The loudest critics of this crown corporation have been the media élite, who have railed against the company's poor financial performance. (The company still depends largely on government largesse to break even: in 1996, the feds contributed $245.2 million to Via's almost $390-million operating budget.)

Against this backdrop, at its Montreal headquarters in Place Ville Marie, Perry J. Greenbaum interviewed Paul Côté, the company's 46-year-old vice-president, public affairs and human resources, to find out where Via was going. Côté, a 25-year veteran of Via (coming to HR from customer service two years ago), spoke with forthrightness about HR's role in steering the company toward the path of self-financing.

WT: When Via had to reduce its staff significantly between 1992 and 1996, in what analysts called a period of uncertainty, how did you ensure you retained good people?

Côté: We decided to look at how we managed the business. And we started to look at our organization. How are we structured? Are we using our resources as effectively as we can, that is, are the few resources we have oriented, focused and allocated to our core business? We found that the answer was no. Our organization was large, bureaucratic and had many layers; it had grown over time. So we took a hard look at our business and started from a customer perspective, asking whether this position or this activity served the customer. At the time I was vice-president of customer services. I had to challenge every paradigm that I had in my head and the way we operated. On our staff, we used to have labour relations advisors, financial advisors, IS [information system] advisors. We all did.

WT: You certainly had a top-heavy organization? Côté: Very top-heavy. And why? Because over time the organization had evolved toward this state. It was a comfortable situation because I didn't have to deal with somebody else in another department to get answers. I had my own staff to advise me. I had my own little company, if you want.

WT: Did you do a re-engineering exercise?

Côté: No, I wouldn't want to lead you down that path because we didn't.

WT: Why not?

Côté: At the time we didn't feel we had the time to go through such an exercise. The president [Terry Ivany] said to each of us on the management committee, "Look, you all have been around for a while; you know your business. You know what I'm after. This is for the survival of the company. If we continue to cut, cut, cut, there will be no services left."

WT: To make the changes, did you use outside consultants? Côté: No, this was all done internally through a management committee. Our review board was composed of our peers, the president and the chairman. And I think that in the end the president and the chairman, [Marc LeFrancois], led us successfully through the exercise. With 800 less people on our payroll, we save close to $50 million per year.

WT: Were unions involved in this downsizing procedure?

Côté: No, because these numbers reflect non-unionized people. Some clerical unionized positions were abolished, but these cuts largely affected management and non-scheduled positions. Unions [entered into the picture] at a later stage through some efficiency changes that we had to make through labour negotiations.

WT: Can you describe that process?

Côté: Well, it was a difficult time. We faced a strike on some of the issues that we were after in 1996. We were going after some deficiency gains that were quite significant. For example, train crews were paid on mileage accumulated rather than hours worked, which dates to the steam era when a train used to take eight hours to go from Montreal to Toronto. Now it takes only four hours. [Crew members] were getting paid for eight. Because there were collective agreements, we went through the process, and tried to negotiate our way out of it. Unfortunately it took a strike to get some of the issues resolved. That was one of them. We had other issues, however, such as employment security, which was given to employees in the late-80s through negotiations.

WT: You mean so-called lifetime job security?

Côté: That's right, after four years of service. But we just couldn't afford it.

WT: So, with all this going on, how is morale these days? Côté: For our unionized workforce the last round of negotiations was terminated through an arbitrated settlement following a strike. It's not ideal. It's never good to have a third party decide how you're going to live your life in the industry; there were some hard feelings.

WT: Were pension plans ever an issue?

Côté: No, nothing was brought up at the time. The issues were really related to work practices and processes.

WT: How did you decide on who was cut: seniority, merit, education, performance?

Côté: For unionized personnel we had to, of course, follow the procedures and rules of the collective agreement: seniority and qualifications.

WT: And for management?

Côté: Well that was made mainly on the basis of competency. We knew the people we had. We knew what the expectations of the new organization would be. We knew the pressures would be greater than before because bureaucracy and layers would be removed. So each of us was asked to take a look at our staff and to pick out the best people who could face the new mandate and the new expectations. Unfortunately, that meant some long service employees, 48, 50 or 51 years old, then close to retirement, had to be terminated.

WT: What was your strategy?

Côté: All the VPs met to ensure we kept the best people to run this company: the managers day in, day out. We had to make sure they were also able to adapt to the changes, which were dramatic in our case, very dramatic. So it wasn't only on the basis of technical confidence [that we made our decision], it was also on the ability to adapt to this new environment.

WT: How did you bring about this new workplace culture?

Côté: Circumstances were favourable to us. We had the new president [Terry Ivany, who joined Via in 1993 from Marine Atlantic]. He came in and said his objective was to bring the company back to its primary focus, that is, to serve the customer. We should not be operations-driven, we should be customer-driven.

WT: Then being vice-president of customer service, you were undoubtedly happy to hear that?

Côté: Yes, but the concept was not only for external customers but for internal customers, too. [Mounted on the wall is a plaque that says "The answer is yes, what's the question."] This is not a joke; that attitude is what we want in the company. The type of attitude that calls for a mindset of being helpful, being ready to serve.

WT: So how did you provide this, were changes brought about by training?

Côté: A couple of things happened. First of all the president insisted that we meet together-the executives, senior management and, of course, other layers of the company-and put together our strategic plan. In 1996 we released Service for Success.

WT: Briefly, what is the plan's focus?

Côté: We came up with five strategic goals to provide the company with a focus. And we have set specific objectives for each of our goals to ensure that employees know what direction we're going and how we're doing it. Training was necessary.

WT: What kind of training?

Côté: We used to have in excess of 100 different programs: time management, stress management, all sorts of different things. When you have few resources it may not be a wise approach to have a "Christmas catalogue of training." We decided to trim it down to three programs: achieving excellence and customer service (AECS), supervising for service (SSS) and performance enhancement (PE).

WT: Who takes what courses?

Côté: Everybody on the front line throughout the company and even people who work in support functions take the AECS two-day program: secretaries, clerks in HR labour relations and finance. The SSS program, a 10-day training that consists of five modules of two days, is given to everybody in the company who has some responsibility in managing, coaching, supervising or monitoring people in the organization: to ensure that everybody is singing from the same songbook. The third program, PE, is a systematic approach to managing employees' progress; it calls for identifying specific opportunities or problems. We call that working on the behaviours that need to be changed.

WT: Has everybody gone through the first two programs?

Côté: Many people have gone through three programs.

WT: Have there been any major changes in policy?

Côté: No, most changes happened in early 1990 before I arrived here. There used to be binders and binders of policies in HR. Nobody would really pay attention to them; they were a self-feeding machine. For example, we used to have two people who were assigned to do organizational charts. That's all they did, full-time.

WT: Are you doing any hiring now?

Côté: No.

WT: Has the HR department itself faced cuts?

Côté: There used to be 100 people and now we're down to 22. Under the current circumstances I would say it's a pretty good size: services are being provided, there are no complaints. Could it be 19, could it be 18? I think at this point the real question is, "What activities should be performed internally?"

WT: Assuredly, many companies see outsourcing as a benefit. Which services would you consider contracting out?

Côté: Day-to-day services such as benefits and pension, HR services like status change, name change, address change, file update and things like that. Also management of WCB and implementation of the health and safety program. Given the proper environment and circumstances, we will be looking at that possibility.

WT: Being free of these day-to-day activities, say many management consultants, allows HR to concentrate on strategic planning. Do you agree?

Côté: Sure, and I think that, other than the issue of outsourcing, this is probably the other major challenge that I have, the need to move our department a little bit more to the strategic level. There is so much that HR can do to have a company achieve its goals, there is no question about it. But we've got some work to do on that.

WT: Do you think Via will reach a day when it won't need government funding?

Côté: I think that you will hear about this in the future. We are in the process of preparing proposals for the federal minister [of transport] that would call for some investment in infrastructure and equipment. Not in the $18-billion dollar range [the estimated cost for high-speed rail service], but of more modest proportions. Self sufficiency in the early 21st century is possible, perhaps around 2002 or 2003.

WT: Via showing a profit?

Côté: Yes, but some federal government decisions have to be made. We have to buy new equipment, improve the track, as well as discuss the issue of remote services and why we have to absorb $45 million of expenses every year to run services that have no chance of making a profit.

WT: Is there also a possibility of Via going private?

Côté: There is always a possibility. But before that happens many things must happen. Our objective is to make sure we are in-line with government fiscal policy, to bring it [our deficit] back to zero and then to make a profit. What will happen, how this will come about, God knows. But for now, we would like to work toward self sufficiency and success in the long run. And if Via is making a profit, then employees shouldn't worry.

Consider flexible hours In 1870, the standard work week was sixty-four hours. When the average working day was reduced from over ten hours to nine, people were worried that the reduction would lead to all kinds of trouble. George Brown, editor of the Globe and Mail at the time, said "the man who thinks that a 10-hour workday is hurtful or oppressive is too lazy to earn his bread. In the name of Canadian women, we protest against sending such a fellow home to pester his wife by loafing around the house for an extra hour every day."

Our ideas on how much time employees should spend at work has changed dramatically since then. With the increased number of women in the job market, consideration must be given to their child rearing commitments. If your organization cannot accommodate women, you will lose them as a potential candidate base in the future.

Employers must look for ways to allow employees to have more time for themselves and still maintain productivity. There are ways that employees can have more time for their personal needs and still maintain the same levels of productivity. These include job sharing, permanent part-time positions, working at home, using temporary personnel and contract work.

Many workers are interested in taking a pay cut in return for more time off. What is the point in working hard if you can't take the time to enjoy your personal life? When employees are working fewer hours, they have a better chance to take care of personal problems that may interfere with their work.

Job sharing is beginning to gain popularity. Two or more employees split the work and the salary. Job sharing makes resolving staffing problems easy. When one person goes on holiday, the other person can work full-time. It also provides a good opportunity for some of the employees to ease into retirement.