The Stel Salaried Pensioners Organization wishes to thank The Hamilton Spectator for permission to post the following article (Opinion) by Lee Prokaska, published in the November 2, 2007 edition
The Hamilton Spectator
(Nov 2, 2007)
To paraphrase William Shakespeare, a rose is
a rose. Call it a dandelion and it will still smell like a rose.
The same goes for a steel company. No matter
what name it carries, it will still be a steel company, it will still provide
employment and produce steel. We hope it will do so for a very long time.
Certainly it is a historic moment when the
name of one of our steel companies is changed. Unquestionably, there is deep
sadness at the passing of a legendary name that has, for almost a century,
helped define this community not only for those who live here but also for the
world beyond. But in the fullness of time, will it really matter that, in 2007,
Stelco became U.S. Steel Canada?
In so many ways, it is a wonder there was
even a Stelco left to be renamed. Labour-management dysfunction had long been a
corporate personality trait; Stelco also seemed to have a streak of corporate
stubbornness that made the company sluggish and unwieldy as it tried -- largely
unsuccessfully -- to respond to changes in the types of steel products in
demand. It was barely three years ago that the company entered bankruptcy
protection. Even after emerging from that protection, continuing losses made
the company's survival an open question. Let's face it, corporate branding has
not been positive for a long time.
Our other big steel company has for years
stood in contrast to insular Stelco. Historically, Dofasco has had a more open
corporate character and a more progressive worker-management relationship. It
has been more nimble in adjusting to market demands. And while the realities of
globalization have recently led it to cut its summer student program and offer
buyouts to permanent staff, Dofasco is a company that has been involved in the
community, donating money, time and personnel to local projects and causes. As
a result, there's a sense that if the new owners changed Dofasco's name, it
would pack a greater emotional wallop.
U.S. Steel paid $1.1 billion US for Stelco,
taking on $800 million US in debt and $1.4 billion in pension and health-care
liabilities. U.S. Steel plans a $100-million investment in the Hamilton and
Lake Erie operations. U.S. Steel has no immediate plans to increase the
workforce, but neither does it have immediate plans to make cuts. It could have
turned out much worse for 3,600 Stelco workers who still have their jobs, and
for the city's industrial tax base.
U.S. Steel has some major work to do in
rebranding the Hamilton operation, to remove any vestiges of stigma that come
from the almost-failure of Stelco. Certainly that will take time and commitment
on the part of the company and its workers, but it's necessary for the
long-term viability and prosperity of the company. A name change is not a bad
place to start making over the steelmaker's image.
Stelco's association with the people of
Hamilton has not always been a happy one, but the company has been a consistent
and cherished element in the self-image of this city. The birth of U.S. Steel
Canada is certainly the end of an era. But that's not automatically a bad
thing.