management by walking around" is a time honored tradition.

Posted from Android

He was / is a real piece of work. I met him and his minions at the BC Rail Prince George yard office. He commented that the entrance needed some "sprucing up", my reaction and reply was "yes, perhaps re-apply the BC Rail logo that used to be above the door".  There was a very dumbfounded look from him and entourage, and a great smile and snicker from the "former BC Rail" employees there.  Doug

what ticks me off is BNSF outbid cn for bc rail yet who got them?

Dilworth Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> what ticks me off is BNSF outbid cn for bc rail
> yet who got them?

It was political don't you know?

Dilworth Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> what ticks me off is BNSF outbid cn for bc rail
> yet who got them?

Please substantiate that claim. CN paid $750 million for the operating assets and long-term lease of the tracks and a further $250 million to purchase $852 million in operating losses accumulated by BC Rail that could be applied as tax credits against its federal and provincial corporate income taxes. In short, $1 billion was paid to the B.C. government, although the net cost to CN was $750 million because it recovered the $250 million paid for the operaring losses when these were applied against its taxes for 2004 throuigh 2007.

BNSF did not make a direct bid for BC Rail.  Instead, it backed the bid by OmniTrax.  Do you know how much OmniTrax bid? That was never officially disclosed. If you know and can document that, I'd be very interested to hear it.

CP also made a bid, and its CEO later acknowledged that CN's bid had a higher monetary value.

 

hoggerdoug Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> He was / is a real piece of work. I met him and
> his minions at the BC Rail Prince George yard
> office. He commented that the entrance needed some
> "sprucing up", my reaction and reply was "yes,
> perhaps re-apply the BC Rail logo that used to be
> above the door".  There was a very dumbfounded
> look from him and entourage, and a great smile and
> snicker from the "former BC Rail" employees
> there.  Doug

... and the rest is history; ... talkabout a CLM.  How do you like being banished to the other side of the country, Doug?   ANSWER:  ... just fine thanks!

He stated, "I firmly believe that to run a high performance operation, you have to create and maintain a constructive tension of operating accountability within the culture..."

In other words "maintain the culture of fear".
I wonder how many people realize that CP workers only get a 20 minute break in an 8 hour day, and are often forced to work an 11 hour shift, after which they can only book 10 hours off?

Posted from iPhone

Finderskeepers Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I wonder how many people realize that CP workers
> only get a 20 minute break in an 8 hour day, and
> are often forced to work an 11 hour shift, after
> which they can only book 10 hours off?

Is this your union agreement?

Ray

Before the current management at CP, workers had the protection of a collective agreement signed by top management of both the railway and the unions and applicable to all , and a series of local agreements applicable to workers at a specific location and signed by local managers and union representatives.

There were disputes, but to resolve these, management and workers at most Canadian railways created the Canadian Railway Office of Arbitration, an independent third party (a lawyer) who adjudicated such disputes.

Depending on location, there were more or less local rules to govern work at specific locations.

The first to go were the local rules, which EHH abolished during a strike a couple of years ago.

Next came a systematic disregard for the collective agreement.  At the same time, many more issues went before the arbitrator and it was clear that CP management had no respect for the grievance process. CP has made the unprecedented move to withdraw from participation from the CROA.

Also, for the first time, there has been many challenges to labour law in Canada. Sadly, the penalties for a corporation violating such law are just "chump change" for a large company. The Government has the right to suspend operating authority of a company violating the law, and has done in the past to small and medium sized enterprises who repeatedly violated Federal and Provincial Law, however most corporate enterprises have enough respect for governance to abide by the law.

Interestingly, squabbles in the CP boardroom, and the long term health of the CEO may bring about change into how the railway is managed.

eminence_grise Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
>(snip)
>
> Interestingly, squabbles in the CP boardroom, and
> the long term health of the CEO may bring about
> change into how the railway is managed.

Definitely something to be watched closely.

I'm also intrigued about how the national treasures provisions of the law would apply if CP sought to sell itself.  Potash Inc and others used the provisions to fend off hostile takeover efforts.  The mention that CP would now follow US law as well as Canadian securities law points toward some mischief.


(US corporate law differs from Canadian law in a number of ways. CP announced on Monday that it would adopt and follow a number of provisions of US law, including additional filings and reporting. In addition to following Canadian law.  But there are a number of situations where differences in US and Canadian law could put a director at risk. And, I'm curious if the recent director exits and Mr Harrison's absence might be tied to these differences.

One of the biggest differences is the Canadian requirement that a major Canadian company has a general obligation to local towns, provinces etc and these interests should be considered in any major decision. US law, in contrast, requires directors to do what's in the best interest of the company's owners, the shareholders. Period.)


INSERT LEGAL ADVICE Disclaimer here.  MAKE YOUR OWN INVESTMENT DECISIONS etc.

Attacking collective agreements and attempting to weaken or eliminate unions are, unfortunately, not unique to CP these days. It's going on everywhere and the economic impacts will be with us for decades when these decent paying jobs are gone. 

Ken