OSHA Orders Union Pacific to Pay $305K After Firing Worker Who Refused Storm Duty
A North Little Rock yardman was terminated after halting work during a lightning storm. Federal regulators say the firing was illegal retaliation.
Federal workplace safety regulators have ordered Union Pacific Railroad to pay a former North Little Rock yardman at least $304,869 after determining the company illegally fired him for refusing to work during a lightning storm, the U.S. Department of Labor announced.
The Occupational Safety and Health Administration concluded that the worker flagged nearby lightning to management, cited OSHA and National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration lightning safety guidelines, and initiated a safety stand-down until the storm cleared. Union Pacific responded within minutes by pulling the employee from service and later charged him with insubordination. His employment was formally terminated on May 30, 2024, under the Federal Railroad Safety Act — a statute specifically designed to shield railroad workers from retaliation for raising safety concerns.
Read more SEC Proposes New Crypto Asset Custody Rules for Advisers and Funds →
On June 10, 2026, OSHA issued its order directing Union Pacific to expunge all references to the incident from the employee's personnel records and to pay back wages, lost benefits, compensatory and punitive damages, and attorney's fees totaling the award. The agency's finding represents a significant application of federal whistleblower protections in a railroad safety context.
Union Pacific has contested the ruling. The company filed formal objections to OSHA's order and requested a hearing before a U.S. Department of Labor Administrative Law Judge, meaning the case will advance to an additional adjudication phase before any penalties are finalized.
OSHA's Whistleblower Protection Program enforces 25 separate federal statutes shielding workers who report safety and regulatory violations across industries ranging from railroads and pipelines to securities and nuclear energy. Per department policy, the name of the employee involved was not disclosed. Continue reading at DOL News Releases and Briefs.
