Talk:Canadian National Railway

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

labor relations[edit]

I will admit that my perspective is biased, which is why I ask that some neutral party please consider adding a section on CN's poor labor relations. I know from personal experience that CN has been dragging out contract negotiations with the former Wisconsin Central track dept. union for over six years. I've also heard how CN was notorious for a hostile work environment shortly after privatization. I know every large company has labor problems, that CN is not unique, but it is never the less a part of CN's history and should be mentioned. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.115.47.182 (talk) 04:18, 17 July 2013 (UTC)

official names --> Railway vs. Railways[edit]

Is there any significance in the difference between Canadian National Railways and Canadian National Railway? Did they just feel the plural a tad too long? --Menchi 20:14, 14 Aug 2004 (UTC)

I'd say on the surface it was largely to appear more modern, new image, brand etc. BUT you have to remember Canadian National Railways was a company headquartered in Montreal and not oblivious to Quebec politics. Quebecers were embracing post-modernism throughout the 40's and 50's in an effort to get away from the stiffling confines of institutions dominated by the Roman Catholic Church.
Also, following Quebec premier Maurice Duplessis's death in office in 1959, his successor(s) lost the 1960 election to Jean Lesage, largely based on the growing discontent of the Quebec populace at the Anglicization (sp?) of their culture and the tremendous English control of their economy. The Revolution Tranquille (Quiet Revolution) refers to many of the reforms that Lesage placed in the 60's which transformed the province.
It's hardly a coincidence that CNR, an English name and a federally owned Crown corp, decided to change to a bilingually appropriate name at this time - Canadian National/Canadien National with the acronym CN which worked in both languages. Kind of like how Eaton's in English Canada had to change to Eaton in Quebec or today how we have The Home Depot in English Canada vs. Home Depot in Quebec (and New Brunswick).
Overall though, it's probably a combination of factors. Canadian railways were VERY slow to dieselize compared to their US counterparts. It was only in the early 60's that the last steam locomotives were used in revenue service on CN and CP. With diesels, you needed to paint them (usually with a splashy corporate logo and colours) and the original olive & green paint scheme was considered tired and pretty old school by the 60's so the new paint scheme with the new "squiggly worm" corporate logo - whose design is still viewed by many logo designers and historians world-wide as one of the most signficant logo designs in history - all coincided to drop CNR in lieu of CN.
You also have to remember that CNR by the post-war era was no longer a CNR - that is an amalgamation of railways, as it had been set up to do in the 1920s - so with the company having entrenched its operations to the extent that it did, it was no longer a collection of railways but a railway. Also, CN was more than just a railway as it owned Trans-Canada Airlines, vast communication networks, shipping lines and ferries, etc.
I feel like I've confused the issue a bit more! :-)
In short: 1) post-modernity (or is modernity), 2) logo, corporate image, etc., 3) bilingualism, Quebec-based company, etc., 4) no longer just a railway but more like a holding company for various government agencies/companies, etc.
Cheers, Plasma east 17:17, 31 Aug 2004 (UTC)
The CNR was formed from the Canadian Government Railways. Order-in-Council PC 3122 dated December 20, 1918 gave the plural name Canadian National Railways. However, the Canadian National Railway Company was incorporated by Parliament June 6, 1919 which was proclaimed by Order-in-council PC2094 dated October 4, 1922. It would appear that Canadian National Railways was the marketing name since it consisted of several merged railways, but only an examination of the legal texts would confirm the issue. --142.154.32.57 01:04, 27 Dec 2004 (UTC)
I am pretty new the Michigan, previously I lived in Maryland. Seeing CN Rolling stock where I was in Maryland was pretty rare the majority were CSX and Conrail. Naturally, now that I came to Michigan I see them all the time. I was wondering what the deal was with the Canadian/Canadien thing was. At first I thought it was a mistake at the repaint shop, then I was wondering how they could let so many mistakes slip by. Now I know. It must be a French thing. --Dp67 | QSO | Sandbox | UBX's 15:06, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

Who took over whom 1918 - CNoR or CGR?[edit]

I am sceptical of the statement that the CNoR was asked to manage the Canadian Government Railways. It seems more likely that CGR would take over the bankrupt CNoR just as it had the National Transcontinental Railway. Is this a reference to the CNoR's D.B. Hanna being asked to take a management role in the new Canadian National Railways by the Minister of Railway and Canals? Needs to be investigated.--142.154.32.57 01:13, 27 Dec 2004 (UTC)

On November 20, 1918, the Canadian government took over the CNoR. It then entrusted the management of the CGR, which it already owned, to the CNoR board of directors. JYolkowski 00:40, 3 Jan 2005 (UTC)

Passenger Trains[edit]

Is there any interest in adding a passage somewhere about CN's historical passenger trains? There is an article now (albeit a crappy bare stub) on the Super Continental. Anybody out there up for buffing up the stub and linking to there from here? CN fans need to rise to the occasion - the article for The Canadian is much better developed. Fawcett5 03:46, 4 Mar 2005 (UTC)

Stock market information[edit]

I noticed that TSX and NYSE information was added to this entry, and to the Canadian Pacific Railway entry - it would probably be more appropriate to place this information with the corporate owners of the respective railways: Canadian National Railway Company and Canadian Pacific Railway Limited, where the TSX and NYSE categories have already been added... Just a thought.Plasma east 05:13, 12 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Passenger service in Newfoundland[edit]

I notice that an anon just added something to the article indicating that passenger service in Newfoundland ended in 1969. Is that true? I know that CN discontinued its major Newfoundland passenger service sometime in July of that year, but I was under the impression that passenger service was provided on branch lines (via mixed trains, mostly) after that point. JYolkowski // talk 13:59, 26 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Correct, July 2, 1969 was the last day of the "Newfie Bullet" passenger train, however mixed (freight and passenger)trains continued for many years on three branchlines. Carbonear and Bonavista Mixed service ended in August 1983. Argentia Mixed ended September 19, 1984. The Corner Brook Mixed ended Sept. 30,1988 and abandonment followed with dismantling begun Oct. 1988.
R.L.Kennedy 20:55, 27 Apr 2005 (UTC)
And CNR passenger service ended in Oct. 1968 in Prince Edward Island, if I recall correctly. Would have to read back issues of Canadian Rail or Branchline to confirm though. Pass. rail service was bustituted, same as Nfld. Plasma east 15:59, 2 September 2005 (UTC)

Diesel Locomotives[edit]

What is the basis for the statement that early diesels were a failure? Is it merely the fact more were not built?

There were plenty of Fairbanks-Morse units as well as GMD and MLW/Alco units. Passenger units included F-M in addition to those models listed and in addition there were a number of GMD-1 passenger units.

R.L.Kennedy 20:59, 27 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Various[edit]

Regarding the order of control etc. Canadian Government Railways was entrusted to the directors of the Canadian Northern Railway for operation purposes. P.C. 2854, November 20, 1918.

P.C. 3122 December 20, 1918 was Authority for use of the name Canadian National Railways to designate operation procedure of Canadian Northern Railway and the entrusted Canadian Government Railways

9-10 Geo. V, Chap 13 1919 Consolidation of lines constituting Canadian Northern Railway System, the Canadian Government Railways and all railways that are, or may become, the property of the Dominion of Canada.

U.S, Subsidiaries

Grand Trunk Eastern was an informal name, however, legally it was still the Grand Trunk Railway since a Canadian government entity could not legally exist or operate in a foreign country.

This also applied at the Niagara Frontier where CNR trains ran into the US at Niagara Falls, Ontario and New York. It was only about a mile or so of track. I recall seeing a steam locomotive working in the area clearly lettered Grand Trunk. This would have been a requirement in regards to Customs for equipment going into the country etc.

R.L.Kennedy 03:20, 14 Feb 2005 (UTC)

Nationalization. Re: the recent change. I think you are getting off track here. The Great War (WWI) was over before the CNR came into being. It was the bankruptcy of GTR and CNoR that brought about the CNR not a desire to nationalize, otherwise the CPR would have taken over. That is nationalization.
R.L.Kennedy 00:26, 23 July 2005 (UTC)

Article rewrite[edit]

It's been well over a year since the current format of the article was established with the expanded info. Since that time the format many of the rail-related articles on companies, etc. have been improved signficantly. The content, while more-or-less correct, could stand to be edited for better flow, less wordy, etc. and make more use of the CNR images collection at the Nat. Museum of Science & Tech. (public domain - fairuse), etc. I think it's high-time for this entry on CNR to get agressive treatment as a collaboration project - any thoughts by others? Plasma east 15:57, 2 September 2005 (UTC)

I agree, I think it could use a rewrite. There's a lot of good information there, but it's kind of disorganized, and there's a lot of information from the past 10 years but little for the preceding 70. P.S. There are a couple of interesting public domain images to be found here: [1]. JYolkowski // talk 23:02, 2 September 2005 (UTC)
Indeed, a greater emphasis needs to be made on the history. I'll see what I can find in my own collection (I think I've got a passenger timetable from the 1950s or 60s, and I've got a bunch of other reference material...), but the majority of my references are on subjects in the western US. I'm in the middle of research for the Santa Fe Railroad article, but I'm sure that I'll find something helpful. slambo 15:52, September 3, 2005 (UTC)
OK, I'll devote some time toward getting a template and draft content for the revision. I have official guides from the 1970s into VIA and an older one from the 1930s for passenger info. I'll check what I have about other company operations (steamships, hotels, telegraph, etc.). I agree that historical info is limited in the present version so reversing the proportion would be beneficial to the readership. Plasma east 14:09, 6 September 2005 (UTC)

Incorrect interwiki links[edit]

I've removed the links to it:CN and sv:CN several times because those are disambiguation pages and I don't see an appropriate Canadian National Railway article on those two wikis yet. Yurikbot keeps re-adding them because CN reidrects to this article. Maybe with them commented out now, the bot won't try to readd them. Slambo (Speak) 16:25, 28 July 2006 (UTC)

Commuter service, too[edit]

I seem to recall CN operating the commuter train service on Montreal's northern route, Central Station to Deux Montagnes, as recently as the 70s or early 80s. Should that be added to the Passenger section?Shawn in Montreal 04:01, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

Merge discussion, November 2006[edit]

Note: Previous discussion.

  • If we're going to merge, the merge should be into this article title as previously stated. At the moment, I still oppose a merge because the other article was split off from this one in the first place. Slambo (Speak) 17:42, 25 November 2006 (UTC)
    Seeing no further activity after my previous comment here, I've removed the merge tags as "no consensus after 10 days". Slambo (Speak) 20:57, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

2007 strike[edit]

I'm a bit surprised that nobody's put anything in this article about the current strike. Some details are currently in the following references:

The strike is expected to last through the coming weekend, and on reading the various train boards out there, I've heard that the CN mainlines are eerily quiet this week as a result. I've added a short blurb to Portal:Trains based on this information. Has there been any effect on CN operations in the US (other than fewer shipments crossing the border in either direction right now)? Slambo (Speak) 16:33, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

Is a strike such as this really worthy of being in an "encyclopedia" ? I think not. It is a news item. Let's at least wait for the outcome of it.

R.L.Kennedy 03:48, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

Inappropriate link?[edit]

I looked at the link that was repeatedly added to the External links section today. I don't think it meets current external links policy because the page encourages readers to "Become a client" of the trading company that owns the site, and the one paragraph of data available on that page is little more than what we already have in the lead section here. I've seen articles in newspapers unrelated to rail transport that are more extensive than that on subjects that are far smaller than this company. Rather than continuously reverting and getting into an edit war over this, let's discuss it further here. Slambo (Speak) 20:44, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

I've invited the editor who was reinserting the link to join the discussion here, but looking at his contribution history, he has been adding similar links to a number of other pages about current corporations for the same website. I've removed the link from this article again for the reasons stated above. Slambo (Speak) 22:24, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

See also Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Spam#http://spam.andrewjohns.ca and RaymondJames. Slambo (Speak) 22:42, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

Transcontinental Railway[edit]

In the article, it says CN is "Canada's only transcontinental railway company". But in the article of Canadian Pacific Railway, It says CP "was Canada's first transcontinental railway". So, which one is correct? ppa (talk) 00:16, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

Both are correct. CP was the first, but it is no longer a transcontinental within Canada as it does not extend eastward past Quebec any more and only reaches the Atlantic Ocean after passing through New York. CN connects from Vancouver to Nova Scotia entirely within Canada. Slambo (Speak) 11:25, 21 August 2008 (UTC)
Yes, but in North America transcontinental railway just means it crosses the Rockies. In any case, CP still reaches Montreal and hence the Atlantic via the St. Lawrence, which is more than many former U.S. transcontinentals could claim. (Western Pacific Railroad? Unless there's a hidden outlet from the Great Salt Lake... :)) Also note that CP didn't originally reach the Maritimes, but it was called a transcontinental from the beginning. (It actually never reached the Atlantic proper except through Maine.) --NE2 20:56, 28 October 2009 (UTC)

Seton to Lillooet "Buddweiser"[edit]

I've ridden on the Buddweiser, though CN didn't own the BCR line yet; I"m not sure that it's CN that's operating the route, so much as a local body, probably the Seton Band, that's operating it, and CNR has been forced to provide usage of the tracks. I'll be back about that if I can find the details....Skookum1 (talk) 02:40, 28 March 2009 (UTC)

Updating the Sale of BC Rail scandal[edit]

The passage on the tainted sale of BC Rail is far out of date, notably because the court seal was lifted a few months ago, and just this last couple of weeks 8000 pages of documents have been released, though some apparently have been faked to provide false leads. It's a dirty, dirty story though CNR itself isn't necessarily the bad guy; but various allegations of government and politician misconduct have surfaced, and worries of a mistrial have been eclipsed by revelations that the Premier and other high cabinet officials met with CN, and that the CN sale was rigged from the start, such that the bidding process was rigged and the other bidders have called hte process unfair; the sale may be reversed, particularly if collusion charges are levelled by the governing caucus (i.e. levelled by the authorities, they've already been made by a former caucus member). I'm too busy to keep up with edits to this and the BC Rail and the various politician articles and BC Legislature Raids, and there's more breaking every day. For those interested in this issue and who have the time to update the article in an NPOV fashion (which I, frankly, would find hard to do, as I think the guilty parties on the political side of the equation are all damned crooks) and also disapprove of the CNR's slack safety standards (I know the places their trains have gone over, and know that the trains were unnecessarily long) and wonder what other kickbacks there are in teh equation; the trial has since moved far beyodn the grow-op and money laundering charges; ostensibly it's still only about influence peddling ("receiving/offering a benefit", to/from OmniTRAX via Pilot House Communications, a government-friendly lobbying agency) and the involvement of a "backroom Liberal" (Patrick Kinsella) and various payments made to him for unclear services, and how he lobbied without being a registered lobbyist, for more than one corporate party in the bidding, as well as advising the government (Premier) at the same time.....one of hte main citability problems with all this is that the main news sources have been in blogspace because the national media are covering other issues, like gang warfare, pedophiliac rings, floating feet and avalanches, and of course the global economic meltdown and the usual gamut of "ordinary scandals" in Central CAnada and "hockey gossip"; the notability of certain blogs - http://bctrialofbasi-virk.blogspot.com/ plus http://billtieleman.blogspot.com, and articles in http://thetyee.ca and http://www.straight.com plus the occasional column in the major media (but only occasional) require some flexibility on "reliable sources" (as the blogs mentioend are really teh only reliable sources ,as distortion/evasion by the big media continues, despite the occasional column...). Anyway the shit is hitting the fan as I write this, adn it involves CN in a big way; this will haev to be, or should be, a separate section of its own, jsut as it is on teh BC Rail page. So far the Securities & Ecxhange Commission and its Canadian equivalent aren't involved; by the sound of the latest revelations, though, it should be any day now.....as some of the blogpundits have said "this is the most important corruption trial in BC history"...and perhaps Canadian history, eclipsing Airbus/Mulroney-Schreiber and the Sponsorship Scandal. A pretty big deal, too, financially - $1 billion. I know if I were a CN investor, I'd be very worried right now....Skookum1 (talk) 02:40, 28 March 2009 (UTC)

Cuts of service to Northeastern BC[edit]

One of the complaints about CN's behaviour in BC has, lately, been the cutting off of freight services into the Peace River Country, increasing costs for those living and doing business in that region; I'll be back with more on that when I have some details.....Skookum1 (talk) 02:40, 28 March 2009 (UTC)

Map needs updating, I think[edit]

This is in relation to the situation in the previous section, part of the story of which is that CN closed down services on the Peace River-Prince George link in order to force businesses and residents in that area to rely on a a newly-acquired line/track from Alberta into that region; or would that be the formerly-crown-owned Alberta railway subsidiary? I'll do some digging later about the info in the previous section, but if what I recall reading is right there's another spur line that should be on the map....and does CN own, or not own, the trackline of the Dease Lake Extension?Skookum1 (talk) 14:47, 18 April 2009 (UTC)

Name is no longer Canadian National Railway[edit]

The DBA name is now "CN" only and "Canadian National" is excluded from company use/press releases. This is fairly well-known for those following the politics of this company; and it may be4 headquartered in Montreal, in terms of Canadian legal requirements re its ownership, but controlling interest and management direction comes from Texas. Note the use of CN in this article which is about a change in CEO....a CEO who happened to be from Tennessee. Don't want to get into ramifications of this except to say that "Canadian National Railway" is an obsolete term.Skookum1 (talk) 14:57, 28 October 2009 (UTC)

Let me know when they change their actual name. For now, their website says "© 2009, Canadian National Railway Company". --NE2 20:50, 28 October 2009 (UTC)

I'm not sure where any of this info is from but if you read the whole article this guy links to it also says the next (current) CEO is a Quebec native. I can't find find or heard anything on CN being controled from Texas!?!? The official name is still Canadian National Railway Company. There are other companies that use their initials throughout company reports and releases... GE,... GM. Also a DBA is a form of incorporation and is not the type of company CN is.173.123.200.144 (talk) 17:17, 25 April 2012 (UTC)

CN Worldwide[edit]

How can we incorporate CN Worldwide, a private subsidiary owned by CN? Should it be a one-sentence reference in the intro, or a line in the infobox, or possibly a subsection? --ACRSM 02:05, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

Canadian registry v. actual American ownership[edit]

In re a discussion topic, now archived I guess (not on the immediate talkpage above) about whether or not this is a Canadian company, someone had responded that 15% of shares is the limit on any one shareholder, as if that somehow "proved" it was Canadian-owned and not run from Texas, and as if having a flagship office with a Canadian address/registry was sufficient to prove it was still Canadian.  !5% may be the limit on any one stock portfolio's share but this 2004 report from the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives, quote in the BC Mary blog, says that 70% of shares are held by Americans. Somewhere else another report says that Bill Gates is the single largest shareholder, controlling 23% of shares (apparently through more than one stock portfolio). The actual ownership of the company is dominantly American, and it's known to those who follow the politics or privatization that company decision-making is not in Canadian hands....this is a Canadian registered company, it is not a Canadian owned company......Skookum1 (talk) 16:28, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

Registered?! This is not a boat we're talking about. That whole arguement above is convoluted. There's nothing clear-cut about publicly traded companies. Its a Canadian company, publicly traded on the NYSE and Toronro exchange, headquartered in Montreal. Bill Gates and other investors bought shares of a Canadian company. I'm not sure what is ment by Canadian hands. The board is split between Canadians and Americans, the Chairmam is from Vancouver, the President/CEO is Canadian and the COO is American. So what if the majority of stockholders are American, they probably won't vote in a block. That would go without saying since there are 300 million Americans and 30 million Canadians. Ford is an American company with shares owned by American and Canadian investors.173.123.200.144 (talk) 15:10, 25 April 2012 (UTC)

Reporting Currency[edit]

The company reports in Canadian dollars (all figures on cn.ca) but the article sources these things in USD (the second footnote). This seems illogical. Change it? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.148.129.210 (talk) 19:08, 17 January 2010 (UTC)

Templates for many more states[edit]

By the map and article, there are many more states with CNR service, especially between Canada and Alabama. Someone should add those. --DThomsen8 (talk) 12:40, 2 May 2010 (UTC)

Proposed deletion of Montrain[edit]

Ambox warning yellow.svg

The article Montrain has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

A search for references found no WP:RS for the content of this article. Fails WP:V and WP:N

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. Jeepday (talk) 00:09, 31 December 2010 (UTC)

Purchase of Thompson branch[edit]

Hello,

in 1957, the spur from Hudson Bay Railway near Sipiwesk to the city of Thompson, Manitoba, was build and thus owned by INCO. At some point between, 1958 and 1962, the branch was sold to CN. Does somebody know, or maybe could figure out, in what year this did happen?

Regards Kallewirsch (talk) 23:09, 6 August 2011 (UTC)

Some pretty heavy googling reveals this [2] - the reports are dated to 1958 - from monthly journals - so I'd say they bought it 1957/8 - looks like they bought it pretty much once it was built. (if I've read right )
quote: "Still another branch line became a part of CNR with acquisition of the newly constructed 30-mile railway from Sipiwesk on the Hudson Bay line in Northern Manitoba to the great new nickel deposits being developed by International Nickel Ltd. at Thompson in the Moal Lake-Mystery Lake region:"
It's mentioned in the context of the opening of the Bartibog to Heathe Steal line which happened in 1957 - so I guess it is a from a review of the previous year (1957) - that would mean that CNR bought the line as soon as it was completed (I would guess that INCO would be making a bigger profit on the mine than CNR on just operating a railway - so it may have made sense for INCO to 'subidise' the cost of the railway by effectively building it for them, and then letting them have it at reduced cost - it might not have made sense as a capital investment for CNR as muc otherwise - that's just a guess = I can't think of another reason why CNR didn't build it themselves if the intention was (as it seems) to operated it from day 1...)
someone at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Trains might have more info.Imgaril (talk) 03:31, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

Many thanks for the quick response. As searching by Google is often a mystery, without the exact phrase I wouldn´t have found it.

CN was running the line from the beginning, according to this article describing the opening event.

According to this and this article, the bill that allowed CN to buy the line was in its last phase of legislation in December 57. I don´t know how legislation in Canada worked in the late 50ies, but I think the bill was finally passed end of 57 or early 58. Even if there was no much need for negotiations, I think it´s unlikely that the purchase took place still in 57.

The latter souce gives a hint why the line was built by INCO and not by CN. I suppose that in those boom years INCO needed a secure way to bring men and material into Thompson area as soon as possible, so they didn't want to wait until parliament did pass a bill to allow CN to build the line itself. Kallewirsch (talk) 07:46, 7 August 2011 (UTC)

Ships[edit]

The CNR, in common with many railways, operated an number of ships. This was done through Canadian National Steamships Ltd. The article doesn't mention this at all. Mjroots (talk) 06:31, 1 September 2011 (UTC)

Ownership[edit]

This material is unsoursed and rediculous. This is an assumption and if you knew why the GTC was created it was for tax purposes or for merging with another company. If you're going to make text like this the easiest thing to do would be to cite the actual US law.
The US subsidiaries kept their identities due to their ownership. Legally, foreign governments were not allowed to own railroads in the US. However, a railroad owned by another railroad was allowed to operate, even if that "other railroad" was owned by a foreign government. 173.123.200.144 (talk) 14:28, 25 April 2012 (UTC)

Outdated Map?[edit]

The Elgin, Joliet and Eastern Railway has been a subsidiary of the CN since 2009. Shouldn't the map be updated to include the new "belt" around Chicago? --MasterA113 (talk) 22:03, 23 September 2012 (UTC)

"as far north as Anchorage"??[edit]

from the introductory article section: "... it is the northernmost rail line anywhere within the North American Rail Network, as far north as Anchorage, Alaska. " The map at the beginning of this article shows no red lines reaching Anchorage. If this is supposed to suggest that the northernmost service is at the same latitude as Anchorage, let it be clarified. Mang (talk) 19:27, 17 October 2012 (UTC)

Though the claim is true - I think - because the White Pass and Yukon Railway and the Alaska Railway (?) near Anchorage do not connect to the North American network. The northernmost point in the CN network for now is, I think, Mosque, British Columbia on the Dease Lake Extension of what had formerly been the British Columbia Railway and was never completed; there's current talk about finishing it to Dease Lake, British Columbia and extending it via Atlin, I think, and the Yukon River to Fairbanks; no other route is build-able other than nearer the Alaska Highway; the CN line in Northeastern BC may reach farther north than the Dease Lake Extension i.e. to Fort Nelson, British Columbia maybe.Skookum1 (talk) 07:57, 19 April 2013 (UTC)
the map does need upgrading to show the Dease Lake line, wherever it ends at the moment.......but the northernmost point of the network is Hay River, Northwest Territories; neither northerly point in BC is as far north.Skookum1 (talk) 08:11, 19 April 2013 (UTC)

Neutrality[edit]

I don't think the section "High Treason" is particularly neutral... Stephenb (Talk) 07:13, 19 April 2013 (UTC)

I just removed it with the edit comment "who added THAT??".....also the two short sections following it which were also uncited and also b.s. You can take the POV tag off unless there are other reasons for it to stay?Skookum1 (talk) 07:50, 19 April 2013 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Canadian National Railway. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

You may set the |checked=, on this template, to true or failed to let other editors know you reviewed the change. If you find any errors, please use the tools below to fix them or call an editor by setting |needhelp= to your help request.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

If you are unable to use these tools, you may set |needhelp=<your help request> on this template to request help from an experienced user. Please include details about your problem, to help other editors.

Cheers. —cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 18:35, 17 October 2015 (UTC)

70 mi railway to Hay River[edit]

Which stretch of track is being referred to? Mackenzie Northern Railway lists this stretch as 602 miles. --Ysangkok (talk) 03:06, 14 February 2016 (UTC)

There are 76 mi of track within NWT, so it's worded misleadingly. The line that branches off from the rest of the CN network, from Roma Jct (Grimshaw) to Hay River, is 376 mi long. The 602 mi figure must include the former NAR lines Smith–Fahler, Winagami (McLellan)–Grimshaw, and the Daishowa Spur, which were also part of MNR. Indefatigable (talk) 22:32, 14 February 2016 (UTC)

Proposed updates to Corporate governance section[edit]


Hi,

I represent CN. We are hoping an editor can kindly update the Corporate governance section of the Canadian National Railway page to reflect the current members of CN's Board of Directors as follows:

===Members of the Board===
Robert Pace, D. COMM.
Chair of the Board
Canadian National Railway Company
President and Chief Executive Officer
The Pace Group
Committees: 3, 4, 5, 7

Donald J. Carty, O.C., LL.D.
Retired Vice-Chairman and Chief Financial Officer
Dell Inc.
Committees: 1(C), 3, 5, 6, 7

Ambassador Gordon D. Giffin
Partner
Dentons U.S. LLP
Committees: 1, 4, 6(C), 7, 8

Edith E. Holiday
Corporate Director and Trustee, Former General Counsel, United States Treasury Department and Secretary of the Cabinet
The White House
Committees: 1, 2, 6, 7, 8(C)

V. Maureen Kempston Darkes, O.C., D. COMM., LL.D.
Retired Group Vice-President
General Motors Corporation and President GM Latin America,
Africa and Middle East
Committees: 1, 2, 3, 5(C), 7

The Honourable Denis Losier, P.C., LL.D., C.M.
Retired President and Chief Executive Officer
Assumption Life
Committees: 3(C), 4, 6, 7, 8

The Honourable Kevin G. Lynch, P.C., O.C., PH.D., LL.D.
Vice-Chair
BMO Financial Group
Committees: 2(C), 3, 6, 7, 8

Luc Jobin
President and Chief Executive Officer
Canadian National Railway Company
Committees: 4(C), 7

James E. O'Connor
Former Chairman and CEO
Republic Services, Inc.
Committees: 1, 2, 5, 6, 7(C)

Robert L. Phillips
President
R.L. Phillips Investments Inc.
Committees: 1, 3, 5, 6, 7

Laura Stein
Executive Vice-President – General Counsel and Corporate Affairs
The Clorox Company
Committees: 1, 2, 5, 6, 7


Committees:

1. Audit
2. Finance
3. Corporate Governance and Nominating
4. Donations and Sponsorships Committee
5. Environment, Safety and Security
6. Human Resources and Compensation
7. Strategic Planning
8. Investment Committee of CN's Pension Trust Funds

(C) Denotes chair of the committee

At the same time, we would like to update the Heads of CNR section of the page more completely accurately and reflect the members:

===Heads of CNR===

  • David B. Hanna 1919-1922 as President
  • Sir Henry W. Thornton 1922-1932 as Chair and President
  • Samuel J. Hungerford 1932-1941 as President and 1936-1942 as Chair
  • Robert C. Vaughan 1941-1949 as President and 1942-1949 as Chair
  • Donald Gordon 1950-1966 as Chair and President
  • Norman J. MacMillan 1967-1974 as Chair and President
  • Pierre Taschereau 1974-1977 as Chair
  • Robert A. Bandeen 1974-1982 as President
  • Jacques A. Dextrase 1977-1982 as Chair
  • J. Maurice LeClair 1982-1985 as President and Chief Executive Officer and 1985 1986 as Chair and Chief Executive Officer
  • Jack H. Horner 1982-1984 as Chair
  • Elizabeth J. Hewes 1984-1985 as Chair
  • Ronald E. Lawless 1985-1987 as President and 1987-1992 as President and Chief Executive Officer
  • Brian O’Neill Gallery 1987-1989 as Chair
  • Brian R.D. Smith 1989-1994 as Chair
  • David G.A. McLean 1994-2014 as Chair
  • Paul M. Tellier 1992-2002 as President and Chief Executive Officer
  • E. Hunter Harrison 2003-2009 as President and Chief Executive Officer
  • Claude Mongeau 2010-2016 as President and Chief Executive Officer
  • Robert Pace 2014- as Chair
  • Luc Jobin 2016- as President and Chief Executive Officer


Please let me know if you have any questions or concerns.

Thanks!

Scott

Sources:

CNR.CA Company Profile[1]
The Board and Its Committees[2]
Historical Heads of CN[3]

Scott at CN (talk) 18:23, 16 August 2016 (UTC)

Partly done: I have updated the "Heads" section as per the sources provided above...but not sure about listing current positions at all...as per WP:LISTPEOPLE " the names of non-notable people may be included in a list that is largely made up of notable people"...its a close call. Will leave the request open to get a third persons POV on this.--Moxy (talk) 18:53, 16 August 2016 (UTC)
Moxy, I added just a sentence with just the names of the board members; no details about their positions at other companies. If I'm reading it correctly, WP:LISTPEOPLE governs stand-alone lists, so I don't think it is of concern to an embedded list. Is what I wrote a fair compromise? Altamel (talk) 01:21, 22 August 2016 (UTC)

The other electric locomotives[edit]

Besides the CN Boxcab Electric Canadian National Railway#Electrics the section mentions ...they were supplemented by nearly identical locomotives from the National Harbour Board; those engines were built in 1924 by Beyer-Garratt and English-Electric. In 1950, three General Electric center-cab electric locomotives were added to the fleet.

Would it be possible to add specific articles? Peter Horn User talk 20:52, 21 August 2016 (UTC) Peter Horn User talk 20:55, 21 August 2016 (UTC)

  1. ^ "CNR.CA Company Profile". wsj.com. Dow Jones & Company, Inc. Retrieved 10 August 2016. 
  2. ^ "The Board and Its Committees". CN.ca. Canadian National Railway Company. Retrieved 10 August 2016. 
  3. ^ "Historical Heads of CN". CN.ca. Canadian National Railway Company. Retrieved 16 August 2016.