UNITED STATES
SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
Washington, D.C. 20549

SCHEDULE 14A

Proxy Statement Pursuant to Section 14(a)
of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934
(Amendment No.  )

Filed by the Registrant   ☒

Filed by a Party other than the Registrant   o

Check the appropriate box:

o   Preliminary Proxy Statement

o   Confidential, for Use of the Commission Only (as permitted by Rule 14a-6(e)(2))

☒   Definitive Proxy Statement

o   Definitive Additional Materials

o   Soliciting Material Pursuant to §240.14a-12

UNION PACIFIC CORPORATION
(Name of Registrant as Specified In Its Charter)
(Name of Person(s) Filing Proxy Statement, if other than the Registrant)

Payment of Filing Fee (Check the appropriate box):

Union Pacific Corporation 1400 Douglas Street, 19th Floor Omaha, NE 68179

March 28, 2018

NOTICE OF
ANNUAL MEETING OF SHAREHOLDERS

Only shareholders of record at the close of business on March 9, 2018, are entitled to notice of, and to vote at, the Annual Meeting.

For your convenience, you may attend the Annual Meeting in person or listen via a live audio-only webcast. You may listen to the live audio-only webcast of the Annual Meeting via the Internet at www.virtualshareholdermeeting.com/UNP2018 when you enter your 16-digit control number included on your notice of Internet availability of proxy materials, on your proxy card or on the instructions that accompanied your proxy materials. Instructions on how to listen to the Annual meeting via live audio-only webcast are posted at www.virtualshareholdermeeting.com/UNP2018.

Your vote is very important. New York Stock Exchange rules provide that if your shares are held by a broker, your broker will NOT be able to vote your shares on most matters presented at the Annual Meeting, including the election of directors, unless you provide voting instructions to your broker. We strongly encourage you to submit your proxy card to your broker or utilize your broker’s telephone or internet voting services (if available) and exercise your right to vote as a shareholder.

Rhonda S. Ferguson
Executive Vice President,
Chief Legal Officer and
Corporate Secretary

UNION PACIFIC CORPORATION
PROXY STATEMENT

TABLE OF CONTENTS

PROXY SUMMARY

This summary highlights information contained elsewhere in this Proxy Statement. This summary does not contain all of the information that you should consider. You should read the entire Proxy Statement carefully before voting.

This Proxy Statement and the accompanying proxy card are being distributed and made available to shareholders on or about March 28, 2018.

Even if you plan to attend the 2018 Annual Meeting of Shareholders in person, we encourage you to vote in advance of the meeting. You may vote using one the following voting methods. Make sure to have your proxy card or voting instruction form in hand and follow the instructions. Participants in Union Pacific’s thrift and retirement plans who hold Company stock through such plans will receive separate voting instructions. You can vote in one of three ways:

Record Holders			Beneficial Owners
	Vote via the Internet		Follow the instructions set forth on the voting instruction form provided by your broker with these proxy materials.
	•	Go to www.proxyvote.com
	Vote by telephone
	•	Call toll free 1-800-690-6903 within the USA, US territories & Canada on a touch tone telephone
	Vote by mail
	•	Complete, sign, date and return your proxy card in the envelope provided

After two consecutive years of overall volume declines, the Company experienced a 2% increase in volume in 2017. This increase in volume, along with positive pricing and a continued focus on productivity, generated record earnings. Highlights of the Company’s 2017 operational and financial performance include:

* See Item 7 of Union Pacific’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2017, for reconciliations to U.S. GAAP

The Company’s commitment to strong corporate governance, effective risk management and strong independent oversight of management by the Board is reflected in our sound governance practices and policies. Governance Highlights include:

We carefully considered the results of the Say-on-Pay vote at our 2017 Annual Meeting of Shareholders and, in order to respond constructively to the voting results, our Compensation and Benefits Committee directed management to actively seek more specific feedback from shareholders regarding the Company’s executive compensation program. We take these voting results seriously and, in 2017, our management team made a concerted effort to increase engagement with our shareholders regarding our executive compensation program. Our Chair of the Compensation and Benefits Committee, along with senior members of our management team, participated in a number of in-person and telephonic meetings and discussions with shareholders.

During 2017, we engaged shareholders with cumulative shareholdings of over 55% through a combination of:

These conversations were productive and meaningful and led to changes in our executive compensation program as discussed in the Letter from the Compensation and Benefits Committee on page 41 and in the Compensation Discussion and Analysis beginning on page 43.

Also in 2017, as part of our regular shareholder engagement, management participated in 12 investor conferences, numerous in-person investor meetings, and hosted nearly 240 conference calls with analysts and investors.

Because executive compensation programs for 2017 were set early in the year, certain changes that our Compensation and Benefits Committee implemented after considering shareholder feedback will take effect in 2018. We believe that changes we have made will enhance our compensation program in a manner that both benefits shareholders and continues to align with our strategy and pay-for-performance philosophy.

financial performance and overall relative Peer Group performance composite rank of 3rd (compared to a relative Peer Group performance composite rank of 13th in 2016)

UNION PACIFIC CORPORATION
1400 Douglas Street, 19th Floor
Omaha, NE 68179
   
PROXY STATEMENT
FOR
ANNUAL MEETING OF SHAREHOLDERS
TO BE HELD ON MAY 10, 2018

INFORMATION ABOUT THE ANNUAL MEETING, VOTING AND PROXIES

Important Notice Regarding the Availability of Proxy
Materials for the Shareholder Meeting to Be Held on May 10, 2018

This Proxy Statement and our 2017 Annual Report on Form 10-K are available at www.up.com under the
“Investors” caption link by selecting“Annual Reports/Form 10-Ks and Proxy Statements”
www.up.com/investors/annuals/index/shtml.

This Proxy Statement is being furnished to shareholders of Union Pacific Corporation (the Company) in connection with the solicitation of proxies by the Board of Directors of the Company (the Board) for use in voting at the Annual Meeting of Shareholders or any adjournment or postponement thereof (the Annual Meeting). The Annual Meeting will be held on Thursday, May 10, 2018, at 8:00 A.M., Central Daylight Time, at the Omaha Marriott Downtown at the Capitol District, 222 North 10th Street, Omaha, Nebraska. This Proxy Statement and the accompanying proxy card are being distributed and made available to shareholders of the Company on or about March 28, 2018.

Only holders of record of the Company’s common stock at the close of business on March 9, 2018 (the Record Date), will be entitled to vote at the Annual Meeting. On the Record Date, we had 775,579,258 shares of common stock outstanding and entitled to vote. If a majority of the shares outstanding on the Record Date are present and entitled to vote on any matter at the Annual Meeting, we will have a quorum at the Annual Meeting. Any shares represented by proxies that are marked for, against or to abstain from voting on a proposal will be counted as present for the purpose of determining whether there is a quorum.

Again this year, we are using the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) rule that allows companies to furnish their proxy materials over the Internet. As a result, we are mailing a notice of Internet availability of proxy materials instead of a paper copy of the proxy materials. All shareholders receiving the notice will have the ability to access the proxy materials over the Internet and may request to receive a paper copy of the proxy materials by mail. Instructions on how to access the proxy materials over the Internet or to request a paper copy may be found in the notice of Internet availability of proxy materials. In addition, the notice contains information on how you may request access to proxy materials in printed form by mail or electronically on an ongoing basis.

Your notice of Internet availability of proxy materials, proxy card or voting instruction card will contain instructions on how to:

Your notice of Internet availability, proxy card or voting instruction card will contain instructions on how you may request proxy materials electronically on an ongoing basis. Choosing to access your future proxy materials electronically will help us conserve natural resources and reduce the costs of distributing our proxy materials.

Holders of our common stock are entitled to one vote for each full share held as of the Record Date.

Under Proposal Number 1, directors will be elected by a majority of the votes cast by the shares of common stock present at the Annual Meeting (either in person or by proxy) and entitled to vote on the election of directors, which means that a nominee will be elected if he or she receives more “for” votes than “against” votes. Pursuant to Section 9 of Article I of the Company’s By-Laws and applicable laws of the State of Utah, a nominee who does not receive more “for” votes than “against” votes will be elected to a shortened term expiring on the earlier of: (i) 90 days after the day on which the Company certifies the voting results; or (ii) the day on which a person is selected by the Board to fill the office held by the director.

Approval of Proposal Number 2 (ratification of the appointment of the independent registered public accounting firm), Proposal Number 3 (advisory vote to approve executive compensation) and Proposal Number 4 (shareholder proposal regarding independent chairman) requires the affirmative vote of a majority of the votes cast on the proposal (either in person or by proxy).

If your shares are held in street name (that is, through a broker, bank, trustee, nominee or other holder of record), you are considered a beneficial owner of those shares. As the beneficial owner of those shares, you have the right to direct your broker, bank or nominee how to vote. If you do not provide voting instructions to your broker in advance of the Annual Meeting, New York Stock Exchange (NYSE) rules grant your broker discretionary authority to vote on the ratification of the independent registered accounting firm in Proposal Number 2. If you do not provide voting instructions, your broker will not have discretion to vote your shares on Proposal Numbers 1, 3, and 4 resulting in what is referred to as broker non-votes on those matters.

The Board recommends that you vote FOR Proposal Numbers 1, 2 and 3 and AGAINST Proposal Number 4.

Although the advisory vote on Proposal Number 3 is non-binding, the Board will review the results of the votes and, consistent with the Company’s strong record of shareholder engagement, will take them into account in making determinations concerning executive compensation.

In accordance with Utah law, abstentions and broker non-votes are not treated as votes cast and, therefore, are not counted in determining which directors are elected under Proposal Number 1 and which matters are approved under Proposal Numbers 2, 3 and 4.

Whether you hold shares directly as a shareholder of record or in street name (that is, through a broker, bank, trustee, nominee or other holder of record), you may direct how your shares are voted without participating in the Annual Meeting. There are three ways to vote by proxy:

If you sign and return your proxy card but do not give any voting instructions, your shares will be voted “for” the election of each of the director nominees listed in Proposal Number 1 below, “for” Proposal Numbers 2 and 3 and “against” Proposal Number 4. To our knowledge, no other matters will be presented at the Annual Meeting. However, if any other matters of business are properly presented, the proxy holders named on the proxy card are authorized to vote the shares represented by proxies according to their judgment.

The Board maintains a confidential voting policy pursuant to which Broadridge Financial Services, Inc. (Broadridge) receives shareholder proxies or voting instructions, and representatives of Broadridge, serving as independent inspectors of election, certify the vote. Proxies, as well as telephone and Internet voting instructions, will be kept confidential from management (except in certain cases where it may be necessary to meet legal requirements, including a contested proxy solicitation or where a shareholder writes comments on the proxy card). Reports concerning the vote may be made available to the Company, provided such reports do not reveal the vote of any particular shareholder.

After you submit your proxy you may revoke it at any time before voting takes place at the Annual Meeting. You can revoke your proxy in two ways: (i) deliver to the Secretary of the Company a written notice, dated later than the proxy you want to revoke, stating that the proxy is revoked or (ii) submit new telephone or Internet instructions or deliver a validly executed later-dated proxy. For this purpose, communications to the Secretary of the Company should be addressed to 1400 Douglas Street, 19th Floor, Omaha, Nebraska 68179 and must be received before the time that the proxy you wish to revoke is voted at the Annual Meeting. Please note that if your shares are held in street name (that is, a broker, bank, trustee or other nominee holds your shares on your behalf) and you wish to revoke a previously granted proxy, you must contact that entity and submit new voting instructions to your broker, bank, trustee or nominee.

The Company will pay the entire cost of preparing, printing, mailing and distributing the notices and proxy materials and soliciting votes. In addition to the mailing of the notices and proxy materials, proxies may be solicited by personal interview, telephone and electronic communication by the directors, officers and employees of the Company acting without special compensation. We also make arrangements with brokerage houses and other custodians, nominees and fiduciaries for the forwarding of solicitation material to the street name holders of shares held of record by such individuals, and the Company will reimburse such custodians, nominees and fiduciaries for reasonable out-of-pocket expenses incurred by them in connection with such solicitation. In addition, the Company engaged Morrow Sodali, LLC 470 West Avenue, Stamford, CT 06902 to solicit proxies on its behalf. The anticipated fees of Morrow Sodali LLC are $17,500, plus certain other customary fees and expenses.

Only shareholders as of the Record Date are entitled to attend the Annual Meeting. The Company reserves the right to require proof of stock ownership as of the Record Date and a government-issued photo identification of any person wishing to attend the Annual Meeting. You may obtain directions to the Annual Meeting by contacting the Secretary of the Company at the address set forth on the notice page of this Proxy Statement. Please note that the use of cameras (including via cell phone with photographic capabilities), recording devices and other electronic devices is strictly prohibited at the Annual Meeting.

For your convenience, you may also listen to the Annual Meeting via a live audio-only webcast. You may listen to the live audio-only webcast of the Annual Meeting via the Internet at www.virtualshareholdermeeting.com/UNP2018 when you enter your 16-digit control number included on your notice of Internet availability of proxy materials, on your proxy card or on the instructions that accompanied your proxy materials. Instructions on how to listen to the Annual Meeting via live audio-only webcast are posted at www.virtualshareholdermeeting.com/UNP2018.

References to the Company’s website included in this Proxy Statement and in the Company’s 2017 Annual Report on Form 10-K are provided as a convenience and do not constitute, and should not be deemed, an incorporation by reference of the information contained in, or available through, the website.

PROPOSAL NUMBER 1 – ELECTION OF DIRECTORS

The Board currently consists of twelve members. The Corporate Governance and Nominating Committee of the Board proposed, and the Board recommended, that ten of the twelve individuals currently serving as directors each be nominated for re-election to the Board at the Annual Meeting. Each of the nominees has consented to being named as a nominee and to serve if elected. If any nominee(s) for director for any reason should become unavailable for election, it is intended that discretionary authority will be exercised by the persons named in the enclosed proxy in respect of the election of such other person(s) as the Board shall nominate.

Thanks to Our Retiring Directors. Michael W. McConnell and Steven R. Rogel, both of whom have served as valued members of our Board, will be retiring as directors at the Annual Meeting and will not stand for re-election. The Board wishes to thank both Mr. McConnell and Mr. Rogel for their years of dedicated service and work on behalf of the Company and its shareholders.

Directors will be elected by a majority of the votes cast by the shares present at the Annual Meeting and entitled to vote on the election of directors, which means that a nominee will be elected if he or she receives more “for” votes than “against” votes. Pursuant to Section 9 of Article I of the Company’s By-Laws and applicable laws of the State of Utah, if a nominee does not receive more “for” votes than “against” votes, he or she will be elected to a shortened term that terminates on the earlier of: (i) 90 days after the day on which the Company certifies the voting results; or (ii) the day on which a person is selected by the Board to fill the office held by the director.

The Board recommends a vote FOR the election of each of the nominated directors.

The following identifies the Company’s nominees for election to the Board. Each of the nominees currently serves as a director. Each nominee, if elected, will serve for a term of one year or until his or her successor is elected and qualified.

The Corporate Governance and Nominating Committee considered the character, experience, qualifications and skills of each director nominee when determining whether he or she should serve as a director of the Company. Consistent with the stated criteria for director nominees described on pages 16 and 18 below and included in the Company’s Corporate Governance Guidelines and Policies, the Committee determined that each director nominee exhibits a high degree of integrity, has significant professional accomplishments, and has proven leadership experience. Each director nominee is or has been a leader in his or her respective field and brings diverse talents and perspectives to the Board. The Committee also considered the experience and qualifications that each director nominee brings to the Board outlined above in each director’s biographical information, as well as service on boards of other public companies.

The Committee utilizes the following list of skills, attributes and qualities that are particularly relevant to the Company when evaluating director nominees.

Below we identify the balance of skills and qualifications each director nominee brings to the Board. The fact that a particular skill or qualification is not designated does not mean the director nominee does not possess that particular attribute. Rather, the skills and qualifications noted below are those reviewed by the Corporate Governance and Nominating Committee and the Board in making nomination decisions and as part of the Board succession planning process. We believe the combination of the skills and qualifications shown below demonstrates how the Board is well-positioned to provide effective oversight and strategic guidance to management.

Union Pacific Director Skills and Qualifications Matrix

The Corporate Governance and Nominating Committee is responsible for developing and periodically reviewing and recommending to the Board the appropriate skills and characteristics required of Board members in the context of the current composition of the Board. Such criteria, as described in the Company’s Corporate Governance Guidelines and Policies, include: business and management experience; familiarity with the business, customers and suppliers of the Company; varying and complementary talents, backgrounds and perspectives; diversity (inclusive of gender, race, ethnicity and national origin); and relevant legal, regulatory and stock exchange requirements applicable to the Board and certain of its Committees.

All potential new Board candidates should exhibit a high degree of integrity and ethics consistent with the values of the Company and the Board. In all our director nominee searches, the Committee is committed to actively seeking out highly qualified women (Ms. Lute and Ms. Hopkins) and other diverse candidates (Mr. Davis, Mr. Patel and Mr. Villarreal), for consideration as nominees to the Board. The Committee ultimately seeks to identify and nominate candidates with diverse talents, backgrounds and perspectives who will enhance and complement the skills and expertise of the Board and satisfy the Board membership criteria included in the Company’s Corporate Governance Guidelines and Policies. In determining the independence of a candidate, the Committee relies upon the then effective independence standards adopted by the Board. In addition, the Committee requires that all candidates:

The Committee also values familiarity with the rail transportation industry and considers the number of other public boards on which candidates serve when determining whether the individual circumstances of each candidate will allow the candidate sufficient time to effectively serve on the Board and contribute to its function and activities.

The Committee meets at the first Board meeting of each year to consider the inclusion of nominees in the Company’s proxy statement. During this meeting, the Committee considers each nominee by:

As part of the Committee’s oversight of the Board’s self-evaluation process, the Committee assesses the effectiveness of the criteria listed above when evaluating all new director candidates and when assessing the composition of the Board. The Committee will consider candidates recommended by shareholders under the same standards after concluding that any such recommendations comply with the requirements outlined below. During 2017, the Company retained the services of Russell Reynolds Associates to help identify and evaluate suitable candidates for consideration to replace retiring directors. Mr. Patel was first identified by Russell Reynolds as a director candidate.

We believe that Board tenure diversity is important and directors with many years of service provide the Board with a deep knowledge of our Company, while newer directors lend fresh perspectives. The chart below reflects the Board tenure of our current directors. The average tenure of all directors currently serving on our Board is eight years. Excluding Mr. McConnell and Mr. Rogel, who will retire from our Board in May and who are not standing for re-election, the average tenure of our Board is six years.

The Corporate Governance and Nominating Committee is responsible for overseeing the annual self-evaluation process of the Board and its committees, which is used by the Board and each committee to assess their effectiveness and performance and opportunities for improvement. In addition, each committee reviews its Charter annually and reports to the Corporate Governance and Nominating Committee and the Board on its self-evaluation and review of its Charter. We conducted a multi-year review of our Board and committee assessment process, with the assistance of outside counsel and the Compensation and Benefits Committee's independent consultant, to enhance analysis of how the Board and its committees were performing their substantive duties and responsibilities. We also specifically coordinated the self-assessment with the directors' skill set matrix criteria to develop a robust director evaluation process.

The Board and committee evaluation process involves the annual distribution of an extensive self-assessment questionnaire to all Board and committee members that invites a review and written comments on all aspects of the Board and each committee's role and responsibilities, as well as director performance and Board dynamics. These comments will relate to a holistic review of how the Board can improve its key functions of overseeing the Company's overall governance and the enterprise risk profile of the Company, approving the Company's strategic plan, monitoring strategy implementation and generally overseeing management's operations of the business. In particular, for both the Board and the relevant committee, the process will solicit ideas from directors about (i) improving prioritization of issues, (ii) improving quality of management presentations, (ii) improving quality of Board or committee discussions on key matters, (iii) identifying specific issues that should be discussed in the future, and (iv) identifying any other matters of importance to the functioning of the Board or committee.

The Corporate Governance and Nominating Committee reviews the results of the evaluation process with the Lead Independent Director and Committee Chairs, as appropriate, and then the Lead Independent Director and the Chairman conduct a full Board discussion regarding actionable recommendations for improvement and any changes in Board procedures and policies.

The Company’s By-Laws provide for “proxy access” for certain director candidates nominated by shareholders. Under the By-Laws, a shareholder or group of shareholders who have continuously held for three years a number of shares of Company common stock equal to three percent of the outstanding shares of Company common stock may request that the Company include in the Company’s proxy materials director nominees representing up to the greater of two directors or 20% of the current number of directors. Eligible shareholders wishing to have such candidates included in the Company’s Proxy Statement for the 2019 Annual Meeting of Shareholders should provide the information specified in the By-Laws to the Secretary of the Company in writing during the period beginning on October 29, 2018 and ending on November 28, 2018, and should include the information and representations required by the proxy access provisions set forth in the Company’s By-Laws.

The Corporate Governance and Nominating Committee will consider and evaluate individuals for service on the Board suggested by directors and other interested parties. Shareholders desiring to recommend candidates for consideration at the 2019 Annual Meeting should advise the Secretary of the Company in writing during the period beginning on January 10, 2019 and ending on February 9, 2019, and should include the following information required by the nomination procedures set forth in the Company’s By-Laws, as well as any other information that would assist the Committee in evaluating the recommended candidates: (i) the name, age, and business and residence addresses of the candidate, (ii) the principal occupation of the candidate, and (iii) the number of shares of Company common stock beneficially owned by the candidate. A shareholder should also provide (i) his or her name and address, (ii) the number of shares of Company common stock beneficially owned by such shareholder, (iii) a description of all arrangements between himself or herself and the candidate and any other person pursuant to which the recommendation for nomination is being made, and (iv) the candidate’s written consent agreeing to any resulting nomination and to serve as a director if elected. The By-Laws are available on the Company’s website at www.up.com/investors/governance, and shareholders may obtain a printed copy by contacting the Secretary of the Company at the address set forth on the notice page of this Proxy Statement.

Board Corporate Governance Matters

We are committed to implementing and following high standards of corporate governance, which we believe are important to the success of our business and create shareholder value.

The Board has adopted the guidelines and policies set forth below, and, with ongoing input from the Corporate Governance and Nominating Committee, will continue to assess the appropriateness of these guidelines and policies and implement such changes and adopt such additions as may be necessary or desirable to promote the effective governance of the Company. We post these guidelines and policies on our website at www.up.com/investors/governance.

Director Independence. A majority of the members of the Board are independent. All members of the Audit, Compensation and Benefits and Corporate Governance and Nominating Committees are independent. An “independent” director is a director who, as determined by the Board in its business judgment, meets the NYSE definition of “independence” as well as the Director Independence Standards adopted by the Board and set forth in the section titled “Director Independence Standards.” In addition, directors who serve on the Audit Committee and on the Compensation and Benefits Committee must meet additional independence criteria applicable to audit committee members and compensation committee members, respectively, under NYSE listing standards, as described in the section titled “Audit Committee and Compensation and Benefits Committee Independence Criteria.” Independence is determined annually by the Board based on the recommendation of the Corporate Governance and Nominating Committee.

Board Membership Criteria. The Corporate Governance and Nominating Committee is responsible for developing and periodically reviewing the appropriate skills and characteristics required of Board members in the context of the current make-up of the Board. The Corporate Governance and Nominating Committee develops and recommends membership criteria to the Board. Such criteria include: business and management experience; familiarity with the business, customers and suppliers of the Company; varying and complementary talents, backgrounds and perspectives; diversity (inclusive of gender, race, ethnicity and national origin); and relevant regulatory and stock exchange membership requirements for the Board and its committees. All potential new Board candidates should exhibit a high degree of integrity and ethics consistent with the values of the Company and the Board. When searching for new directors, the Committee should actively seek out highly qualified women and individuals from minority groups for consideration as nominees to the Board as part of the Committee’s regular process.

Selection of Director Nominee Candidates. The Corporate Governance and Nominating Committee is responsible for recommending to the Board the selection of director nominee candidates.

Board Size. The Board’s guideline is to maintain a Board size of 10 to 14 members with no more than two management directors.

Election of Directors-Majority Voting. In uncontested director elections, directors shall be elected by majority vote, pursuant to the Company’s By-Laws, and under Utah corporate law, any director who is not re-elected ceases to serve on the Board no later than 90 days after the voting results are certified.

Retirement Age for Non-management Directors. Non-management directors who are 75 years of age will not be eligible to stand for election to the Board at the next Annual Meeting of Shareholders. Non-management directors who turn 75 during their term are eligible to finish out that term. The Corporate Governance and Nominating Committee may consider a director’s nomination beyond the age of 75 if it believes that the nomination is in the best interest of the shareholders.

Director Orientation and Continuing Education. Upon election to the Board, new members are provided with a comprehensive set of materials on the operations, finances, governance and business plan of the Company, visit at least two major facilities during the first year of service and meet informally with as many members of senior management as practical. The Board encourages directors to periodically attend appropriate continuing education programs and sessions and obtain and review appropriate materials to assist them in

performing their Board responsibilities. The Company recommends continuing education programs and sessions to directors and pays any fees and expenses associated with attendance at continuing education programs and sessions. Directors are expected to participate in continuing education at least once every other year.

Change in Principal Occupation. Upon a director’s retirement, resignation or other significant change in professional duties and responsibilities, the director shall submit his or her resignation from the Board to the Corporate Governance and Nominating Committee for its consideration and recommendation as to acceptance.

Service on Outside Boards. When the CEO or another senior officer of the Company is invited to serve on outside boards of directors, the CEO will present the issue to the Corporate Governance and Nominating Committee for review and approval. Directors must notify the Board prior to accepting a position on the board of another company. No member of the Audit Committee may serve on the audit committees of more than three public companies.

Board Leadership. The Board annually elects a Chairman of the Board, who may or may not be the CEO of the Company. If the individual elected as Chairman of the Board is not an independent director, the independent directors also elect a lead independent director. The lead independent director serves for a period of at least one year. The lead independent director’s responsibilities include: (1) presiding at meetings of the Board at which the Chairman and CEO is not present, including executive sessions of the independent directors; (2) approving the flow of information sent to the Board, and approving the agenda, schedule and what materials are sent for Board meetings; (3) serving as the liaison or facilitating working relationships between the independent directors and the Chairman and CEO; (4) being available for consultation and communication with major shareholders as appropriate; (5) in conjunction with the Compensation and Benefits Committee, overseeing the process of evaluating and compensating the Chairman and CEO; (6) assuring that a succession plan is in place for the Chairman and CEO, as well as the lead independent director; (7) authorizing or recommending the retention of consultants who report directly to the full Board; and (8) assisting the Board and Company officers in compliance with, and implementation of, the Company’s governance guidelines and policies. The lead independent director also has the authority to call executive sessions of the independent directors. The lead independent director will often act as Chair of the Corporate Governance and Nominating Committee, fulfilling the designated duties and responsibilities set forth in the Committee’s Charter.

Board Committees. The current standing committees are the Audit Committee, Finance Committee, Compensation and Benefits Committee and the Corporate Governance and Nominating Committee. The Board has the authority to create additional committees. The Board periodically reviews committee service and assignments, along with the respective committee chair positions, and recommends rotation of members.

Board Meeting Agendas. The directors and management of the Company may originate action items relating to the business and affairs of the Company for the Board agenda and the scheduling of reports on aspects of parent or subsidiary operations.

Board Committee Meeting Agendas. The departments of the Company that administer the area of responsibility charged to each committee may submit items for inclusion on committee agendas, and committee members may suggest topics for inclusion or request additional information with respect to any program previously reviewed by the committee.

Distribution of Board Materials. Information and materials for Board consideration are generally distributed to directors at least five days in advance of the meeting, with additional time provided when the complexity of an issue demands, unless an issue for Board consideration arises without sufficient time to complete distribution of materials within this time frame. Additionally in some cases, due to the timing or the sensitive nature of an issue, materials may be presented only at the Board meeting.

Board Presentations. The Board encourages broad management participation in Board presentations and the involvement of those managers who are directly responsible for the recommendations or other matters before the Board.

Strategic Planning Review. Management presents an annual strategic plan to the Board for its review and assessment, and the Board makes such recommendations to management regarding the strategic plan as it deems necessary.

Reporting to the Board of Directors. The Board receives reporting on at least an annual basis by (1) the Chief Compliance Officer with respect to the Company’s implementation of its compliance program; (2) the Chief Safety Officer with respect to the safety performance of the Company’s railroad operations, including applicable safety metrics and Federal Railroad Administration (FRA) regulatory developments and compliance, including the outcome of claims conferences held with the FRA; and (3) the General Counsel with respect to pending litigation involving railroad operations.

Safety of Railroad Operations. Management presents an annual strategic safety plan to the Board for its review and assessment, and the Board makes such recommendations to management regarding the strategic plan as it deems necessary.

Director Access to Management and Outside Advisors. The Company provides each director with access to the management of the Company. The Board and committees, as set forth in the applicable committee charter, have the right to consult and retain outside counsel and other advisors at the expense of the Company.

Director Attendance at Board Meetings. Directors are expected to attend in person all regularly scheduled Board and committee meetings and to participate telephonically when they are unable to attend in person.

Executive Sessions of Independent Directors. Regularly scheduled sessions of independent directors are held at every meeting of the Board. The lead independent director presides at these sessions and has the authority to call additional executive sessions as appropriate.

Board Member Compensation. Non-management Board members generally are paid an annual retainer valued between the median and seventy-fifth percentile of compensation at comparable companies, and the retainer is reviewed periodically by the Corporate Governance and Nominating Committee. A substantial portion of the annual retainer is paid in Common Stock equivalents, which are not payable until after termination of service from the Board.

Board Member Equity Ownership. Board members must own equity in the Company equal to at least five times the cash portion of the annual retainer, with such ownership goal to be reached within five years of joining the Board, unless special circumstances of a member as determined by the Board delay the achievement of the ownership goal. Board members who have met their applicable ownership goal may sell shares of Company common stock that exceed their ownership goal pursuant to a written trading plan designed to comply with Securities and Exchange Commission Rule 10b5-1 and in compliance with the Company’s trading policy for Board members.

Evaluation of the Chairman and the CEO. The performance of the Chairman and the CEO is evaluated annually by the independent directors during an executive session led by the Chair of the Corporate Governance and Nominating Committee. The evaluation includes an assessment of individual elements of performance in major categories such as leadership, strategic planning, financial performance, operations, human resources, external relations and communications, and Board relations. The Compensation and Benefits Committee then meets following the executive session to determine the appropriate level of compensation to be awarded to the Chairman and the CEO and management of the Company. The lead independent director and the Chair of the Compensation and Benefits Committee then review with the Chairman and the CEO their respective performance and any recommended areas for improvement.

Succession Planning. The Board is responsible for overseeing the succession planning process for the CEO and other senior management positions. The CEO periodically reports to an executive session of the Board on succession planning, including an assessment of senior managers and their potential to succeed him or her. The CEO also makes available to the Board, on a continuing basis, the CEO’s recommendation concerning who should assume the CEO’s role in the event the CEO becomes unable or unwilling to perform his or her duties. This process enables the Board to maintain its oversight of the program for effective senior management development and succession as well as emergency succession plans.

Evaluation of Board and Committee Performance. The Board and its committees, to the extent required by their respective charters, conduct self-evaluations annually to assess their performance. The Board and

committee evaluation process involves the distribution of a self-assessment questionnaire to all Board and committee members that invites written comments on all aspects of the Board and each committee’s process. The evaluations are then summarized and serve as the basis for a discussion of Board and committee performance and any recommended improvements.

Evaluation of Director Performance. The Corporate Governance and Nominating Committee assesses the contributions and independence of current directors in connection with considering their renomination to stand for election to the Board.

Director Attendance at Annual Shareholder Meetings. It is the policy of this Company that all directors shall attend the Annual Meeting of Shareholders.

Future Severance Agreements. The Company shall not enter into a future severance agreement with a senior executive that provides for benefits in an amount generally exceeding 2.99 times salary plus bonus unless such agreement is approved by a vote of the Company’s shareholders. The full text of the policy may be found on the Company’s website at www.up.com/investors/governance/severance.pdf.

Confidential Voting. It is the Board’s policy that all shareholder proxies, consents, ballots and voting materials that identify the votes of specific shareholders be kept confidential from the Company with access to proxies, consents, ballots and other shareholder voting records to be limited to inspectors of election who are not employees of the Company, except as may be required by law or to assist in the pursuit or defense of claims or judicial actions or in the event of a contested proxy solicitation.

Amendments. The Board may amend, waive, suspend or repeal any of these guidelines and policies at any time, with or without public notice, as it determines necessary or appropriate, in the exercise of the Board’s judgment or fiduciary duties.

To assist it in making determinations of a director’s independence, the Board has adopted the independence standards set forth below. The Board affirmatively determined that former director, General Krulak, retiring directors Messrs. McConnell and Rogel, and all remaining current directors, who are also director nominees, Ms. Hopkins and Ms. Lute and Messrs. Card, Davis, Dillon, McCarthy, McLarty, Patel, and Villarreal, have no material relationship with the Company or any of its consolidated subsidiaries, including Union Pacific Railroad Company (the Railroad), (either directly or as a partner, shareholder or officer of an organization that has a relationship with the Company) and is independent within the meaning of the applicable listing standards of the NYSE and the Director Independence Standards adopted by the Board. Additionally, the Board determined that all Board Committees are comprised entirely of independent directors and that all members of the Audit Committee and Compensation and Benefits Committee meet the additional independence standards applicable to such committee members as set forth below.

The Board’s independence determination included a review of the payments over the last three years between the Railroad and LyondellBasell Industries, N.V. (LyondellBasell). Mr. Patel is the Chief Executive Officer and Chairman of the Management Board of LyondellBasell. LyondellBasell paid the Railroad approximately $112 million, $105 million and $105 million for transportation services in 2017, 2016 and 2015 respectively. In 2015, the Railroad purchased $35 million of fuel from a subsidiary of LyondellBasell. These amounts were significantly less than 2% of LyondellBasell’s consolidated gross revenues for any of the past three years (0.3% for 2017, 0.3% for 2016 and 0.4% for 2015).

Director Independence Standards

An “independent” director is a director whom the Board has affirmatively determined has no material relationship with the Company or any of its consolidated subsidiaries either directly or as a partner, shareholder or officer of an organization that has a relationship with the Company. Accordingly, a director is also not independent if:

For purposes of these standards, an “immediate family” member includes a director’s spouse, parents, children, siblings, mother and father-in-law, sons and daughters-in-law, brothers and sisters-in-law, and anyone (other than a domestic employee) who shares the director’s home.

Audit Committee and Compensation and Benefits Committee Independence Criteria

In addition to the Board’s Director Independence Standards above, a director is not considered independent for purposes of serving on the Audit Committee or the Compensation and Benefits Committee, and may not serve on such committees, if the director: (a) accepts, directly or indirectly, from the Company or any of its subsidiaries, any consulting, advisory, or other compensatory fee, other than Board and committee fees and fixed amounts of compensation under a retirement plan (including deferred compensation) for prior service with the Company; or (b) is an “affiliated person” of the Company or any of its subsidiaries; each as determined in accordance with NYSE and SEC rules and regulations.

The Board annually reviews related party transactions involving directors and director nominees in conjunction with making director independence determinations and preparing the annual Proxy Statement. We require that executive officers report any transactions with the Company under the written Business Conduct Policy that covers all Company employees. Under the Business Conduct Policy, the Audit Committee reviews any transaction reported by executive officers and refers any reported transactions to the Corporate Governance and Nominating Committee for evaluation pursuant to the Company’s Related Party Transaction Policies and Procedures (the Related Party Policy) described below.

Under the Company’s Related Party Policy, transactions with related parties are subject to approval or ratification by the Corporate Governance and Nominating Committee. Transactions subject to Committee review and approval include any transaction in which (i) the aggregate amount involved will or may be expected to exceed $120,000 in any calendar year, (ii) the Company is a participant, and (iii) any related party will have a direct or indirect interest (other than solely as a result of being a director or a less than 10% beneficial owner of another entity).

“Related party” is defined under the policy as any (i) person who is or was during the last fiscal year an executive officer or director of the Company or nominee for election as a director, (ii) greater than 5% beneficial owner of the Company’s common stock, or (iii) immediate family member of any of the foregoing. “Immediate family” member includes a person’s spouse, parents, stepparents, children, stepchildren, siblings, mothers and fathers-in-law, sons and daughters-in-law, and brothers and sisters-in-law and anyone residing in such person’s home (other than a tenant or employee).

If advance Corporate Governance and Nominating Committee approval of a transaction is not feasible, then the transaction will be considered and, if the Committee determines it to be appropriate, ratified at the Committee’s next regularly scheduled meeting. In determining whether to approve or ratify a transaction, the Committee will consider, among other factors it deems appropriate, whether the transaction is on terms no less favorable than terms generally available to an unaffiliated third party under the same or similar circumstances and the extent of the related party’s interest in the transaction.

Under the Related Party Policy, the Committee may pre-approve certain transactions, even if the aggregate amount involved exceeds $120,000. Such transactions include (i) any transaction with another company at which a related party’s only relationship is as an employee (other than an executive officer), direct or beneficial owner of less than 10% of that company’s shares, if the aggregate amount involved does not exceed the greater of $1 million or 2% of that company’s total annual revenues; and (ii) any charitable contribution, grant or endowment by the Company to a charitable organization, foundation, or university at which a related party’s only relationship is as an employee (other than an executive officer) or a director, if the aggregate amount involved does not exceed the lesser of $1 million or 2% of the charitable organization’s total annual receipts. Additionally, the Board has delegated to the Chair of the Committee the authority to pre-approve or ratify, as applicable, any transaction with any related party in which the aggregate amount involved is expected to be less than $1 million. At each regularly scheduled meeting of the Committee, a summary of each new transaction deemed pre-approved will be provided to the Committee for its review.

Related Party Transactions in 2017

The Railroad has historically and routinely done business with Omaha Track, Inc. and its related companies (Omaha Track). Kelvin Whited, who became the Chief Financial Officer of Omaha Track in July 2015, is the spouse of Elizabeth F. Whited, who became the Company’s Executive Vice President and Chief Marketing Officer in December 2016.

In 2017, the Railroad paid Omaha Track approximately $6.3 million for tie disposal services under a contract awarded in January 2016 through a competitive bid process, approximately $3.0 million for on-track scrap metal removal under a contract that commenced in October of 2014, and approximately $4.1 million for railcar repairs under a contract that became effective in July 2015. All of these transactions are managed by the Railroad’s Supply Department and Ms. Whited has no involvement in these matters.

Since 1994, Omaha Track has been a transload provider to customers of the Railroad for transload shipments of various materials. The Railroad paid Omaha Track approximately $301,400 in 2017 in connection with these transload services. Ms. Whited is not involved in any commercial or rate discussions involving Omaha Track.

These transactions were ratified by the Corporate Governance and Nominating Committee under the Company’s Related Party Policy.

The Board believes it is in the best interest of the Company for the Board to periodically evaluate the leadership structure of the Company and make a determination regarding whether to separate or combine the roles of Chairman and CEO based on circumstances at the time of its evaluation. By retaining flexibility to adjust the Company’s leadership structure, the Board is best able to provide for appropriate management and leadership of the Company and address any circumstances the Company may face. Accordingly, pursuant to the Company’s Corporate Governance Guidelines and Policies set forth on page 19 of this Proxy Statement, the Board annually will elect a Chairman of the Board, who may or may not be the CEO of the Company. Additionally, the Guidelines provide that if the individual elected as Chairman of the Board is not an independent director, the independent directors also will elect a lead independent director. The Board determined that having a combined Chairman and CEO at this time best allows the Board and management to focus on the oversight and implementation of the Company’s strategic initiatives and business plan to efficiently and effectively protect and enhance the Company’s long-term success and shareholder value.

In addition, the independent directors of the Board elected Mr. McCarthy as the lead independent director with the following responsibilities:

The independent directors conducted executive sessions at all Board meetings in 2017. Mr. McCarthy also has the authority to call executive sessions of the independent directors. The Board has adopted a number of strong corporate governance practices that provide effective, independent oversight of management, including:

The Board believes that the current leadership structure and succession planning coupled with an active lead independent director provides effective oversight of management and responsiveness to shareholders, while also continuing the solid leadership of the Company and the Board necessary to effect execution of the Company’s strategic plans.

The Board of Directors is responsible for overseeing the assessment and management of the critical enterprise risks affecting the Company. The Board delegates to the Audit Committee primary responsibility for oversight of managing risks related to financial reporting, environmental matters and compliance.

Management identifies and prioritizes enterprise risks (included in the risk factors disclosed in our Annual Report on Form 10-K) and regularly presents them to the Board for its review and consideration. The senior executives responsible for implementation of appropriate mitigation strategies for each of the Company’s enterprise risks, along with the chief compliance officer, provide reports directly to the Board during the year. The Audit Committee also receives reports throughout the year from the chief compliance officer and the senior executives responsible for financial reporting, cybersecurity and environmental matters.

In addition, the Audit Committee oversees the Company’s internal audit of enterprise risks selected for review and evaluation based upon the Company’s annual risk assessment model with the purpose of evaluating the effectiveness of mitigating controls and activities of Company personnel. The Company’s internal auditors present to the Audit Committee findings regarding the mitigating controls and processes for the enterprise risks selected for review. The Audit Committee, in turn, reports those findings to the entire Board. The Company’s enterprise risk management process is dynamic and continually monitored so that the Company can timely identify and address any potential risks that arise in the ever-changing economic, political, legal and technology threat environment in which the Company operates.

In accordance with applicable provisions of Utah law and the By-Laws of the Company, the business and affairs of the Company are managed under the direction of the Board. The Board has established standing Committees and adopted guidelines and policies to assist it in fulfilling its responsibilities as described below.

During 2017, the Board met six times. None of the directors attended fewer than 75% of the aggregate number of meetings of the Board and the Committees on which he or she served. The average attendance of all directors at Board and Committee meetings was 99.5%. The Corporate Governance Guidelines and Policies included in this Proxy Statement beginning on page 19 reflect our policy that all directors should attend the Annual Meeting. In accordance with this policy, all directors then serving attended last year’s Annual Meeting.

The Board currently maintains four standing committees − the Audit Committee, Finance Committee, Compensation and Benefits Committee, and Corporate Governance and Nominating Committee. Each of the committees operates under a written charter adopted by the Board, copies of which are available on the Company’s website at www.up.com/investors/governance, and shareholders may obtain copies by contacting the Secretary of the Company at the address set forth on the notice page of this Proxy Statement. Each committee has the ability to retain outside advisors to assist it in the performance of its duties and responsibilities. All Board Committees are composed entirely of independent directors, satisfying both the independence standards of the NYSE and the Director Independence Standards set forth in the Company’s Corporate Governance Guidelines and Policies. Audit Committee members and Compensation and Benefits Committee members also satisfy the additional independence criteria applicable to Audit Committee and Compensation and Benefits Committee members under the listing standards of the NYSE.

C = Chair

During 2017, the following independent directors served on the Compensation and Benefits Committee: Andrew H. Card, Jr., Erroll B. Davis, Jr., David B. Dillon, Bhavesh V. Patel, Steven R. Rogel and Jose H. Villarreal.

The Compensation and Benefits Committee has no interlocks or insider participation.

The Board has adopted the Union Pacific Corporation Code of Ethics for the Chief Executive Officer and Senior Financial Officers, the Statement of Policy on Ethics and Business Conduct for employees (the Business Conduct Policy) and the Union Pacific Corporation Code of Business Conduct and Ethics for Members of the Board of Directors. We post these codes of conduct on our website at www.up.com/investors/governance, and printed copies are available to any shareholder upon request to the Secretary of the Company at the address set forth on the notice page of this Proxy Statement. To the extent permitted by SEC rules and the NYSE listing standards, we intend to disclose any future amendments to, or waivers from, certain provisions of these codes of conduct on our website.

Interested parties wishing to communicate with the Board may do so by U.S. mail c/o the Corporate Secretary, Union Pacific Corporation, 1400 Douglas Street, 19th Floor, Omaha, NE 68179. Communications intended for a specific director or directors (e.g., the lead independent director, a committee chairperson or all of the non-management directors) should be addressed to their attention and sent, by U.S. mail, to the address above. The Board has appointed and authorized the Corporate Secretary of the Company to process these communications and forward them to the appropriate directors. We forward communications from shareholders directly to the appropriate Board member(s). If a communication is illegal, unduly hostile or threatening, or similarly inappropriate, the Corporate Secretary of the Company has the authority to disregard or take appropriate action regarding any such communication.

Director Compensation in Fiscal Year 2017

Non-Management Directors’ Fees

For 2017, directors who were not employees received an annual retainer of $250,000, plus expenses. The director’s annual retainer has been the same since 2010. Directors are required to invest $130,000 of the retainer in the Stock Unit Account described below. Chairs of Board Committees receive additional annual retainers of $15,000 each, and members of the Audit Committee receive additional annual retainers of $10,000 each. The lead independent director receives an additional annual retainer of $25,000. Directors who are employees do not receive retainers or any other Board-related compensation.

Stock Unit Grant and Deferred Compensation Plan for the Board of Directors

Under our Stock Unit Grant and Deferred Compensation Plan for non-management directors, a director may, by December 31 of any year, elect to defer all or a portion of any compensation (in addition to the amount mentioned above that is required to be invested in their Stock Unit Account) for service as a director in the ensuing year or years, excluding reimbursements for expenses. Such deferred amounts may be invested, at the option of the director, in (i) a Fixed Rate Fund administered by the Company, (ii) a Stock Unit Account administered by the Company, or (iii) various notional accounts administered by The Vanguard Group. These accounts are unfunded, unsecured obligations of the Company. The Company Fixed Rate Fund bears interest equal to 120% of the applicable federal long-term rate compounded annually. The Stock Unit Account fluctuates in value based on changes in the price of our common stock, and equivalents to cash dividends paid on the common stock are deemed to be reinvested in the Stock Unit Account. The Vanguard Accounts are subject to earnings and value fluctuations from the investment performance of the notional accounts at Vanguard. Payment of all deferred amounts begins in January of the year following separation from service as a director. Deferred amounts may be paid, at the election of the director, in either a lump-sum or in up to 15 equal, annual installments.

2000 Directors Stock Plan

Under the 2000 Directors Stock Plan (the 2000 Plan) adopted by the shareholders on April 21, 2000, the Company may grant options to purchase shares of our common stock to non-management directors. Upon recommendation of the Corporate Governance and Nominating Committee in September 2007, the Board eliminated the annual grant of options for 2008 and future years. The Company did not award any options to non-management directors in 2017.

The 2000 Plan also provides that each non-management director, upon election to the Board of Directors, will receive a grant of 4,000 restricted shares of our common stock or restricted share units that represent the right to receive our common stock in the future (which number has been adjusted to reflect the Company’s two-for-one stock splits on May 28, 2008 and June 6, 2014). The restricted shares or share units vest on the date a director ceases to be a director by reason of death, disability or retirement, as defined in the 2000 Plan. During the restricted period, the director has the right to vote such restricted shares and receive dividends or dividend equivalents, but may not transfer or encumber such shares or units. The director will forfeit such shares or units upon ceasing to be a director for any reason other than death, disability or retirement.

Non-Management Director Compensation in Fiscal Year 2017

The following table provides a summary of the compensation of our non-management directors for 2017.

PROPOSAL NUMBER 2 − Ratification of Appointment of Deloitte & Touche LLP as Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm for the Year Ending December 31, 2018

The Audit Committee has appointed Deloitte & Touche LLP as the independent registered public accounting firm to audit the books and accounts of the Company and its consolidated subsidiaries for the year 2018 and submits this selection for ratification by a vote of shareholders as a matter of good corporate governance. In the event that the Audit Committee’s selection of Deloitte & Touche LLP does not receive an affirmative vote of a majority of the votes cast, the Audit Committee will review its future selection of an independent registered public accounting firm.

The Audit Committee believes that the continued retention of Deloitte & Touche LLP as our independent registered public accounting firm is in the best interests of our shareholders as there are several benefits to the Company of having a long-tenured auditor.

The Company expects that a representative of Deloitte & Touche LLP will be present at the Annual Meeting and will have an opportunity to make a statement if such representative desires to do so and will be available to respond to appropriate questions by shareholders.

Ratification of the appointment of Deloitte & Touche LLP as the Company’s independent registered public accounting firm for the year ending December 31, 2018 requires the affirmative vote of a majority of the votes cast on this proposal at the Annual Meeting.

The Board recommends a vote FOR ratification of the appointment of Deloitte & Touche LLP as independent registered public accounting firm for the year ending December 31, 2018.

Independent Registered Public Accounting Firm’s Fees and Services

Aggregate fees billed to the Company for services rendered by our independent registered public accounting firm for each of the past two years are set forth below:

Audit Fees. Audit services included the integrated audit of financial statements and internal control, quarterly reviews, comfort letters provided in conjunction with the issuance of debt, and agreed-upon procedures performed on the Annual Report R-1 filed by Union Pacific Railroad Company with the Surface Transportation Board.

Audit-Related Fees. Audit-related services included consultation on accounting standards and transactions, audits of employee benefit plans, and audits of subsidiary companies.

Tax Fees. Tax fees included fees for corporate tax planning and consultation services and work performed for international tax compliance.

All Other Fees. No other services were provided to the Company by Deloitte & Touche LLP during the years ended December 31, 2017 and 2016.

Audit Committee Report

The Audit Committee has reviewed and discussed with management the Company’s audited consolidated financial statements for the year ended December 31, 2017. The Committee has discussed with the Company’s independent registered public accounting firm, Deloitte & Touche LLP, the matters required to be discussed with the Audit Committee under applicable Public Company Accounting Oversight Board (PCAOB) standards and SEC Rule 2-07 of Regulation S-X. The Committee also has received the written disclosure and correspondence from Deloitte & Touche LLP required by applicable requirements of the PCAOB regarding Deloitte & Touche LLP communications with the Committee concerning independence and has discussed their independence with them. Based on the foregoing reviews and discussions, the Committee recommended to the Board that the audited financial statements referred to above be included in the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2017, for filing with the SEC.

PROPOSAL NUMBER 3 − Advisory Vote to Approve Executive Compensation

The Board of Directors asks shareholders to support a non-binding, advisory resolution approving the Company’s executive compensation as reported in this Proxy Statement.

We design our executive compensation programs to support the Company’s long-term success. As described below in the Compensation Discussion and Analysis section of this Proxy Statement, the Compensation and Benefits Committee has structured the Company’s executive compensation programs to achieve key Company goals and objectives. We believe our compensation philosophy allows us to link realized pay to a variety of performance measures and reward management skills that produce consistent, long-term performance accompanied with effective risk management and execution of the Company’s strategy.

In 2017, the Company continued to operate a safe railroad, provide solid service to our customers and deliver record financial results despite operational challenges throughout the year, from significant flooding impacting the western portion of the Railroad’s network, to the unprecedented weather event accompanying Hurricane Harvey in our Southern Region. Highlights of the Company’s performance* include:

The Board urges shareholders to read the Compensation Discussion and Analysis, beginning on page 43 of this Proxy Statement, which describes in more detail how our executive compensation policies and procedures, including many best practices, operate and are designed to align compensation with our Company strategy, goals and objectives. Shareholders should also review the Summary Compensation Table and related compensation tables and narrative, appearing on pages 65 through 85, which provide detailed information regarding the compensation of our Named Executive Officers. The Compensation and Benefits Committee and the Board of Directors believe that the policies and procedures articulated in the Compensation Discussion and Analysis create effective incentives for achieving Company goals, including returns to shareholders, and that the compensation of our Named Executive Officers reported in this Proxy Statement has supported and directly contributed to the Company’s performance and success.

In accordance with Section 14A of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, and as a matter of good corporate governance, the Board asks shareholders to approve the following advisory resolution at the Annual Meeting:

RESOLVED, that the shareholders of Union Pacific Corporation (the Company) approve, on an advisory basis, the compensation of the Company’s Named Executive Officers disclosed in the Compensation Discussion and Analysis, the Summary Compensation Table and the related compensation tables and narrative in the Proxy Statement for the Company’s 2018 Annual Meeting of Shareholders.

This advisory resolution, commonly referred to as a “say on pay” resolution, is non-binding on the Board of Directors. Although non-binding, the Board and the Compensation and Benefits Committee will review and consider the voting results when evaluating the Company’s executive compensation programs.

The Board of Directors recommends a vote FOR the advisory resolution to approve executive compensation.

* See Item 7 of Union Pacific’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2017, for reconciliations to U.S. GAAP

A LETTER FROM OUR COMPENSATION AND BENEFITS COMMITTEE

Dear Fellow Union Pacific Shareholder:

We want to thank you for your continued support of Union Pacific and share with you the Committee’s perspective on our business, our approach to executive compensation and our recent compensation program changes.

The record financial results Union Pacific delivered this past year continue to reflect our executive team’s commitment to positive pricing in the marketplace, business development generating volume growth, and a continued focus on productivity. As a result, Union Pacific returned $6 billion to its shareholders in the form of dividends and share repurchases. Union Pacific’s total shareholder return was 32% in 2017 compared with 22% for the S&P 500.

These achievements would not have been possible without the leadership of Union Pacific’s executive management team, led by CEO Lance Fritz, who together with the women and men of Union Pacific worked tirelessly to run the safest Railroad in North America and serve our customers.

We are committed to representing the best interests of our shareholders. As directors and Compensation and Benefits Committee members, we are mindful of our responsibility to represent shareholders, and we take this responsibility seriously. When making compensation decisions, the Committee carefully balances many considerations, factors and perspectives to determine what it believes to be the right decision. In order to closely align our management team with our business goals and the interests of shareholders, our executive compensation philosophy is to provide compensation that is competitive and motivating while also being highly performance-based.

Demonstrating our commitment to align executive compensation with the long-term financial interest of our shareholders, we made the following changes to our compensation program in 2016 and maintained these features for 2017.

Shareholder feedback shaped our additional compensation program changes for 2018. We had consistently received shareholder support in the range of 94% to 97% for our executive compensation program in prior years. However, in 2017, shareholder support declined to 67%. While this vote still represented solid majority support, it caused our Board, and, specifically our Compensation and Benefits Committee, to determine that we should further enhance our outreach with shareholders regarding our executive compensation program.

[Letter Continued on Next Page]

As a result, after the 2017 Annual Meeting, we sought feedback from our shareholders. After taking their input into account, we decided to change the “at-risk” annual cash bonus, which is a significant portion of an executive’s total cash compensation, from a discretionary annual bonus evaluation to a largely formula-driven incentive cash program.

The annual incentive cash program for our executives in 2018 will be based on two key performance metrics: operating ratio and operating income, both of which are indicators of fundamental financial performance in the rail industry. A small non-formulaic component will allow for the consideration of valuable qualitative factors, such as safety, customer service, market factors and individual executive performance.

In addition to the changes noted above regarding the annual incentive program, for PSUs granted in 2018, the Committee decided to remove the ability to earn stock units annually. PSUs will only be earned after the full three-year performance period.

We ask for your support. We hope this letter provides useful context as you review the details of our executive compensation program in the Compensation Discussion & Analysis below. We also hope that we can count on your support of our executive compensation program this year, and we look forward to and ask for your continued interest in Union Pacific.

*See Item 7 of Union Pacific’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2017, for reconciliations to U.S. GAAP

COMPENSATION DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS

This Compensation Discussion and Analysis describes the material elements of our executive compensation program and provides an overview of our executive compensation philosophy, policies and practices, and the corresponding pay decisions for our Named Executive Officers (NEOs) for and during fiscal year 2017.

For fiscal year ending December 31, 2017, our Named Executive Officers (NEOs) included our principal executive officer, our principal financial officer, and the three next most highly compensated executive officers. Pursuant to SEC rules, an additional NEO is also included for 2017.

Ms. Ferguson was elected Corporate Secretary on December 1, 2017. Mr. Butler was Executive Vice President, Chief Administrative Officer and Corporate Secretary until December 1, 2017. Mr. Butler remained at the Company as Senior Vice President until his retirement on February 28, 2018.

Prior to 2017, we received very high levels of shareholder support for our executive compensation program. For example, we received shareholder support of approximately 94%, 95%, 97% in 2016, 2015 and 2014, respectively. In 2017, however, 67% of the votes cast voted in favor of our executive compensation. While this vote represented solid majority support for our NEO compensation, we were disappointed by the result.

We determined that we should better understand shareholders’ concerns and opinions. At the direction of our Board and Compensation and Benefits Committee (Compensation Committee), senior members of our management team engaged in shareholder outreach discussions. Our Chair of the Compensation Committee participated in a number of these in-person meetings and discussions. Our Chair of the Compensation Committee and Lead Independent Director also developed an outreach communication that was sent to shareholders outlining proposed considerations for our executive compensation program and soliciting feedback.

Based on shareholders’ feedback, our Compensation Committee changed the annual cash bonus program for our executives from a discretionary annual bonus evaluation to a formula-based incentive cash program to begin in 2018. Under the new annual incentive plan, eighty percent (80%) of the target annual incentive cash bonuses paid to our executives, including the NEOs, will be based on the attainment of pre-established objective Company financial performance goals, and the remainder (20%) will be paid based on the Committee’s evaluation of the Company’s overall strategy and the corresponding business objectives and individual executive performance in key areas such as safety, customer service, resource productivity, innovation and employee engagement and culture.

In addition to the changes noted above regarding the annual incentive program, for PSUs granted in 2018, the Compensation Committee decided to remove the ability to earn stock units annually. PSUs will only be earned after the full three-year performance period.

Formula-Based Objective Component

For 2018, the financial performance goals are weighted equally based on operating income (40%) and operating ratio (40%), which are key measures in the rail industry.

After the end of the fiscal year, the Committee will certify the extent to which these pre-established operating income and operating ratio goals were achieved. The non-formulaic portion is targeted at twenty percent (20%) of an executive’s incentive cash bonus potential, and the Committee retains the discretion to award less than that amount. If the minimum performance thresholds for both operating income and operating ratio are not achieved, then no annual incentive cash bonus will be paid to executives.

Non-Formulaic Component

Everything the Company does is built on our vision, mission and values — including our six-track Value Strategy. The non-formulaic portion is targeted at twenty percent (20%) of an executive’s incentive cash bonus potential and is based on the Company’s business objectives and individual executive performance in the key areas identified in our overall six-track Value Strategy. When aligned, this strategy adds value to our four stakeholders — employees feel fulfilled and recognize their role; the communities we serve are economically strong; we help our customers win in their markets; and our shareholders are pleased with the returns generated. Our six-track Value Strategy is:

For 2018, the following are certain quantitative and qualitative measurements in each of the six Value Tracks, as indicated above. The attainment of these measures and continued focus on the six-track Value Strategy will enable the Company to add value for the Company’s four stakeholders — customers, employees, communities and shareholders.

Union Pacific Railroad Company (the Railroad) is the principal operating company of Union Pacific Corporation (the Company). One of America’s most recognized companies, the Railroad links 23 states in the western two-thirds of the country by rail, providing a critical link in the global supply chain. The Railroad’s diversified business mix includes Agricultural Products, Automotive, Chemicals, Coal, Industrial Products and Intermodal. We serve many of the fastest-growing U.S. population centers, operate from all major West Coast and Gulf Coast ports to eastern gateways, connect with Canada’s rail systems and are the only railroad serving all six major Mexico gateways. Our freight traffic consists of bulk, manifest and premium business. Bulk traffic primarily consists of coal, grain, soda ash, ethanol, rock and crude oil shipped in unit trains — trains transporting a single commodity from one origin to one destination. Manifest traffic includes individual carload or less than train-load business involving commodities such as lumber, steel, paper, food and chemicals. The transportation of finished vehicles, auto parts, intermodal containers and truck trailers are included as part of our premium business. The Railroad provides value to its roughly 10,000 customers by delivering products in a safe, reliable, fuel-efficient and environmentally responsible manner.

After two consecutive years of overall volume declines, we experienced volume growth of 2% year-over-year, driven by strength in Industrial Products and Coal shipments. Growth in frac sand, coal, and intermodal shipments more than offset declines in grain, crude oil, finished vehicles, and rock shipments. We faced several operational challenges during 2017, from significant flooding in the western portion of our network, to the unprecedented rain and flooding that accompanied Hurricane Harvey in our Southern Region. Despite these challenges, we remained focused on components that were in our control, enabling us to deliver solid financial results.

Please also refer to the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for a complete analysis of the Company’s 2017 financial and operating performance.

Safety − During 2017, we continued our focus on our safety strategy to reduce risk and eliminate incidents for our employees, our customers and the public. We finished 2017 with a 3% improvement in our reportable derailment incident rate per million train miles compared to 2016. Although reportable personal injury incidents per 200,000 employee-hours increased 5% from last year’s record low, it is our second lowest year and a 9% decrease from 2015. Despite our efforts in 2017, our crossing incidents rate increased 5% from 2016. Overall, our 2017 safety results reflect our employees’ dedication to our safety initiatives and our efforts to further engage the workforce through programs such as Courage to Care, Total Safety Culture, and UP Way (our continuous improvement culture).

Service and Operations − Our average train speed, as reported to the Association of American Railroads, decreased 5% compared to 2016, and our average terminal dwell time increased 8% from 2016. Disruptions across our network, including the impact of Hurricane Harvey, negatively impacted network fluidity. Continued implementation and testing of Positive Train Control across a growing number of routes in our network combined with other operational challenges also negatively impacted overall average train speed and terminal dwell. We made capital investments of almost $3.1 billion in 2017, continuing to strengthen our franchise. This

included $1.9 billion in replacement capital to harden our infrastructure and improve the safety and resiliency of our network. In addition, we spent approximately $340 million on Positive Train Control. Through 2017, we invested approximately $2.6 billion in the ongoing development of PTC.

Financial Performance − The Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (the Tax Act) was enacted on December 22, 2017 which resulted in a $5.9 billion non-cash reduction in our income tax expense. In addition, we recognized a $212 million non-cash reduction to operating expense related to income tax adjustments recognized at certain equity-method affiliates. We believe adjusted results that exclude these effects provide relevant information to our investors as they more accurately reflect the strength of our on-going financial performance and are the results discussed in the following paragraphs. Please refer to page 22 of the Company’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for a complete reconciliation of our full year 2017 reported results under accounting principles generally accepted in the U.S. (GAAP) to our 2017 adjusted results (non-GAAP) for the tax related items described above.

In 2017, we generated adjusted operating income of more than $7.8 billion, an 8% increase compared to 2016. Volume growth of 2%, combined with core pricing and productivity gains, generated solid financial performance improvement and more than offset $86 million of operating expense associated with our workforce reduction plan implemented in the third quarter of 2017. Our 2017 adjusted operating ratio was an all-time record 63.0%, improving 0.5 points from 2016. Adjusted net income of $4.6 billion translated into adjusted earnings of $5.79 per diluted share, a best-ever performance.

Our net return on invested capital (ROIC, see footnote 1 on the following page) of 13.7 percent increased a full percentage point over last year’s 12.7 percent. The Company increased its quarterly declared dividend per share by 10 percent, with dividends paid in 2017 totaling $2.0 billion. We also repurchased 36 million shares of Company common stock. Between dividends and share repurchases, the Company returned $6 billion to our shareholders in 2017.

Performance Versus Compensation Peer Group Companies − The Committee benchmarks the Company’s financial performance as measured by growth in total revenue, operating income, diluted earnings per share from continuing operations (EPS) and ROIC, against the results of a group of peer companies (the Peer Group)

that consists of both other railroads and companies that are comparable to the Company in size and complexity but are in other industries (as described on page 50). In addition, the Committee compares the Company’s total shareholder return with those of the Peer Group.

* Du Pont (El) De Nemours excluded due to merger with Dow Chemical effective September 1, 2017. Time Warner excluded due to merger with Charter Communications effective May 18, 2016.

The Company’s executive compensation philosophy is to:

The Compensation and Benefits Committee believes this compensation philosophy allows us to reward behavior that produces consistent, long-term performance accompanied with effective risk management and execution of the Company’s strategy.

To guide its executive compensation decisions, the Committee carefully evaluates and considers a number of factors in connection with its executive compensation decisions, including:

Company Performance. As described above, the Company measures its performance against business objectives related to safety, service and financial performance. Management develops the Company’s overall strategy and the corresponding business objectives and presents them to the Board annually in February. After Board approval, the Committee incorporates the objectives into the compensation program with the assistance and advice from the Finance Committee of the Board. The Board monitors the Company’s progress concerning execution of its strategy and its business objectives during the year. At the end of the year, the Board assesses the Company’s achievement of these objectives. In February, subsequent to the performance year, management presents to the Committee its achievement compared to the business objectives and its relative performance compared to the Peer Group, along with its recommendations for bonus and equity awards.

Guidance from Compensation Consultant and Input from CEO. The Committee reviews and recommends Board approval for the compensation of all NEOs. The CEO provides the Committee with his evaluation of the performance of the other NEOs (excluding himself) and his recommendations for their compensation. The Committee also receives information and recommendations from its independent compensation consultant (FW Cook) on matters related to the NEOs’ (including the CEO’s) and other executives’ compensation. The Committee then determines (with advice from the Board, and assistance from its consultant) a bonus and equity award for the Company’s CEO.

For more information on the operation of the Committee, including information on its compensation consultant, see the Compensation and Benefits Committee section on pages 31 and 32 of this Proxy Statement.

Peer Companies. The Committee benchmarks salary, Total Cash Compensation and Total Direct Compensation for the NEOs against competitive market information. To assess competitive market

information, the Committee looks primarily to pay data from the proxy statements of the Company’s Peer Group. The proxy information reviewed by the Committee consists of comparable data for the CEO and CFO positions and the next three highest paid individuals at each Peer Group company. The Committee also reviews relevant data provided by FW Cook, the Committee’s compensation consultant, for purposes of evaluating the compensation for the CEO and Chairman.

As further discussed below, the Committee generally seeks to establish base salaries below the median of the Peer Group, reflecting the Committee’s philosophy that a greater proportion of the cash component of the executives’ compensation should be incentive-based. The Committee generally targets a range around the median of the Peer Group for Total Cash Compensation and Total Direct Compensation. Then, if Company performance objectives are met, the Committee generally determines compensation within that range based upon relative and individual performance. Total Direct Compensation and Total Cash Compensation may be greater or less than targeted percentiles, depending upon whether and to what degree the Company achieves its business objectives (as described above).

Other factors considered in setting compensation levels may include the individual performance of each NEO and his or her position relative to the Company’s current internal pay structure or changes in personnel or compensation at the Peer Group companies. In addition, the Committee particularly focuses on competitive pay for railroad executives within the Peer Group and the performance of other comparable railroads. In comparing the executive positions with comparable positions at companies within the Peer Group, the Committee and FW Cook review and consider any adjustments that may be required to account for significant differences in tenure or functional responsibilities.

In 2017, the Peer Group consisted of the following 17 companies listed below.

The Committee selected this Peer Group with the assistance of its compensation consultant, FW Cook, after considering U.S. based public companies in the same Global Industry Classification System (GICS) Industry Group with comparable revenues and market capitalization and other U.S.-based public companies with comparable (i) revenues, (ii) operating income, (iii) total assets, (iv) market capitalization and (v) employees, while excluding pharmaceuticals, high-tech, insurance and financial services companies. These comparative financial measures and the number of employees for the 2017 Peer Group are summarized below.

Dollars in millions. Median/Percentiles determined by FW Cook using Standard & Poor’s Capital IQ Service, Form 8-K filings and Peer Group company information. The financial information provided above is derived from data as of fiscal year ending December 31, 2017, except as of November 2017 for FedEx, October 2017 for Deere & Co and Medtronic, and September 2017 for Altria, Exelon, Southern Co. and UPS. Market Capitalization is a 12-month average as of December 31, 2017.

We endeavor to maintain strong governance standards in our policies and practices related to executive compensation. Below is a summary of key executive compensation and governance practices in place during 2017.

Elements of Our Executive Compensation Program

The following table provides information regarding the elements of the Company’s executive compensation program for 2017:

The Committee reviews Total Direct Compensation for each of the NEOs on an annual basis prior to the first Board meeting of the year. Total Direct Compensation consists of (i) cash compensation (Total Cash Compensation) comprised of base salary and annual cash bonus, if any is paid, and (ii) stock-based compensation under our long-term incentive compensation programs. Each component is described more fully below. The Committee also periodically reviews other elements of compensation, including deferred compensation, perquisites, benefits, including retirement plans, and change-in-control severance payments.

The following table summarizes the 2017 Total Direct Compensation the Committee approved for each NEO. This table is supplementary and is not intended to replace the Summary Compensation Table.

2017 Total Direct Compensation Versus Peer Group

A significant portion of the compensation awarded to our CEO and other NEOs, is variable, performance-based compensation and “at-risk.” This is illustrated in the charts below that show the pay mix for Mr. Fritz, our CEO, and for our other NEOs as a group based on the total compensation received by these executives in fiscal 2017 as shown in the Summary Compensation Table.

Named Executive Officer Accomplishments During 2017

In setting the annual bonus for Mr. Fritz, the Committee, along with all the other non-management, independent directors, considered the Company’s execution of its overall strategy in 2017 and the corresponding business objectives in safety, operational and financial performance, including record adjusted earnings per share of $5.79 (See Item 7 of Union Pacific’s Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2017, for reconciliations to U.S. GAAP). During his third year as CEO, Mr. Fritz led the Company’s efforts on resource alignment, productivity and efficiency, while leveraging the strengths of the Company’s rail franchise in the face of significant operational challenges from significant flooding in the western portion of our network, to the unprecedented rain and flooding that accompanied Hurricane Harvey in our Southern Region (please also refer to the Company’s 2017 Financial and Operating Performance section beginning on page 46). Despite these challenges, the Company remained focused on executing its strategy and delivered solid financial results. In 2017, senior management leadership continued the implementation and execution of our “G55 and Zero” initiative driving significant resource productivity, from successfully aligning our resources to meet increases in demand, to being more efficient across the entire organization.

In setting annual bonuses for the other NEOs, the Committee first considered the overall operational and financial performance of the Company in 2017. The Committee considered the CEO’s recommendations for compensation of each of the other NEOs, as well as the responsibilities of each NEO, and their tenure and award levels relative to similarly situated executives in the Peer Group. The Committee also considered the following accomplishments of each of the other NEOs:

Mr. Knight led ongoing strategic initiatives to improve the Company’s financial performance and returns for shareholders. Excluding one-time benefits from tax reform, earnings per share increased 14% in 2017 to an all-time record $5.79. Return on Invested Capital improved a full percentage point from 12.7% in 2016 to 13.7% in 2017, also excluding the benefits from tax reform. Financial results in 2017 reflect a 2% increase in volume, pricing gains, and solid productivity performance. The Company also achieved a record adjusted operating ratio of 63.0%, down 0.5 percentage points from the prior year. Under Mr. Knight’s leadership, the Company’s strategic productivity initiative “G55 and Zero” drove $345 million in cost savings, with a plan for additional financial benefits in future years as the Company continues its focus on this initiative. The Company continued to maintain the strong credit profile needed to retain a solid A/A3 credit rating, while optimizing its balance sheet to increase cash returned to shareholders. Debt to EBITDA was 1.9X in 2017, flat with the prior year. The Company’s average debt maturity was extended by one year to approximately 17 years, while our effective interest rate declined to 4.6% from 4.7% in 2016. Total cash returned to shareholders in the form of dividends and share repurchases was $6 billion in 2017, compared to $5 billion in 2016. Returns to shareholders include a 10% increase in the quarterly dividend effective in the Fourth Quarter of 2017, resulting in a payout ratio of 42.8%. In addition, the Company repurchased 36.4 million shares, which was 4% of total shares outstanding, at a total cost of $4.0 billion and an average price of $110.40 per share. In 2017, the Company’s total shareholder return was 32%, versus 22% for the S&P 500.

Mr. Scott led the Operating team’s progress toward the ultimate safety objective of achieving an incident free workplace. During 2017, the Company continued to focus its strategy and efforts to reduce risk and eliminate safety-related incidents for employees, customers and the public. The reportable personal injury rate per 200,000 employee hours was 0.79, which for the third year in a row the Company was the best Class 1 railroad in North America. The reportable derailment rate per million train miles reflects 3% improvement to 2.94. Mr. Scott led efforts to enhance the Company's safety strategy and continued to foster a robust safety culture reflected in the peer-to-peer, behavior-based Total Safety Culture, as well as the Courage to Care commitment and the G55 and Zero productivity initiative. Mr. Scott led efficiency and productivity gains by rapidly adjusting resources to match business levels. Efficient capital spending minimized the miles of track with speed restrictions due to track condition and resulted in the continued development of a robust track infrastructure. These resource adjustments and productivity initiatives helped the Company achieved a best ever operating ratio in 2017. Throughout the year, Mr. Scott participated in a comprehensive leadership development and engagement plan with senior management and the Board to support the Company’s leadership development plan.

Ms. Ferguson led the Law Department’s continuing efforts to meet the challenges posed by increasingly complex litigation, regulatory matters and the changing political landscape. Ms. Ferguson and the Law team

successfully resolved significant litigation matters. In support of the Company’s G55 and Zero productivity initiative, the Law Department continued to pursue targeted initiatives to reduce litigation and associated costs along with driving efficiencies and prevention efforts in areas such as safety, regulatory, risk management, environmental and ethics. Ms. Ferguson and the Law team provided legal counsel and leadership on corporate, commercial and real estate transactions critical to the success of the Company’s business and strategic plans. Ms. Ferguson and the Law Department also leveraged record safety results with a comprehensive risk management litigation strategy to reduce personal injury costs. Under Ms. Ferguson's leadership, the Law team also continued to lead compliance and risk-reduction initiatives across a wide range of Company activities, protecting Company and shareholder interests.

Ms. Whited led the Marketing and Sales team to implement commercial strategies that enhanced the customer experience and successfully leveraged the value proposition to retain and grow business. These efforts resulted in profitable revenue growth of 6%. Under Ms. Whited's leadership, her team achieved core price growth of $260 million in 2017, and generated over $1.9 billion in business development revenue by winning new and growing existing business. In collaboration with multiple departments, Ms. Whited and her team led resource productivity improvements across the network, which included implementing Mobile Work Order, a new real-time reporting tool for train crews. Her team leveraged this technology to provide improved visibility to rail customers. In addition, as part of the G55 and Zero productivity initiative, Ms. Whited redesigned her Marketing and Sales organization by consolidating six major business units into four: Agricultural Products, Energy, Industrial, and Premium, as well as consolidating four logistics subsidiaries into one, Loup Logistics Company to better serve our customers. She led the Company in creating customer value by expanding services, launching new services, and expanding commercial facilities, resulting in 234 industrial development projects. Ms. Whited and her team leveraged our logistics subsidiaries and interline business to drive growth, extend reach, and improve supply chain logistics. Customers recognized these efforts by awarding the Company with strong customer satisfaction scores and multiple customer awards.

Mr. Butler served two roles for the Company, as Corporate Secretary and as Executive Vice President and Chief Administrative Officer overseeing the Company’s Strategic Planning, Labor Relations, Human Resources and Executive Services teams. As Corporate Secretary, Mr. Butler led activities designed to maintain the highest standards of corporate governance. In particular, Mr. Butler managed the relationship between the Company and the Board and ensured that Board materials and meeting agendas appropriately considered issues identified as priorities by the Board and the Company’s senior leadership, including strategic planning and risk management. Under his leadership as Executive Vice President and Chief Administrative Officer, Mr. Butler led the continued development of a robust strategic planning process. Mr. Butler strengthened the Company’s strategic planning process by focusing on key strategic topics, including supply chain evolution, market penetration, the competitive landscape and technology driven operations and advancements. In his oversight of the Labor Relations team, Mr. Butler supported the Company’s efforts in the successful national negotiations that reached tentative agreements and avoided interruption to service. In his oversight of the Company’s Human Resources team, Mr. Butler facilitated the discussion to change the annual executive cash bonus program from a discretionary annual bonus evaluation to a majority formula-based incentive cash program to best pay for performance, attract and retain talent and align with shareholder interests. Under Mr. Butler’s guidance, the employee value proposition was enriched and the Company continued to attract, develop and engage employees as well as enhance employee development and leadership. Mr. Butler also worked to preserve and enhance the Company’s Heritage assets to ensure value creation now and in the future.

Base Salary

The CEO reviews base salaries and prior year performance and accomplishments for the other NEOs and recommends a base salary for the coming year for each. The Committee considers and evaluates these base salary recommendations. Among many considerations, the Committee primarily considers: (i) the executive’s position and responsibility in the organization, (ii) the executive’s experience and expertise, (iii) Company performance, (iv) individual accomplishments and job performance during the year, (v) Peer Group pay data, (vi) internal benchmarking relative to the Company’s pay structure, and (vii) current salary. In making salary

recommendations to the Board of Directors, the Committee exercises subjective judgment in evaluating all factors and applies no specific weights to the above factors. The Committee alone, with input from its compensation consultant and the Board’s review of CEO performance, assesses and determines the base salary of the CEO for subsequent Board approval.

In February 2017 and 2018, the Committee reviewed each of our NEO’s base salary. Upon review of competitive market data, including our Peer Group, the Committee approved the salary increases shown below.

Annual Cash Bonus

In 2017, annual cash bonuses linked a significant portion of the executive’s Total Cash Compensation to specific annual Company results and also to individual contributions to Company performance. Although we communicated specific strategy and corresponding business objectives to the Company as a whole based on the annual strategic operating plan developed by management and presented to the Board, these business objectives did not exclusively determine executive bonuses. Instead, the Committee used these business objectives to determine an overall funding level without using formulas or assigning specific weight to any one objective. The Committee established 2017’s funding level by considering competitive compensation and the Company’s success in executing its overall strategies and achieving its business objectives, as well as other qualitative factors. The Committee determined individual bonus awards for each NEO on a subjective basis, taking into account Company and individual performance. The Committee implemented this in a manner designed to reinforce the Company’s pay-for-performance philosophy, as annual bonuses were based upon (i) the Company’s performance and (ii) the individual executive’s performance during the period. Over the years, this subjective process has resulted in the annual cash bonus ranging from zero for all NEOs to an amount that significantly exceeds the executive’s base salary.

In February 2018, the Committee adopted a formula-based incentive cash program to begin in 2018, to replace the prior years’ annual cash bonus arrangement. Under the new annual incentive plan, eighty percent (80%) of the target annual incentive cash bonuses paid to executives, including the NEOs, will be based on the attainment of pre-established objective Company financial performance goals, and the remainder (20%) will be paid based on the Company’s business objectives and individual executive performance in key areas such as safety, customer service, resource productivity, innovation and employee engagement and culture. The financial performance goals are based on operating income (40%) and operating ratio (40%), which are key performance measures in the rail industry.   

The following graph sets forth the amount of average annual cash bonus reported for the NEOs for the applicable performance year versus the Company’s EPS as reported in accordance with GAAP.

In 2017, when determining individual annual bonuses, the Committee considered the individual performance of each NEO as well as competitive compensation of the Company’s Peer Group. Depending primarily on the position of the NEO, Company-level performance and individual performance, this process generally results in between half and three-quarters of an executive’s potential cash compensation being at-risk. At the end of the year, the CEO reviews corporate, strategic, operational and individual accomplishments and job performance for the other NEOs (which, for 2017 are as described above under the Named Executive Officer Accomplishments section), and provides the Committee an annual cash bonus recommendation for each NEO other than himself. For 2017, the Committee considered these recommendations as part of its subjective assessment of each NEO, and may make adjustments, in its discretion, applying no specific weight to any one factor. The Committee, with input from its consultant and the review of the evaluations of the CEO by the independent, non-management members of the Board, alone assesses and determines the bonus for the CEO. The annual bonuses for all NEOs are then recommended to the Board for approval.

In light of Mr. Knight’s contributions, performance and long tenure with the Company, his Total Cash Compensation has placed him above the 75^th percentile of our Peer Group.

2017 Total Cash Compensation Versus Peer Group