Mittal Steel's U.S. Record

Summary of Findings

© by Mark Reutter
Posted 4/24/06

No Long-Term Commitment

After paying $4.5 billion to buy ISG and paying himself a $2 billion dividend for forming Mittal Steel, Lakshmi Mittal has announced no long-term capital commitment to build new steel capacity and has undertaken only one major project to replace aging equipment at his U.S. mills.

This runs counter to statements by top executives (What They Said) that Mittal’s acquisition of ISG would spur investment and preserve jobs and production in the U.S.

Heavy Spending Elsewhere

Mittal Steel has made long-term capital commitments in excess of $1.5 billion to improve its steel facilities in Poland, Kazakhstan, South Africa, Mexico, and Romania. Commenting on the company’s long-term strategy, Aditya Mittal spoke of the wage difference between western and eastern Europe, “If you look at our operations in central eastern Europe, the average [labor] cost, let’s say in Poland and the Czech Republic – this is not specific, but rough, round numbers, about $10,000 a year. And if you look at France and Germany, it’s about $40,000…. And I think that gives you a sense of why we are making significant investments in Poland and these areas.” (1)
 
In addition in 2005, Mittal acquired a 37 percent stake in a Chinese steel company for $338 million; signed a memorandum of understanding to build a $11.4-billion “greenfield” mining and steelmaking complex in Jharkhand, India; committed $600 million to reopen iron ore mines destroyed during Liberia’s civil war; and purchased Ukraine’s Kryvorizhstal steel complex for $4.8 billion. (2)

Reduced Capital Investment

ISG had budgeted $425 million for capital expenditures (“capex”) in 2005. But after assuming control of ISG in April 2005 and adding its Inland Steel properties to the group, the Mittal board of directors took away $40 million capex. In other words, more plants = less investment. (3)

In comparison, U.S. Steel Corp., a smaller integrated steelmaker, spent $475 million capex in 2005. (4)

The one major capital project completed by Mittal USA was conversion of a mothballed continuous anneal line to a galvanizing line at the Cleveland mill. The $70-million project – approved and started by ISG eight months before the Mittal takeover – was scheduled for completion in fall 2005. It was not opened until the last week of April 2006. The line has the capacity to roll 700,000 tons of galvanized hot-dip steel for the auto industry and will create 80 new jobs, according to the company.

The opening of the new galvanizing line has resulted in the closing of AK-ISG Coating, another galvanizing plant in Cleveland. The plant employed 83 people last April (2005) when Mittal took over operations from ISG. Employment was reduced to about 40 people in mid-2005 because of weak demand from General Motors and Ford Motors. AK Steel Corp. was a non-operating co-investor in the plant.

So far in 2006, the Mittal board has approved $204 million capex. This includes $126 million to install air-pollution controls required under EPA’s MACT (Maximum Available Control Technology) standards. In comparison, U.S. Steel announced plans to spend $440 million capex in 2006. (5)

Poor Earnings

In 2005, Mittal reported net income of $328 million for its U.S. mills on sales of $12.2 billion. In 2004, ISG reported net income of $637 million, while Inland-Mittal reported $259 million. After adding in ISG’s income for the first quarter of 2005 (before the Mittal takeover) to equalize a comparison, net income dropped 54.8 percent between 2004 and 2005. (6)

Reductions in Output

To try to keep prices stable during last year’s downturn, Mittal throttled down U.S. production, with some facilities operating at under 50 percent capacity. (7)

Plant and Job Cutbacks

Between May 2005 and March 2006, Mittal Steel idled blast furnaces at Burns Harbor, Indiana Harbor, Cleveland, and Weirton, resulting in more than 2,000 “temporary” and “voluntary” layoffs that lasted from several weeks to many months.

In July 2005, Mittal scrapped plans developed by ISG for a $200-million expansion of the Riverdale (Ill.) mill. “Their action is akin to a breach of contact,” Riverdale Major Zenovia Evans told reporters, saying she and other officials went to bat for the company with the Cook County Forest Preserve District to swap land to allow for the mill’s expansion.

In November 2005, Mittal announced that it would not restart the blast furnace and steelmaking operations at Weirton, eliminating 800 jobs and 3 million tons of annual capacity. The company had reviewed a $93 million cost-cutting package that the union put together and found that it would not reduce costs enough to keep Mittal Weirton's hot-end operations open.

In January 2006, Mittal announced that the number of job cuts at Weirton had grown to 950, including support staff.

In February 2006, Mittal announced it would stop accepting orders for galvanized steel at Weirton and shut the galvanizing line within three months, eliminating about 50 jobs. Production of galvanized steel “causes the production line to run slowly, which [Plant Manager Brian] James said costs Mittal productivity and profit,” an AP article noted.

In February 2006, Mittal idled several operation lines at Indiana Harbor, including the No. 4 pickling line and No. 56 tandem mill. Workers at the idled facilities would be moved to other jobs.

In March 2006, Mittal moved forward – over union objections – to idle Sparrows Point No. 2 machine shop, eliminating 40 “temporary layoff” positions permanently.

In March-April 2006, Sparrows Point’s modern in-line side trimmer for the No. 8 chrome line, mothballed by ISG, was shipped to Weirton’s No. 2 chrome line for installation. The removal of Sparrows Point equipment – without the apparent knowledge of USWA Sparrows Point Local 9477 – severely restricts the possibility of future chrome production at the mill.

Management Merry-Go-Round

Rodney Mott, CEO of ISG and CEO-designate of Mittal USA, resigned one day before the merger. He was replaced by Louis Schorsch. Most senior executives of ISG left immediately after the merger, including the chief operating officer, chief financial officer, controller, treasurer, vice president of sales, and head of human resources. The exodus continues. Among prominent recent departures were the general manager of Sparrows Point (in March 2006) and the west regional director and ex-Burns Harbor manager (in January 2006).

Good Safety Record

So far, Mittal Steel has maintained the good safety standards developed by predecessor companies and ISG. Serious accidents still take place in this hazardous line of work (a Mittal employee was killed at the Indiana Harbor plant last December), but Mittal’s reported rate of 0.79 accidents per 200,000 working hours is excellent.

Incentive Pay Reductions

On January 1, 2006, about 2,500 foremen, supervisors, and other salaried employees at former ISG plants saw a reduction in their incentive and profit-sharing pay. “I will be losing $26,000 this year because Mittal has cut the incentive and the profit sharing for all salaried employees in the U.S.,” one employee noted. Other staff expect to lose as much as $40,000 in earnings this year.

Negotiations are under way with the United Steelworkers of America (USWA) to modify incentive pay at some departmental units. The incentive plan was established under the ISG-USWA collective-bargaining agreement of 2003, which covered about 12,000 employees and which Mittal assumed with the ISG takeover. The contract expires on September 1, 2008.

Raining Metal

Mittal’s Cleveland complex is the single biggest air polluter in Cuyahoga County and the city of Cleveland. It literally rains metal, according to Sandy Buchanan, executive director of Ohio Citizen Action, emitting high levels of iron soot that trigger asthma, especially in children and the elderly. Buchanan reports: ”Since taking control of the facility, Mittal executives have not undertaken – or even announced plans to undertake – any steps to reduce this air pollution, have not met with neighbors, and have not responded to any of the 11,493 handwritten letters and petition signatures they have received from neighbors. We even hand-delivered 458 messages attached to drinking straws to Lakshmi Mittal’s office in London, with the message explaining that breathing through the straw for 60 seconds simulates the difficulties of asthma. Mr. Mittal refused to respond.”

Several Mittal representatives met with Ohio Citizen Action members recently, but asserted that they had no power to undertake corrective measures and, in fact, did not have authority to spend even $40,000 for a real-time air monitor to assess pollution from the Cleveland Works. When asked who would have that authority, they said Mr. Mittal. For more, including photos and detailed discharge reports, see: http://www.ohiocitizen.org/campaigns/isg/isgproblem.html.

R&D Disorganization

In April 2005, Mittal Steel announced that it would close ISG Research, the onetime Homer Research Laboratories of Bethlehem Steel at Bethlehem, Pa. About 75 employees were to be transferred to a research facility in East Chicago. “These would be some of the best scientific minds in the steel industry today,” said a Mittal spokesman. But as of February 2006, only about 20 employees had relocated, joining about 100 former Inland employees, in part because of a delayed $10-million addition to the East Chicago facility.

Should Mittal succeed in its takeover of Arcelor, the R&D activities in East Chicago would be moved to Europe, Lakshmi Mittal has told European authorities.

Notes

1. Statement of Aditya Mittal in webcast with analysts, Feb. 23, 2005.

2. From media reports; Aditya Mittal webcast; Mittal Steel N.A., Form 20-F, 2005, to U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission; and Mittal Steel USA, Form 10-K, 2005.

3. Figures come from interviews with informed sources and from company documents. Remember, capex is always a “moving target,” and the amounts allocated may not being spent or unexpected cost overruns may increase the total.

4. From U.S. Steel’s press releases for years 2004 and 2005. This figure is for U.S. Steel’s “domestic” or U.S. mills. The company reported $280 million capex for its eastern European mills in 2005 and $260 million in 2006.

5. “The Company anticipates installing controls at facilities to comply with new MACT standards with capital expenditures [capex] of about $145 million through 2007.” (Mittal 10-K, 2005, pg. 19)

6. ISG took a federal tax benefit (accruing from its 2003 purchase of Bethlehem Steel Corp.), which ballooned its net earnings for 2004 to $1.027 billion. I have excluded this tax benefit in order to give a more accurate comparison of the operating results between 2004 and 2005.

7. Figures taken from Form 20-F, pg. 39, submitted to the Securities and Exchange Commission.