- Aug 3, 2004
Being that Anderson was on a short term contract with bonuses over base pay, I don't think Anderson's tenure was ever meant to be long term. Anderson was the turnaround specialist, this guy is probably the long term pick. As a former CSX executive and background in transportation, he seems qualified to take Amtrak into the next era.Well this leaves me with some questions:
Was there a "no confidence" vote by the board against Anderson (or something similar)?
Was Anderson's term intended to be this short-lived all along?
Will Flynn's railroad experience (whatever extent that is) help or hurt Amtrak?
While Trump may have some influence on the pick via the Transportation department, this is a largely the same board that chose Anderson.Who knows what may change now?
In the Glass Half Full Dept., Flynn's freight rail experience might give him significant insight into how freight and pax rail could co-exist better -- potentially improving OTP.
In the Glass Half Empty Dept., this might just be a further nail in the coffin for LD pax trains, as his CSX experience may bleed over to Amtrak in the form of train-killing.
Inquiring minds want to know: Was the Trump administration in any way involved in the selection of Flynn?
Completely agree, but that isn't a high bar.I knew him as a sales director at CSX before being promoted to other positions and eventually head of Merchandise Service (sales and marketing). He left in 2002. He can certainly 'speak railroad' but not sure what skills he brings as far as passenger rail or transit. Apparently that's no longer important but he should be an improvement over Anderson.