Amtrak Buyouts

There is a paywalled article on Trains.com that says "More than 500 accept Amtrak Buyouts". Does anyone have any additional information regarding this? What are these 500+ buying from Amtrak? Routes? Stations? Trackage rights? Rolling Stock? Locomotives? Maintenance Equipment? etc.

Pensyfan19 wrote: ↑Mon Jul 27, 2020 1:43 pm There is a paywalled article on Trains.com that says "More than 500 accept Amtrak Buyouts". Does anyone have any additional information regarding this? What are these 500+ buying from Amtrak? Routes? Stations? Trackage rights? Rolling Stock? Locomotives? Maintenance Equipment? etc.

It’s a term for when employees are offered a lump sum payment + some sort of benefits package in order to retire early. 500 employees taking buyouts is BIG news.

Basically looking for redundancies , but offering them, rather than forcing them . Payout is probably similar both ways.

I have access to the article. 284 union and 227 management employees took the buy-out to retire early. It was offered to 4369 people but not to anyone "deemed essential to running the business." It also quietly reorganized the top of the org chart.

Amtrak has basically told Congress, "We need $10.05 billion or we cut service and jobs." This was a warning shot.

Events such as this , ( though there is nothing close to the scale of this crisis), are often used to clear out "deadwood". It doesn't make alot of financial sense if they are going to have to employ replacements, but it is a way of getting the employees you want . Or more likely get rid of ones you don't want, or whose roles have become redundant.

Let's "cut to the chase" for TRAINS subscribers:

https://trn.trains.com/news/news-wire/2 ... ak-buyouts

Fair Use:

WASHINGTON — More than 500 management and union employees are accepting buyout offers to leave Amtrak as part of the company called a “self-help” effort to defray the financial impact of revenue losses from the COVID-19 pandemic. Last Friday, July 24, was the final day for many of those departing.

The one-time payouts to 284 union and 227 management employees average about $33,000, Amtrak spokeswoman Christina Leeds tells Trains News Wire. That puts the total expenditure at $16.83 million. She says 4,369 people were eligible; the offer was not available to workers deemed essential to running the business.

I wholly concur with Mr. Wolf's summary of the material.

To be even more clear. It was offered to anyone who was eligible with the exceptions of certain crafts at certain locations. An example in Albany, Ill use the T&E craft. Engineers where not eligible but conductors were. I know of one who took it, a conductor with 50ish yrs service. If it were offered to engineers I know of two possibly more who would have pulled the pin. If I had the time and the age, SEE YA.

David Benton wrote: ↑Mon Jul 27, 2020 6:57 pm Events such as this , ( though there is nothing close to the scale of this crisis), are often used to clear out "deadwood". It doesn't make alot of financial sense if they are going to have to employ replacements, but it is a way of getting the employees you want . Or more likely get rid of ones you don't want, or whose roles have become redundant.

It depends on how the program is structured. I know the details of a buyout offer made about 40 or so years ago by a large company. The result was that the majority of employees who accepted the offer were higher performers whom the company did not want to lose. Based on that experience the company decided to not make such an offer again. Other companies had similar experiences. Another large one implemented a policy such that all employees who were rated by their managers in the bottom 5 percent in the annual performance rating process were terminated if they were rated in the bottom 5 percent for two years in a row. That company's philosophy was that over time overall performance by employees would trend upwards as a result.

Ken W2KB wrote: ↑Tue Jul 28, 2020 10:48 amAnother large one implemented a policy such that all employees who were rated by their managers in the bottom 5 percent in the annual performance rating process were terminated if they were rated in the bottom 5 percent for two years in a row. That company's philosophy was that over time overall performance by employees would trend upwards as a result.

I bet that was great for morale

It’ll be interesting to see if other trades & professions get buyout offers, and which ones.

Ken W2KB wrote: ↑Tue Jul 28, 2020 10:48 amAnother large one implemented a policy such that all employees who were rated by their managers in the bottom 5 percent in the annual performance rating process were terminated if they were rated in the bottom 5 percent for two years in a row. That company's philosophy was that over time overall performance by employees would trend upwards as a result.

That's a fairly standard practice and I think it was GE who upped that to the bottom 10%. At my current employer, folks who are ranked "below-peer" in terms of performance compared to others doing similar work get put under a microscope and have goals set up to try and address where they fall short of their peers. If you don't meet those goals, you're gone in 6-12 months.

When the time came for COVID related layoffs, folks in that bottom 10% were also the first to be cut.

Arguably, sometimes it's worse for morale to retain people who can't keep up with their peers.

mtuandrew wrote: ↑Tue Jul 28, 2020 11:24 am

Ken W2KB wrote: ↑Tue Jul 28, 2020 10:48 amAnother large one implemented a policy such that all employees who were rated by their managers in the bottom 5 percent in the annual performance rating process were terminated if they were rated in the bottom 5 percent for two years in a row. That company's philosophy was that over time overall performance by employees would trend upwards as a result.

I bet that was great for morale

It’ll be interesting to see if other trades & professions get buyout offers, and which ones.

As noted in the previous answer GE did this and Microsoft did this.
It was a complete disaster, both for morale and in terms of performance. Partly because coworkers near the bottom would start to sabotage others so that they would stay above the line.

I'm also reminded of a piece of I saw (I think in a movie) once where the example was given:
You've got 2 baseball players. One can run from Home to 1st in 9 seconds and has great form.
The other takes 11 seconds to run, but has lousy form. Who do you focus on?
The other guy suggests the faster player.
"No, you focus on the one with lousy form. The first one is probably as good as he is going to get, the second though has room for improvement."

So anyway, with buyouts, it's different. You're often trying to get rid of your most expensive people, who are generally your most senior. What their skills are... may vary.

I'm reminded of a conductor in Albany who was obviously just putting in his time. He'd be a prime candidate for a buy-out, but I suspect he finally reached retirement a decade or so ago.

"The beatings will continue until morale improves."

mtuandrew wrote: ↑Tue Jul 28, 2020 11:24 am

Ken W2KB wrote: ↑Tue Jul 28, 2020 10:48 amAnother large one implemented a policy such that all employees who were rated by their managers in the bottom 5 percent in the annual performance rating process were terminated if they were rated in the bottom 5 percent for two years in a row. That company's philosophy was that over time overall performance by employees would trend upwards as a result.

I bet that was great for morale

It’ll be interesting to see if other trades & professions get buyout offers, and which ones.

A friend provided a copy of the list of employees who accepted the retirement incentive offer. There were some familiar names of people I have done business with as a private car owner.

In the Navy, we say "fair winds and following seas" to those who are retiring. So, I extend that nautical greeting to Garland Harper, Joe McHugh, Necho Terry and Lee Trombecky.

Greg Moore wrote: ↑Thu Jul 30, 2020 6:14 pm As noted in the previous answer GE did this and Microsoft did this.
It was a complete disaster, both for morale and in terms of performance.

I do a lot of work with one of those two. I would not emulate anything they do, and their financial reports are no surprise. I hope they make it through 2020.

~500 employees took the buyout, but it wasn't enough in the company's eyes. Next up: involuntary separations and furloughs. Coming soon, probably during the new fiscal year.