sUPer-vision

[garr]

Per the 7/09/04 newswire, UP has:

A. Increased shipments 2.5% (slowest amoung US railroads),

B. Increased revenue 4 to 6% (earnings yet to be determined),

C. Implemented policy of turning certain business away (stone in TX, etc.).

Before I rant let me say I usually lean a little more toward the management side in most debates. However with stats like these, who can defend UP's upper management?

The CEO, COO, CFO, president, executive vps, and other officials at the very top of any railroad, or any other company, have one main job--providing VISION--before supervision.

Without vision, meltdowns happen not once but two or more times. The first because of UP managements' arrogance during a merger. The second because of "sudden" retirement rule changes combined with unforeseen economic improvement. What will the excuse be for the third meltdown?

With vision, the UP management would have known that the knowledge of the acquired company's managers would be of much value. With vision, you don't get blindsided by "sudden" changes(gov't, whether federal or railroad retirement, rarely moves fast and the consumer never really slowed down during the economic slowdown, so business was bound to follow).

The vision of UP management is the same as the management of most other corporations--How do I, or the company, become more appealing to Wallstreet this quarter? Long term thinking is not in the picture. Lines get downgraded or abandoned or railbanked. Employees are eliminated. Maintenance and capacity improvements are put on hold. Decisions are made as if a reckoning day will never come. But they always do.

I have always thought, for the most part, that mergers were beneficial to the customer and railroad. However, I beleive that if SP(and even WP and DRGW) and CNW were still independent, traffic would definitely be growing more than 2.5% combined and more traffic would still be sought after instead of being turned away.

Maybe the wrong management team survived.