IBJNews

International Paper to fold local plant, laying off 91

Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

International Paper Co. plans to close its box plant on the east side of Indianapolis, permanently laying off all 91 employees by July 2, according to a notice to state officials.

The shutdown is the latest in a recent string of layoffs and closures by the global company in its Indiana operations.

Employees at the Indianapolis container plant, 2900 N. Franklin Road, manufacture corrugated and solid fiber boxes. The company said in a notice received Monday by the Indiana Department of Workforce Development that the job losses are expected to begin June 19. They will include more than 70 employees represented by unions.

The closure was necessary due to a recent merger that duplicated International Paper operations in the Indianapolis area, said Cynthia Godby, a spokesperson for the company.

"That created overcapacity in the market," Godby said. "We did not make this decision lightly. It was in the best interest of our shareholders."

International Paper, based in Memphis, Tenn., acquired industry rival Temple-Inland Inc. in February 2012. The purchase included a box manufacturing plant in the Indianapolis area, making the Franklin Road plant redundant, Godby said.

International Paper is a global manufacturing firm specializing in industrial and consumer packaging, as well as uncoated papers. It employs about 70,000 people worldwide, with locations in more than 20 countries.

The company’s operations in Indiana have been in flux for years. In April 2012, International Paper notified state officials that it was eliminating one shift and 57 employees at its Crawfordsville box plant. And, in 2011, International Paper at least temporarily layed off 78 employees at its Indianapolis packaging plant at 620 S. Belmont Ave. Those operations were spun off in the creation of a new packaging firm, AGI-Shorewood.

In January 2009, the company told state officials that it would close its plant in Hartford City by spring of that year, eliminating 99 jobs.

International Paper owns the Xpedx chain of print shops but has been shedding locations over the past three years. Those included Arvey Paper & Office Products at 1021 Pennsylvania St., which closed in June 2012. It reopened under new management in December.

Shares of International Paper, which trade on the New York Stock Exchange, have risen nearly 40 percent in the last year. They closed at $47.20 on Monday.



 

ADVERTISEMENT

Post a comment to this story

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in IBJ editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT

facebook - twitter on Facebook & Twitter

Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ on Facebook:
Follow on TwitterFollow IBJ's Tweets on these topics:
 
Subscribe to IBJ
  1. By Mr. Lee's own admission, he basically ran pro-bono ads on the billboard. Paying advertisers didn't want ads on a controversial, ugly billboard that turned off customers. At least one of Mr. Lee's free advertisers dropped out early because they found that Mr. Lee's advertising was having negative impact. So Mr. Lee is disingenous to say the city now owes him for lost revenue. Mr. Lee quickly realized his monstrosity had a dim future and is trying to get the city to bail him out. And that's why the billboard came down so quickly.

  2. Merchants Square is back. The small strip center to the south of 116th is 100% leased, McAlister’s is doing well in the outlot building. The former O’Charleys is leased but is going through permitting with the State and the town of Carmel. Mac Grill is closing all of their Indy locations (not just Merchants) and this will allow for a new restaurant concept to backfill both of their locations. As for the north side of 116th a new dinner movie theater and brewery is under construction to fill most of the vacancy left by Hobby Lobby and Old Navy.

  3. Yes it does have an ethics commission which enforce the law which prohibits 12 specific items. google it

  4. Thanks for reading and replying. If you want to see the differentiation for research, speaking and consulting, check out the spreadsheet I linked to at the bottom of the post; it is broken out exactly that way. I can only include so much detail in a blog post before it becomes something other than a blog post.

  5. 1. There is no allegation of corruption, Marty, to imply otherwise if false. 2. Is the "State Rule" a law? I suspect not. 3. Is Mr. Woodruff obligated via an employment agreement (contractual obligation) to not work with the engineering firm? 4. In many states a right to earn a living will trump non-competes and other contractual obligations, does Mr. Woodruff's personal right to earn a living trump any contractual obligations that might or might not be out there. 5. Lawyers in state government routinely go work for law firms they were formally working with in their regulatory actions. You can see a steady stream to firms like B&D from state government. It would be interesting for IBJ to do a review of current lawyers and find out how their past decisions affected the law firms clients. Since there is a buffer between regulated company and the regulator working for a law firm technically is not in violation of ethics but you have to wonder if decisions were made in favor of certain firms and quid pro quo jobs resulted. Start with the DOI in this review. Very interesting.

ADVERTISEMENT