"It's not rocket science" - From the Editor - Amtrak's capable new leader David Gunn - Brief Article

Railway Age, July, 2002 by William C. Vantuono

Last December, I wrote that Amtrak "requires insightful, resourceful, visionary, 'fire in the belly' leadership--sans the spin." Amtrak now has that kind of leader, David Gunn, who is capable of turning the company around and steering it through a sensible restructuring program--provided the powers-that-be in Washington give him a chance.

What sort of man is David Gunn? Those in the industry who know him say he relishes a challenge. All who have heard him know that he speaks matter-of-factly, without rhetorical flourishes. Last month, he told PBS Television's Jim Lehrer that he alternated "between being optimistic and pessimistic."

Two groups were responsible for Amtrak's current plight, Gunn told Lehrer: "One is Congress--the politicians. They created Amtrak, and they put Amtrak on this fanciful search for self-sufficiency. The next thing that happened is management attempted to do what the law required, which was to achieve self-sufficiency. And I think they tried far too long. They should have said, 'this is going to fall.'"

Gunn strongly believes in what he calls a "traditional railroad structure," which he is now putting in place. In one of his first communications to employees, he said he is committed to a national system, and "will not participate in the dismemberment of our company. I am committed to restoring the existing system to a state of good repair as a first priority. I will create a lean, competent management. We will not be self-sufficient, but we must increase our cost recovery."

To accomplish that, Gunn is consolidating decision-making into Amtrak's Washington headquarters, eliminating the Northeast Corridor, Intercity, and West Coast business units that operate semi-autonomously. Citing a problem he terms "title inflation," he's cutting over 60 vice president positions, leaving about 20 in upper management with that title. For example, in Amtrak's mechanical department, he's reducing 15 top managers in the chain of command--one executive vice president-operations, five senior vice presidents, two vice presidents, three regional vice presidents, one chief mechanical officer, and three senior directors--to four. The new structure will have one chief operating officer (the capable Stan Bagley), one chief mechanical officer, and two assistant chief mechanical officers, one each for cars and locomotives. "In the future," Gunn said, "the title 'vice president' will be used sparingly and with fewer adjectives such as executive, senior, corporate, regional, etc."

Gunn's candor is refreshing, if not disarming. Since taking office, he's come out with statements that have caused some people to cringe, others to exhale a sigh of relief:

* "Guests may be called passengers," he told employees.

* Expressing his desire to quickly undo "some well-intended but unsuccessful organizational experiments," he told employees he "unfortunately did not have time to hire consultants to tell us what to do, so we are doing this on our own."

* "Acela: Why is it called this?" he said at last month's APTA conference. "Amtrak had a recognized brand--Metroliner. Everyone knows what 'Acela' is. It's the room below the first floor. It's like taking Coca Cola and calling it 'Brown Liquid."' And, "How can you have a new train and not have it come under the control of your operating department?"

* Asked by Jim Lehrer what he thought of the Amtrak Reform Council's recommendations, he responded, "It's absolutely--you want to buy it?" When Lehrer said, "No, no," he shot hack, "I also have a bridge." At the APTA meeting, he said, "What is loony about their idea is that you can privatize Amtrak. So I'll prove it to you. Anyone want to buy us? I brought this hat with me--you can have it!"

* On Amtrak's relationship with freight railroads: "I don't share the idea with some of the freight railroads that there should be a wall between passenger and freight. Look at BNSF. They treat us as a profit center. We pay them millions in incentives. They are the sharpest at using equipment and facilities. When I was with the Santa Fe, we had a double-track, 90-mph railroad, and ran 16 passenger trains mixed with over 50 freight trains a day. Drag trains and fast trains don't work on the same track--I don't care how many sidings you've got."

It's hard to argue with this one: "We must overcome the complete loss of credibility. It's not rocket science. We need to show Congress we know how to run a railroad. I can make it efficient. I can't make it self-sufficient."

That is a message the Bush Administration and Congress should accept at face value.