U.S. Steel’s secret deal can be made public

Court of Appeal decision means workers, retirees and city may see details of agreement

TORONTO — Ontario’s Court of Appeal has cleared a path to forcing release of the secret deal between U.S. Steel and the former Harper government.

In a ruling released Tuesday, the court struck down a decision by the judge overseeing the restructuring of U.S. Steel Canada where he said the Investment Canada Act barred released of the deal and that he lacked authority under creditor protection legislation to overrule that.

Lawyer Andrew Hatnay, of Toronto’s Koskie Minsky, said the appeals victory is an im- portant one.

He has lead the charge at the Court of Appeal for the coalition of active and retired workers and the City of Hamilton, who have been demanding access to the agreement for the last five years.

“It settles the main issue that was advanced by USS, which was ... to hide behind the provisions of the statute that the Court of Appeals now says has no application,” he said.

The Court of Appeal decision removes one of the major bulwarks of U.S. Steel’s effort to the hidden agreement. Now, barring an appeal to the Supreme Court of Canada, the only hurdle remaining is for Judge Herman Wilton-Siegel to decide there are no other barriers.

Hatnay added that seeing the full detail of the agreement remains important if workers and others are to be able to fully evaluate any restructuring proposals tabled by the company.

“We don’t know if it’s still important because we don’t know what’s in it, but as a creditor it’s important for us to know what’s in it,” he said.

Union leader Bill Ferguson, of the United Steelworkers local at the Lake Erie Works, said seeing the full package will also tell people how badly they were betrayed by the Harper government when it accepted the deal in exchange for dropping its lawsuit against the company over broken investment, employment and production promises given in exchange for government approval to buy Stelco in 2007.

“People deserve to know how their government acted in this,” Ferguson said. “The federal government acted on behalf of the workers by signing this deal but decided to keep it secret. I think that has to be exposed.

“I do not believe the government has the right to do secret deals about the livelihoods of people,” he added.

“I’ve heard some people say you’ll be disappointed because it’s pretty bland. If it’s pretty bland then what are they hiding?”

The Ontario and national offices of the United Steelworkers also hailed the decision as a victory for workers.

“It is in the interests of thousands of working f amilies, pensioners and their communities that this veil of secrecy finally be lifted,” Ontario director Marty Warren said in a news release Tuesday. “Those who are directly affected, whose jobs, pensions and benefits are at risk, deserve a fair, open and transparent process.”

National director Ken Neumann said “It’s an offence to vulnerable working families and pensioners that the previous Conservative government sided with U.S. Steel in court to try to block the release of this secret deal.

“We expect that the new Liberal government will stand up for workers and pensioners and actively petition the court to end the secrecy and release these documents,” Neumann said.

Local 1005 president Gary Howe said in the same release that access to the details of the agreement are crucial for workers to have a f air chance of protecting their rights and interests in the restructuring.

The Appeal Court decision arrived on the same day closing arguments began in the U.S. Steel claims trial — the lengthy proceeding in which the same coalition of groups, joined by the provincial government and a former Stelco president, are trying to convince Wilton-Siegel that the American company’s claim of $2.2 billion in debt from the Canadian firm is really equity.

If U.S. Steel wins its point, it becomes U.S. Steel Canada’s largest creditor with the power to shape a restructuring workers and the province fear will leave little to no cash to top up underfunded Canadian pension plans.

In his presentation, U.S. Steel lawyer Michael Barrack said it’s clear from the way the Canadian-American financial arrangements are structured that they were conceived as debt that would have to be repaid.

He also bemoaned the way the Pittsburgh-based company is being attacked after doing a good deed in keeping its Canadian arm afloat during the 2008-2009 downturn.

“But for the involvement of U.S. Steel a standalone Stelco would not have survived the recession of 2008-2009,” he said.

Lawyer Alan Mark, acting for the provincial government, argued that U.S. Steel consistently abused its power as sole shareholder of the former Stelco to give itself security other creditors were denied.

That is most starkly shown, he said, in the security agreement U.S. Steel Canada president Mike McQuade signed in 2013, giving the parent company a claim against all Canadian assets in exchange for continued draws against two loans — money he admitted Stelco needed to continue operating.

The trial continues Wednesday.