2 big rail unions oppose $85B Union Pacific-Norfolk Southern merger over safety and cost concerns

Railroad Unions Withdraw Support for $85 Billion Union Pacific-Norfolk Southern Merger

Two influential railway unions representing more than half of Union Pacific and Norfolk Southern workers have withdrawn support for the proposed $85 billion merger that would create America’s first transcontinental railroad, citing concerns over job security, safety, and market competition.

The Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers and Trainmen and the Brotherhood of Maintenance of Way Employes Division, both Teamsters affiliates, announced their formal opposition to the deal on Wednesday. Their rejection adds to mounting criticism from the American Chemistry Council, agricultural organizations, and competing railroad BNSF, all of whom have expressed concerns that the merger would harm competition in the transportation sector.

“This proposed monopoly will end up costing businesses more and those costs will be passed on to consumers,” said Brotherhood of Locomotive Engineers and Trainmen National President 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.”

Despite the growing opposition, the deal has secured backing from the nation’s largest rail union representing conductors, hundreds of individual shippers, and a tentative nod from President Donald Trump, who has indicated the merger “sounds good.” The decision ultimately rests with the U.S. Surface Transportation Board, which will assess whether the merger serves the public interest once the railroads submit their formal application, expected later this week.

Union Pacific CEO Jim Vena has championed the merger as economically beneficial, arguing that a coast-to-coast network would accelerate rail shipments by eliminating hand-offs between railroads in the central United States, potentially making rail more competitive against trucking.

However, after months of meetings with executives, union leaders remain unconvinced. They warn that promises to preserve jobs lack sufficient detail to be trustworthy and express concern that nothing prevents the companies from transferring positions hundreds of miles away or selling Union Pacific lines to short-line operators that typically offer lower wages.

Union Pacific has countered these concerns with a statement promising that “every employee with a union job at the time of the merger will continue to have one,” noting they’ve formalized “jobs-for-life” agreements with five unions. Vena has acknowledged, however, that the workforce could still shrink through natural attrition.

The unions have also raised safety concerns, arguing that Union Pacific hasn’t made the same safety improvements that Norfolk Southern implemented following the catastrophic derailment in East Palestine, Ohio, two and a half years ago.

The merger faces particularly stringent regulatory scrutiny under rules adopted in 2001 after a series of disastrous rail consolidations in the 1990s caused severe shipping delays. These untested regulations require mergers between the six largest railroads to demonstrate public benefit and enhanced competition—a higher standard than was applied to Canadian Pacific’s $31 billion acquisition of Kansas City Southern two years ago.

Transportation expert Joe Schwieterman of DePaul University noted the unprecedented scale of the proposal. “This merger is like nothing we’ve seen before. It’s creating a railroad of such enormous scope that it’s somewhat of a paradigm shift,” he said.

If approved, the merged entity would likely control more than 40% of the nation’s freight rail capacity. Currently, Norfolk Southern and CSX dominate the eastern U.S. rail network, while Union Pacific and BNSF serve the western regions. The two major Canadian railroads compete where their tracks extend into the United States and Mexico.

BNSF, owned by Warren Buffett’s Berkshire Hathaway, has strongly opposed the merger. “No customer is asking for this. This is strictly a Wall Street play for shareholders,” said Chief of Staff Zak Andersen.

Earlier this fall, both Buffett and Canadian Pacific Kansas City’s CEO expressed disinterest in rail mergers, suggesting that railroads should instead find collaborative ways to improve shipping efficiency without the complications of consolidation. However, CSX recently replaced its CEO with an executive experienced in leading companies through major mergers, signaling potential industry shifts on the horizon.