BLET, BMWED, BRS Oppose Potential UP-NS Merger (UPDATED 12/23)
BLET and BMWED, which comprise the Teamsters Rail Conference, conducted five months of investigation, held meetings across the nation to listen to union members employed at both railroads, and negotiated directly with UP CEO Jim Vena.
The following is a statement from Teamsters General President Sean M. O’Brien; Mark Wallace, President of the Teamsters Rail Conference and the BLET; and Tony Cardwell, President of the BMWED, on the potential merger between UP and NS.
“The Teamsters Union strongly opposes the proposed merger between Union Pacific and Norfolk Southern as currently written.
“Between the BLET and the BMWED, the Teamsters Rail Conference represents nearly 20,000 Union Pacific and Norfolk Southern workers—over half of their unionized employees. These hardworking men and women make these railroads run. We cannot and will not support any agreement or merger that fails to safeguard their lives and livelihoods.
“The Teamsters investigated the terms of the acquisition for five months, held meetings with members nationwide, and directly negotiated with Union Pacific’s and Norfolk Southern’s leadership. Executives from both carriers—particularly Union Pacific—refused to make real commitments to protect the jobs and address the concerns of our members.
“Union Pacific and Norfolk Southern have worrying histories when it comes to protecting workers and communities. This includes causing a shocking number of accidents on the tracks, like the catastrophe in East Palestine, as well as trying to give away American jobs to Mexican rail crews. They have given us every reason to believe these problems would only grow worse if the merger is approved under its proposed terms.
“It’s time for Union Pacific and Norfolk Southern to get serious and do right by our members. Until they do, the Teamsters will do everything in our power to block this harmful merger.”
According to the two unions, the “supersized” transcontinental railroad, to be called Union Pacific, that would be created by the UP-NS merger, spanning 43 states and 50,000 miles of track, would be a “de facto monopoly.”
“This debt-ridden tie-up won’t make rail more competitive with trucks as merger proponents claim,” said Mark Wallace, “We believe this transcontinental railroad will make shipping by rail less attractive as the merged carrier passes off rail lines that serve small towns, factories and farms to short line railroads while running miles-long slow-moving trains on the main line. For rail customers it will be a choice between ‘Hell or the highway.’”
More than 40 chemical company CEOs, as well as more than 60 trade associations and chambers of commerce, have also voiced opposition to the merger.
UP and NS formally filed an application to allow the merger to go forward on Dec 19. The Teamster-affiliated unions say that the safety record of UP, the dominant partner in the potential merger, “should be carefully examined by the Surface Transportation Board (STB) as it considers whether this acquisition should be approved.”
“We’ve been around the track before with railroad mergers,” said Wallace. “Mergers can be messy, and the very act of merging two railroad cultures creates safety risks. UP can do better. BLET and BMWED were open-minded to the merger when first announced. We reached out to Jim Vena on day one. We have met with Vena and others on his team over the past five months. The UP CEO has failed to convince us that he has the best interests of customers, workers and the communities served by rail on his agenda. As a result, it’s now our job, with the full backing of the Teamsters union, to convince the STB that this merger should be rejected.”
The statement from BLET and BMWED follows a Dec. 16 release by UP stating that “every employee with a union job at the time of the merger will continue to have one.”
UP says it has formalized that pledge with groundbreaking jobs-for-life agreements with the International Association of Sheet Metal, Air, Rail and Transportation Workers – Transportation Division (SMART-TD), the nation’s largest rail labor organization, as well as National Conference of Firemen and Oilers (NCFO), Brotherhood of Railway Carmen (BRC), International Brotherhood of Boilermakers (IBB) and United Supervisors Council of America (USCA).
BRS on Dec. 22 released a statement of opposition, noting:
“Signalmen are responsible for the installation, inspection, maintenance, and repair of the signal systems that govern train movements through America’s communities. The safe operation of the national rail network depends on redundancy, accountability, and a strong safety culture. The proposed merger moves in the opposite direction.
“UP’s public assurances that the transaction will improve efficiency and strengthen safety are not supported by its recent record. Federal regulators have already raised concerns regarding UP’s safety culture, including interference with a Federal Railroad Administration safety assessment and documented patterns of retaliation against employees who raise safety issues. Expanding the size and reach of an organization with unresolved safety deficiencies presents unacceptable risk to workers and the public.
“The merger would also consolidate unprecedented control over the nation’s rail infrastructure. By combining two of the largest Class I railroads, the transaction would reduce competition across key corridors, limit shipper options, and concentrate nearly forty percent of U.S. rail freight under a single corporate entity. History shows that this level of consolidation leads to service disruptions, higher costs, job losses, and weakened oversight—outcomes that are inconsistent with the public interest.
“From a workforce perspective, rail mergers have repeatedly resulted in staffing reductions, forced relocations, and the erosion of institutional knowledge that is critical to safe railroad operations. Signal work is not interchangeable or easily replaced. Fewer skilled workers covering larger territories increases failure risk, lengthens response times, and undermines the very safety claims advanced by merger proponents.
“The Surface Transportation Board’s (STB) merger rules require more than promises. They require clear, demonstrable evidence that a transaction enhances competition, protects workers, and improves service and safety for the public. Based on the record before it, this proposal does not meet that standard.”
BRS President Mike Baldwin said: “The rail industry has been down this road before, and the results were disruptive, dangerous, and costly. This merger is not about strengthening the rail network. It is about expanding corporate power while shifting risk onto workers, communities, and the public.”
BRS reported that it will “continue to engage in the regulatory process, work with allied rail labor organizations, and submit formal comments to the STB to ensure that the voices of frontline safety workers are heard.”
