News & Reviews News Wire UP to close Nebraska locomotive shop, transferring or furloughing railroaders NEWSWIRE

UP to close Nebraska locomotive shop, transferring or furloughing railroaders NEWSWIRE

By Angela Cotey | October 15, 2018

| Last updated on November 3, 2020


Get a weekly roundup of the industry news you need.

Email Newsletter

Get the newest photos, videos, stories, and more from Trains.com brands. Sign-up for email today!

UPlogo
OMAHA, Neb. — Union Pacific is closing its locomotive shop in South Morrill, Neb., in January.

UP representative Kristen South confirmed the closure in an email to Trains on Monday. She says the railroad is working with labor unions so railroaders have the opportunity to relocate within the railroad’s network, based on seniority.

Workers who are unable, or who are unwilling to transfer, will be furloughed. South says work now done at South Morrill will go to shops in North Platte, Neb., and Little Rock, Ark.

The North Platte Telegraph reports that the closure impacts about 70 workers directly, and is expected to hurt the Morrill area’s economy.

South Morrill is in western Nebraska near the border with Wyoming.

See the original article online. 

8 thoughts on “UP to close Nebraska locomotive shop, transferring or furloughing railroaders NEWSWIRE

  1. Showing how UP isn’t immune from weakness in coal. Volumes are down significantly so it makes sense to do the work at other nearby shops if the volume can be handled. Thus far we’ve only seen CSX and NS cutting in their coal networks, but now UP joins the ranks. Can’t imagine BNSF will last much longer without doing a bit of their own trimming.

    If one doesn’t right-size their operations over time, one ends up with a marginally profitable mess – and you don’t want that!

  2. Alex Christmas I don’t know that BNSF can make a similar cut because Alliance is well placed for servicing locomotives on those routes without a close alternative I’m aware of, and their PRB lines are not as close to 100% coal as UP’s.

    Also as of a couple years ago, BNSF was retaining more coal volume out of the PRB compared to UP, possibly due to price competition and partly due to the “luck of the draw” where UP served more power stations being retired and/or converted to gas. That could’ve changed since I had access to the comparison data though.

You must login to submit a comment