Thread regarding Union Pacific Corp. layoffs

would be nice if someone actually did some research. UP was labeled best place to work amongst veterans. Many tax breaks given for hiring veterans, however It would be interesting to see if people who have been cut or furloughed are still on the books for these tax breaks. If people would just take a minute to do some research they would see that this company does not, completely and unequivocally does not, in any way shape or form....care about their employees. If your still here its because you are stuck because of age or lack of skills and are riding this till the wheels fall off.

If UP is the most admired railroad, why did Warren Buffett invest in the BNSF?

Yeah the the funny thing is not only has UP been the worst ranked company overall for two years in a row, but the other railroads are pretty close behind with everyone doing the PSR thing. So even if it were the most admired among these that’s not saying much. Also, nobody admires UP or any other railroad except foamers. The vast majority of people don’t even know what UP does and the only time they think about the railroad is when they are blocked by a train and even then they don’t even know which railroad it is nor do they care they are just p-ss-d.

Bib, I have friends at two other class 1 railroads and they ARE very dissatisfied with their management. Just because UP is listed as the worst on Glassdoor, doesn’t mean other companies don’t treat their employees just as badly. I worked at another class 1 (NS) before UP. I can truthfully say they were much tougher with discipline. They have a very military like structure and the managers don’t interact very much with the workers except when testing. I would not recommend anyone to apply with any railroad due to them all adopting the same operating methodology (PSR). The railroads are doing well for investors, the board of directors, upper management, and pretty much no one else.

It would seem that "somebody" has to benefit from being a sh!tty place to work. If it's not the employees, it must be the higher ups, the board, CEO and big investors. I do think there is potential in what another poster said about how there might be hype before the biggest investors pull out, bit that's also somehow not insider trading. Hmm...

Not one employee has commented on the UP site.....

I think everyone is taking this article at face value and not looking at the big picture. Fortune magazine is written for investors. It is their job to basically talk up an investment opportunity. That being said, here is what I gather from this article.

Railroads have traditionally been considered long term, safe holdings. They produced a dividend and were analogous to holding long term bonds. Their growth was not spectacular but was consistent and solid in the long term. If you look at Union Pacific's stock growth chart, you will notice that the growth was very modest until 2010. The stock rose quite rapidly from there and you can see the huge slide in 2015 which dropped almost as fast as it rose. It went from a high of 107 in Feb of 2015 to a low of 60 in in Feb of 2016. Then it began to rise once again and this time it shot up. Presently the stock is at 220.

This is analogous to what occurred during the tech bubble in the 1990s and the telecom bubble in the early 2000s. Back then, the news and pundits were hyping the companies generating a lot buzz for the small investors (day traders) to wanted to invest their money in the hopes of making it rich. Recall how stocks of companies such as pets.com, napster, and Geocities were hyped to generate investing interest. The telecom bubble was the same story with such companies as Worldcom, Qwest, and XO communications. Even companies in the energy sector were over hyped-anyone remember Enron? Later examples were in green energy with companies such as Solyndra. But the question was, who became rich? Certainly a handful of day traders made some profits but it was the investment funds who walked away rich on the backs of the day traders while the companies began imploding.

Fortune magazine isn't writing a puff piece about Union Pacific because they want to make the company seem like it is something that it is not. What this article is about is generating investment interest from the small investor. Get the average Joe to sink his hard earned dollars into the company. The stock goes up a bit and the mutual funds then pull out leaving the day trader stuck with the sinking ship. Don't forget, these fund managers have to recoup their funds that they lost on the Gamestop incident. Personally, I think certain investment funds have decided that Union Pacific has gone as far as they deem safe and is becoming a risky investment. They want to pull out but if people catch on what is going on behind the scenes, Union Pacific's stock would plummet. Therefore, they must hype the stock so that more money is going in than what is being withdrawn. These funds can then start selling their shares.

No I have to disagree with that last post. The reasoning for that is quite obvious. If the "other" class 1 employees are just as or more dissatisfied with their employers, then why didn't they make the the worst employer list? The other class 1's have made cuts, but the only ones that made the very deep cuts and closed a few locations are now on that list. The CP,CN, and BNSF are NOT on the list. The possible unfortunate reality is the railroads may never be trusted again for employment. This next statement is for any company out there, big or small. A company needs to have employees. The employees need to be able to trust the company. If the employees can't trust the company, then you have what the we have today. Remember, they made the worst employer list. They didn't make that list by being compassionate and with their employees in mind. Just something to think about. I personally believe that article was based on a pure financial view. That article just like many different news articles have been filled with fictional views, like quality of management. The management at the UP is in no way quality management and that's not an opinion by the way. If Fortune or any other magazine want to do another article of "most admired company", then why not include interviews from lower personnel? Why only talk with the executives, directors, and securities analysts? I can certainly go on further with this, but hopefully your smart enough to see where this is going. That article only saw the company through the upper echelon. Therefore the article was based on the most biased point of view. Sorry for the long reply, but I just don't agree with it at all. I was let go after 27 years, and all I got was the biggest piece of TOUGH SH1T!

UP might be the highest rated railroad, but you have to consider the context. The class 1’s have been cutting employees, short lining, and destroying their workforce for the past few years. The other railroads employees are just as, if not more dissatisfied with their companies than UP’s. The railroad industry had taken a huge turn against its employees and most railroad workers are very unhappy no matter the company. UP being the most admired is nothing to brag about. It’s like saying you are the most popular terrorist. Being the best of a group of awful companies is not anything to celebrate.

Why tell them anything? They know it's the worst company, but was probably bribed into writing that article to make the UP look better somehow. I'm waiting for the new articles to start, that are appropriately called WhatsUP. We all know how those StraightUP articles went. I have hope that some day they'll learn. For the time being, it's just better to let them think of brain dead propaganda to distract folks from how sh1tty the company really is. I gave up giving a damn about this company. I've done my time and will continue steering as many people as I can away from being employed by this company. If some people want to take the chance at getting a job here, then all I can say is that I did warn them!

They had to come out with that BS since UP was voted the worst company two years in a row.