---

USWA: Federal Judge Rules Against Oregon Steel; Decision Hits Company with Massive Back-Pay Liability

22 May 2000

USWA: Federal Judge Rules Against Oregon Steel; Decision Hits Company with Massive Back-Pay Liability

    PUEBLO, Colo., May 22 The following was issued today by
the United Steelworkers of America:

    In a long-awaited ruling, a federal administrative law judge has found
Oregon Steel Mills, Inc. and its wholly owned subsidiary, New CF&I,
Inc., guilty of massive violations of federal labor law and ordered the
company to reinstate and make back-pay restitution to approximately 1,000
formerly striking members of the United Steelworkers of America, the union
announced at a press conference here Saturday.
    The 111-page ruling by National Labor Relations Board Administrative Law
Judge Albert Metz upheld every major charge against Oregon Steel and New CF&I,
finding that:
    -- The company unlawfully refused to bargain with the union.
    -- The company unlawfully threatened and intimidated the work force.
    -- The company unlawfully refused to reinstate strikers to their jobs
       after they made an unconditional offer to return to work.

    Because of its refusal to reinstate the workers, the company owes back pay
to all former strikers from December 30, 1997, a liability that has reached
approximately $120 million, and is accumulating at a rate of up to $1 million
a week.
    "We're thrilled.  We're thankful.  But we're not surprised, because anyone
who knew this case -- including the company -- knew that CF&I and Oregon Steel
were in deep, deep trouble," said Terry Bonds, director of USWA District 12,
which covers the southwestern United States.
    Bonds pointed out that, because of the detailed nature of the decision,
and the judge's finding of facts, there is virtually no chance of the decision
being overturned on appeal.
    "The biggest problem for the company, beyond all the legal wrangling, is
that when an impartial federal judge heard the company's arguments and
listened to the testimony of its witnesses, he didn't believe them," he said.
    In describing the testimony of the company's witnesses, the decision is
filled with terms like "unconvincing," "evasive," "hesitant," and "not
persuasive."  In contrast, the judge found the testimony of steelworkers who
witnessed and were harmed by the company's illegal activity to be
"compelling," "candid" and "more believable."
    Bonds said that "Oregon Steel's express contempt for federal labor law and
the administrative law process is once again evident in its pathetic response
to the judge's decision, which mocks the legal process and attempts to divert
attention from the real issue-the company's lawbreaking."
    "The company claims that any decision that discounts management testimony
as not believable must be biased, but there is a more obvious explanation for
that finding -- that their witnesses simply weren't believable, a conclusion
that is obvious to anyone who reads the decision," he said.
    Bonds noted that each day that goes by increases the company's liability,
and called on management to settle the dispute.
    "The Pueblo mill was the company's main money-maker before this dispute
began, and it's done nothing but lose money since," Bonds said.
    "Shareholders have seen the value of their investment decline by 90%, and
nearly a thousand working families in Pueblo have been deprived of their
livelihood for more than two years.  It would only compound the tragedy if
this management prolongs this dispute by engaging in an essentially pointless
round of appeals," he said.
    Bonds' contention is supported by an analysis of NLRB decisions appealed
to federal courts by Prof. James Brudney of the Ohio State University School
of law.  The study found that the Board was affirmed by federal courts of
appeals more than 80% of the time.  It also found that back-pay awards were
upheld by the courts in 78% of all cases -- including 11 instances where the
back pay award was upheld even when the case was reversed.
    Bonds also noted that, while Oregon Steel has previously appealed adverse
decisions of the NLRB, the company has never won an appeal.
    "This is a management that's betting the solvency of its Pueblo subsidiary
-- and possibly of the company itself -- on a strategy that's never been
successful for them before. It just doesn't make sense," he said.

    CONTACT:  John Duray of the United Steelworkers of America, 412-562-2592.
    Web site:  http://www.uswa.org.