The Union has received your reports about the conduct of AFI on the picket line. We are very concerned that AFI continues to violate the Court’s December 22, 2009 Order that requires AFI to stay on the Company’s side of the picket line except to perform their assigned tasks. We know that there are many incidents where AFI is standing side-by-side with us at the picket line and where picketers experience their conduct as intimidating and/or confrontational. Local 6500 has directed our lawyers to bring this offensive conduct to the Court’s attention without delay. We shall advise of the outcome of this initiative or of a hearing about this matter, should a hearing be required.

BUT NOTE - Just because the Company continues to violate the Court’s Orders does not mean that we are free to violate the Court’s Orders. REMEMBER, there are Court Orders in place that set out the limits on picketers while on Company property and WE ARE OBLIGED TO FOLLOW THE COURT’S ORDERS. We must resist the powerful temptation to react with conduct contrary to the outstanding injunctions to the Company’s inflammatory conduct and to their intransigent bargaining posturing.

We are not allowed to engage in blockading of the Company’s premises or in other improper conduct because we are upset that the Company continues to disrespect us – whether by allowing AFI to violate the Orders of the Court or by refusing to engage in meaningful collective bargaining.

Please understand that the Court is not able to assist us if we are seen to be ‘taking the law into our own hands.’

The Company has made it quite clear that violations of the Court’s Orders or other “improper” conduct on the picket line will result in discipline. And they have followed through with discipline and some discharges. This over reaction – even pre-empting the judicial process in some cases – is just another example of corporate arrogance.

Everyone in our community knows that Brazilian Vale Inco has turned a labour dispute and strike into a vicious and difficult struggle – one that is unlike anything our great Local Union 6500 has faced in a half century.

In this uncharted labour relations turf, we all have to act with our heads thinking clearly, with focus and resolve – with our collective eyes on the victory that is coming. In short we have to ‘strike-smart’.

John Fera, President Local 6500
Rick Bertrand, Vice-President Local 6500
Myles Sullivan, USW Staff Representative

ISSUED BY USW LOCAL 6500 FEBRUARY 22, 2010

Steelworkers ready to go back to bargaining table: GerardBy: Heidi Ulrichsen - Sudbury Northern Life Staff
UPDATED Jan. 27 at 8:10 a.m.

Vale Inco president and CEO Tito Martins seems puzzled as he speaks about the failure of recent negotiations with Steelworkers Local 6500, and the subsequent rejection of the company's contract offer by union members.

“If you ask me what (the Steelworkers) want, I don't know,” he said.
During negotiations between the two parties earlier this month, Vale Inco made compromises on all the major issues, Martins said.

“We spent 10 days trying to get (the Steelworkers) to accept that,” he said.

“They didn't want to negotiate. Then the mediator came to us, and said 'There's no deal.' We put a second offer on the table. It was improved a little bit more, and increased the DB (defined benefit) pensions, increasing wages and everything.

“And nothing. They said 'OK, we will not be recommending this.'”

Martins met with a group of journalists from Laurentian Media (Northern Life's parent company) at the company’s corporate office in Toronto March 24.

He answered questions about a number of topics, including the past and future of the business and the more than eight-month-long strike by Steelworkers Local 6500 members.

The union left the most recent bargaining session complaining about several issues, including return-to-work protocol, Martins said.

“They asked us about return-to-work, and we said 'Between four and six weeks.' They went back talking about six months...They lied. Six months is a big lie.”

Martins said the union was also informed the company could not guarantee job security for all of its members for five years.

However, they were also told that there are no layoffs immediately planned.

Martins said about 500 strikers have already retired, many more won't return to work after the strike because they’ve gotten new jobs, and the company is planning to open Totten Mine in 2011, where 300 more workers will be needed.

He said there are currently only 2,500 workers left on strike in Sudbury. When the union went on strike last year, it had more than 3,000 members. The most recent number of strikers provided by the union is 2,850.

Martins said he guesses the union is in a power struggle with the company.

This is a statement that angers Steelworkers international president Leo Gerard.

When asked by Northern Life if the strike is about a power struggle between the union and the company, with the workers being caught in the middle, Gerard had this to say: “The fact is this — our members have voted (against the recent contract offer),” he said. “Do you understand that?...Our members are the union. The only thing that will resolve this are not dumb questions like that, but collective bargaining.”

Gerard spoke with Northern Life after the meeting with Martins, to discuss some of Martins' statements.

He said he has recently tried to contact Vale Inco officials, but nobody responded to his phone calls.

After members rejected Vale Inco's offer earlier this month, the Steelworkers stated that they're ready to get back to the negotiating table at any time. “If it's a matter of who will phone first, that shouldn't be a problem.”

Gerard said he would not discuss the union's major negotiation sticking points with the media. “The place for negotiations is at the bargaining table,” he said.

At the same time, the union has published several op/ed pieces in local media and on its web site and most recently published a 12-page document called “Vale's unsustainable approach to Canadian mining,” which was distributed through local media sources.

Gerard said the union had not been informed by Vale Inco that there will be no layoffs in the near future.

“If the company's position is that not only is there going to be a layoff, but there's going to be a hiring...I would have appreciated if they'd tell us that.”

In January, the Steelworkers filed a bargaining in bad faith application against Vale Inco with the Ontario Labour Relations Board.

Part of that application was an internal document put out by the company last year, which stated that the company wanted to reduce the number of mines in Sudbury from 2,000 to 1,800, or even 1,500 down the road.

Gerard said Vale Inco has failed to answer questions about this document during negotiations.

“They've said that there will be less people, and we've asked that they share their strategic plan so that we could review that and include that whenever we get to a final settlement with our members. That information has been denied.”

Vale Inco's Sudbury operations are currently being run by 1,200 staff employees, he said. Although re-starting operations during a strike is unprecedented in Inco's history, Martins said he had to do so to keep his business going. There are currently no replacement workers employed by the company, but there are plans to eventually hire these workers to increase production.

Martins said the productivity in the smelter, which is currently being run by staff employees, is “much higher today that it was before.”
The smelter is currently processing copper concentrate, “which is easier and needs less people (to produce),” he said.

He said the staff workers are currently receiving 20 per cent bonuses to work in production, averaging 20 per cent of their yearly salaries. On an average salary of $60,000 a year, that works out to $12,000.

When asked how he expected the people of Sudbury to respond to replacement workers, based on the city's culture, Martins said he wasn't sure because he doesn't know much about the city's culture.
“But actually, from what I hear and I am reading, a lot of people actually are supporting us,” he said.

Martins said he has had very little interference during the strike from the provincial and federal governments.
“The federal government is more neutral. It doesn't want to be involved. This is our perception. The province has been more in touch with us.”

According to Martins, Greater Sudbury Mayor John Rodriguez does complain to him often about the company's actions during the strike.
However, he has never talked to him about the impact Vale Inco operations have on local infrastructure, such as roads.

“He complains about the way we are treating the union. But he doesn’t complain about our relationship. Not at all. He maybe complains that he’s not receiving (mining royalties) because we are not producing. Then I want produce, and he says ‘You should not be producing because you’re causing problems for us here.’”

The CEO also spoke extensively about the need for changes within the company to improve sustainability.

Beginning at the end of the 1990s, and the beginning of the 2000s, mining companies started merging because they needed to get bigger to raise capital, Martins said.

But as these mergers happen, changes needed to be made to improve sustainability and competitiveness.

Martins said if Inco hadn't been bought by Vale in 2006, the former company would likely be making many of the same changes as his company is.

“We are not against the union,” he said. “We never were, actually. Since the beginning, we told the unions 'We are going to propose changes.' It's one thing that everybody asks. 'Are you trying to break the union?' No.

“We always thought we should have a very transparent way to tell the unions 'It's not working anymore. You've got to change your mindset, as you have done with other industries, like the car makers.'”

Gerard said Vale Inco shouldn't be worrying about profitability because the company just made $4 billion in the last 30 months.
Giving the Steelworkers a fair deal would not be terribly expensive for the company, he said.

He referred to the union's recently published 12-page document.
“In the year that nickel was at its highest average selling price, which was 2007, the...price was $16.98 per pound,” Gerard said.
“The cost of the nickel bonus was 1.3 per cent (compared to the nickel price), or 21 cents a pound. Over eight years, the average cost of the nickel bonus towards the price of nickel was 9/10 of one per cent.

“Clearly, this is not about sustainability. This is about reducing the return that comes to our members and to the community. Ninety per cent of what our members make is spent right here in the Sudbury community.”

Martins said that when Vale bid on Inco in 2006, it was only able to view publicly available information about the company's finances. This was because Vale had put in an unsolicited bid.

“(We found out more) when we were negotiating the undertakings with the government, because they had to open (the finances) to us. I’m not saying (we made) a mistake. We did not. We like what we bought. But we didn’t know a lot of things.”

Vale eventually paid $19 billion to purchase Inco. When asked if Vale over-paid for Inco, Martins said “if we manage to achieve some efficiencies, and I’m not talking about employees, we can cope with that. We can overcome any negative result.”

Martins was also asked if Vale would sell the part of its operations that was formerly Inco if the right offer existed.

He said, “I don’t think — no. There’s no reason to sell it.” However, he did say he is currently receiving a lot of offers for the purchase of the former Inco.

When asked what he thought about the possibility of Vale selling the former Inco, Gerard said he didn't want to respond to rumours.

“The most important thing is we want to have a constructive relationship with this company, with a fair deal,” Gerard said.

“Our members want to go to work and use their terrific mining and smelting skills. They want to be able to use their brains to do their work. They want to be able to retire with dignity. They want to be able to raise their kids.”

Clash of cultures blamed in Vale Inco strike
Lack of communication and mutual respect to blame for 8-month strike in Sudbury, former top executive says

Vale Inco strikers stopped a truck full of ore outside the Clarabelle Mill in Sudbury last October. Company workers have been on strike since July, 2009.
STEVE RUSSELL/TORONTO STAR

Mark Cutifani runs a gold mining company in South Africa now, long gone from Vale Inco in Canada where he had begun engaging workers and changing an adversarial climate that had defined labour relations for more than half a century.
That adversarial climate is back in a big way at the mining giant in Sudbury and Port Colborne, where more than 3,100 employees have remained off the job in an increasingly bitter 8 1/2-month strike.
The classic labour-management struggle threatens to set back labour relations for years and undermine the value of one of the richest mineral deposits in the world.
The United Steelworkers union says a clash of cultures is at the root of the dispute. It argues that Inco's Brazilian owners want to instill a foreign brand of subservient labour relations here; run roughshod over existing workers' rights and cut bonus pay at a time when the company is profitable.
Vale Inco says the union's statements smack of racism and the company rejects the idea that cultural differences have anything to do with the strike.
The company claims the union is misleading its members badly. It says the union steadfastly refuses to accept that the Sudbury operations need significant restructuring to make them profitable and internationally competitive over the long term, because local mining costs are rising as the company digs deeper to reach rich reserves.
The intransigence, finger pointing and outright verbal warfare are not in the playbook of the personable Cutifani, who left in 2007 after receiving a lucrative offer as chief executive officer of AngloGold Ashanti Ltd.
"My disappointment in watching from afar is to see both sides missing each other in almost every conversation," said Cutifani, who noted he has friends on both sides of the dispute.
"They are both yelling at each other so loudly, they are now deaf to each other's position."
Cutifani, an Australian who had worked in other countries, understood cultures and the importance of respecting them.
To him, they provided clues to how companies such as Inco worked and could perform better.
He arrived at Inco in 2003 and found Canadians democratic in nature and "very consensus driven." As president of Inco North America and Europe, and later Vale Inco's chief operating officer, he seized on those values to implement change.
Recognizing leadership shortfalls, Cutifani stressed the importance of management getting back in touch with employees and showing more respect. For openers, he took the door off his office.
Cutifani overhauled job tasks to generate maximum value from workers and machines; developed integrated planning processes so that each level added value to the next one and started targeting more investment for mines and operations to improve capabilities.
His fresh ideas empowered workers. The initiatives included programs such as "front-line planning and scheduling" (FLP&S) where crews shared decision making and gained more control in the workplace. At the same time, crews faced additional responsibility in reaching production targets.
"We were trying to introduce something more respectful and motivating for people," Cutifani said in an interview from South Africa.
The moves in Sudbury improved relations and productivity, but Cutifani knew the company still had a lot of work ahead. And Brazil's Companhia Vale do Rio Doce, which acquired Inco in 2006 for about $19.3 billion, didn't interfere with the strategy, he said.
One mine manager said many workers and supervisors embraced his ideas and changes that would help them and the company.
"There certainly was a need for change at Inco and a lot of people really liked it," said the manager, who requested anonymity in view of the escalating strike tensions. "But after Cutifani left, the stuff for the front lines in the mines wasn't really followed up.
"(Vale Inco) brought in something else that wasn't team oriented or all that efficient. It doesn't prompt people to share problems and deal with common issues. There is more mistrust now."
Without other executives pushing the same "game-changing" strategy, some initiatives drifted, according to insiders familiar with Vale Inco's operations. They said Vale Inco took a more aggressive approach in implementing change. Instead of "give and take," they said top executives expected lower-level managers and workers to take direction and "stand and deliver."
Consultations with the union dropped and labour relations deteriorated after Cutifano's departure. A stronger influence from the parent company in Brazil emerged. Other key Canadian managers left including Fred Stanford, the president of the company's Ontario operations, whom union leaders and staff regarded as "a people person."
In brainstorming sessions involving mine managers last June, a summary of discussions did not include any reference to the need for union participation.
"This was brainstorming with an astounding absence of brains," said an independent expert familiar with the bargaining after reading the summary.
"I saw no evidence of any attempt to inform or engage the union leadership in any planning."
There also didn't appear to be much thought in the summary about getting workers to support Vale Inco's goals in improving productivity and reducing costs after a strike.
Negotiations between the Steelworkers and Vale Inco for a new contract collapsed a few weeks later and the strike started last July 13, despite a union proposal to extend the existing pact for a year. Both sides accused each other of an unwillingness to bargain.
The key issues involved company demands to cut costs by reducing the potential payouts of a bonus incentive program; altering pension plans and giving management more flexibility in contracting out.
Vale quickly showed the strike would be different than any other walkout in its more than 50 years of labour strife. For the first time, the company resumed partial operations. It has gradually increased output with the intent of hitting full production soon with staff and replacement workers.
Vale, which was losing about $7 million a day in production earlier in the strike, has also spent heavily on monitoring picket lines.
The company has fired 10 workers and sued the union, its leaders and members for alleged property damage and threats involving picket line activity. It has taken the union to court to restrict pickets.
The union argues Vale is trying to provoke workers on picket lines in efforts to weaken union solidarity and community support. One former senior manager even went so far as to say the company had been "rubbing mud in the workers' faces."
Bargaining resumed with a special mediator during the past month but 88 per cent of workers, who are collecting $200 in weekly strike pay and suffering financially, voted against a five-year offer with minor improvements. The proportion opposed was higher than when the workers turned down an offer before the walkout eight months ago.
In view of the continuing wide gap in positions, the Steelworkers proposed binding arbitration to end the strike, but Vale said it would not allow a third party to decide how to run the company's business.
In a stinging public letter after the workers' rejection, Tito Martins, chief executive officer for Vale Inco, lashed out at the union for relying "heavily on a global campaign of misinformation, racism, intolerance and xenophobia to further its position in a country like Canada that prides itself as a model of multiculturalism."
"Make no mistake, this labour dispute is not about countries or nationalities," Martins said. "This is about clinging to years gone by and building for the years to come."
Leo Gerard, international president of the United Steelworkers and a former Inco smelter employee, said in his 40 years as a unionist, he has never seen a company behave like Vale in Sudbury in the pursuit of pushing workers into line with its other global operations where labour standards and pay are significantly lower.
"Let me tell you, if you want a collective agreement in Sudbury, you better change your global business model because you're not going to push us down to our knees," Gerard told about 4,000 people at a Sudbury rally earlier this week after reading Martins' letter.
Charlotte Yates, a professor of labour studies and political science at McMaster University in Hamilton, said although a clash of cultures is probably a factor in the dispute, she also sees it as a resource multinational company – susceptible to volatile commodity prices – taking an opportunity to bargain hard in a weak economy where workers feel vulnerable about their futures.
Yates said the Vale Inco fight has similarities to the ugly Giant Mine strike in the Northwest Territories during the early 1990s, when American-owned Royal Oak Mines took a tough stance, locked out employees and hired replacement workers. It culminated in the bombing deaths of nine replacement workers by a union member.
Some union leaders in Sudbury have warned that the strike is a "powder keg" waiting to explode.
Yates questioned why governments have generally remained silent and not taken a more active role in pressuring the two sides to settle the dispute because of the continuing economic damage.
She also said it appears the labour relations climate at Vale Inco is different than in many European countries where management has learned to work with unions rather than trying to antagonize them.
"I am note sure Vale Inco understands the implications of a long strike on labour relations and productivity over the long term," Yates added. "While the company may be paying a big price in Sudbury, the workers are also paying a big price financially. It will be impossible for them to recover financially, even if the union wins the strike."
Workers have each lost an average of more than $30,000 in net pay to date. Many of them have exhausted savings and some now regularly visit food banks for help.
Yates said it appears the labour movement in Canada, which has been in disarray for years, is waking up to the importance of making sure the strike does not turn into a major loss because defeat may encourage other large employers to follow similar paths. Sudbury has remained a stronghold of organized labour for generations.
Cutifano said the key is to talk constructively and find long term solutions for both sides.
"That was where we were always working toward and that is where I still hope they end up," he said. "Treating each other with dignity and respect goes both ways."

When Vale Inco attempts to bring “scabs” into Sudbury, the United Steelworkers union will push to have anti-scab legislation passed in the province, even if it means closing down Highway 401, the Steelworkers international president told those attending a rally at the Sudbury Arena March 22.

Leo Gerard was one of several thousand people who came out to support striking members of Steelworkers Local 6500 during the union's Bridging the Gap rally. They marched from the union's Brady Street hall to the Sudbury Arena, yelling raucous union chants.

The rally, which was attended by union leaders from across the country and around the world, was originally supposed to take place on the Paris Street bridge, but the venue was changed last week because of safety concerns over the location.

Gerard said the provincial NDP, with the help of the union, would bring in anti-scab legislation “even if we have to shut this whole goddamn province down.”

Provincial NDP leader Andrea Horwath said anti-scab legislation need to be brought in by the province, and also said the province should be “doing something to get binding arbitration” so the Steelworkers can get back to work.

The union leader also took issue with a letter posted by Vale Inco president and CEO Tito Martins on one of the company's websites last week.

In the letter, Martins said the Steelworkers leadership has relied on “misinformation, racism,intolerance and xenophobia...to further its position in a country like Canada that prides itself as a model of multiculturalism.”

Standing with union leaders from around the world behind him, Gerard said he “resents from the bottom of my feet to the top of my head” being called racist.

“These are my sisters and brothers,” he said, referring to the union leaders behind him. “We have a global union. We don't resent our brothers and sisters. We resent the management causing this fight unnecessarily.”

Martins said in his letter that it's ironic that the Steelworkers have taken this position, given that it's an American union. Gerard said he is not foreign to Sudbury, as he grew up here, and was a member of Local 6500.

Gerard also addressed another statement in Martins' letter, which said “it appears name calling comes easier than negotiating.”

“Tito, come to Sudbury tomorrow, we're ready to negotiate. Come to Sudbury tomorrow, or shut your goddamn mouth,” he said.

Federal NDP leader Jack Layton was also among those who attended the rally.

He said multinational corporations around the world are watching the strike in Sudbury to see if Vale Inco can “beat the workers.”

“Well, I said it last September (at a previous rally in Sudbury), and I'll say it again. You picked the wrong union, and you picked the wrong town.”For the full story, read the Thursday edition of Northern Life.

“Vale’s strategy to divide the international trade union movement will not work. Its authoritarian behaviour and its anti-union practices will only reinforce our ties of solidarity.”

The CUT (Central Única dos Trabalhadores) Brazil condemns the declarations of March 18 by the management of Vale Inco, Canadian subsidiary of the Brazilian multinational Vale, about the labour dispute that has already lasted almost nine months.

The letter, signed by the Vale President of Canadian Operations, Tito Martins, charges the members of the United Steelworkers Union (which represents workers in Canada and the USA) of promoting a global campaign of disinformation and of racism and intolerance against the foreign presence in the country.

After months of negotiation between the subsidiary of the mining company in Canada and the unionists of that country, the company refused to renew clauses relative to the retirement pension fund, and demanded take-backs of other benefits established in their collective bargaining agreements for more than 20 years, including a nickel bonus. The agreement was not approved and the workers went on strike on July 13, 2009, for an undetermined period of time. The three striking locals are in Sudbury, Port Colborne and Voisey’s Bay, Canada, and they together represent close to 4,000 workers.

CUT repudiates the attitude of Mr. Tito Martins and of Vale in calling any Canadian citizen, and especially our USW brothers and sisters, or from any place around the world, as racist. We believe that right now, all efforts should be aimed at resolving the conflict, and not at unfounded provocations and accusations.

Vale’s strategy to divide the international trade union movement will not work. Its authoritarian behavior and its anti-union practices will only reinforce our ties of solidarity. The CUT reaffirms its commitment to the struggle of our Canadian brothers and sisters.

Artur Henrique da Silva Santos
National President, CUT
Brazil

Vale rejects clear path to settlement - Column by John Fera and Rick Bertrand

After refusing to negotiate for eight months, Vale Inco recently accepted a proposal from the United Steelworkers to hold exploratory discussions with a mediator. But it threw away the opportunity to use those talks, as well as an extraordinary offer from the Steelworkers, to resolve the strike it provoked.

During the talks, conducted from late February though March 7, the Steelworkers offered numerous new proposals and repeatedly sought common ground on key issues. The union's exceptional willingness to pursue mutual compromises clearly formed the basis for a settlement and the end of this strike.
However, fair and meaningful bargaining requires good faith from both sides, and, unfortunately, Vale failed to reciprocate.

Rather than respond to the union's goodwill, the Brazilianowned company offered only minimal changes on minor issues. Mostly, Vale demand capitulation to its rigid demands that would hurt Sudbury working families, trigger job losses in our economy and damage our community's future.

Just as the mediator called off the discussions, Vale threw at the union as a fait accompli what it called an "offer for settlement." Before union negotiators could even read the massive document, Vale posted on its website an incomplete, slanted version of its "offer." Vale failed to reflect its refusal to seek genuine compromises to reach agreement and end the strike. It's version of reality neglects the destructive ramifications its demands would have for our community.

Despite this, the Steelworkers made another unprecedented attempt to reach a settlement.

The union proposed that all outstanding issues be referred to binding arbitration. We also offered to end the strike during arbitration. Because this dispute presents unique circumstances, the union went to extraordinary lengths and broke with its tradition of spurning binding arbitration.

The Steelworkers hoped for a positive response from Vale because in Brazil, labour disputes often are resolved through a binding, arbitrated settlement.

Yet in Canada, Vale thumbed its nose at the proposal for binding arbitration, coldly rejecting a clear path to a fair settlement and an immediate end to the strike.

Vale's behaviour is so insidious that it has even raised the ire of respected American corporate executive Leo Hindery Jr. a leading advocate for corporate responsibility.

"Almost nothing in labour relations is more vile than 'conditioned bargaining,' yet Vale has made this approach the base of its demands," Hindery wrote in a recent column.

We are seeing first-hand Vale's insensitivity to its workers and their communities, as it tries to run away from fair wages and benefits that are the product of longtime collective bargaining," he said.
Today and tomorrow, striking Steelworkers in Greater Sudbury and Port Colborne will vote on Vale's disingenuous and substandard "offer of settlement." Afterward, the union will publicly discuss details of this "offer." It should be clear, however, that Vale's approach to bargaining in Canada stands in stark contrast with that of nickel miner Xstrata, which arranged for local management to settle a new contract without inciting a labour dispute.

We hope we've explained why the Steelworkers bargaining committee has unanimously recommended that our members reject Vale's "offer."

For eight months now, 3,000 Steelworkers and their families and untold others in our communities have endured the pain of a strike caused by the Brazilian multinational Vale Inco.

It is Vale's refusal to bargain in good faith that dictates we must continue this struggle, one that has only succeeded so far because of the aid of our supportive communities.

John Fera is president of Steelworkers Local 6500; Rick Bertrand is vice president

Mar 10, 2010By: Sudbury Northern Life Staff
Local 6500 should get everything they are asking for, and we as a community should be supporting them 100 per cent.
What it comes down to is this: Vale comes into our town, takes our minerals and wealth out of the ground and makes a tidy profit in doing so.

Don’t kid yourself. When the mine is already built and the infrastructure laid out, and you also happen to have some very rich mineral deposits literally waiting to be blasted, smelted, refined and sold, you...are making lots of money.
And that is all this strike is about at the end of day, money. For anyone living in Sudbury who isn’t part of this union, there is only one question:

Where do you want the money from our natural resources to go?

a) Out of the community and into the pockets of some wealthy Brazilian executives.

b) Into the pockets of local residents, your friends, family and neighbours. People ready to spend and re-invest that money into our community.

That is the only question that should matter to anyone living here, working for Local 6500 or not. It isn’t only the union who stands to lose in this strike, it is the entire community. If Vale wants to come to our town and make money off our minerals, they should have to pay top dollar for those minerals.

It’s the only way to ensure that the profit from our natural resources stays here, where it can help Sudbury. And we deserve that money.

I know I’m too young to talk about this like I was alive during this time, but who had to deal with the moonscape back in the day? Vale? No. Sudbury did.

We, as a community, deserve that money, because we are the ones who made the sacrifices for that money. If the money isn’t coming into the Sudbury, then the rocks shouldn’t be going out of Sudbury.

Let’s face it people, in Sudbury, rocks = money.

Steve Goulet
Greater Sudbury

Vale Inco is suing senior leaders of striking Steelworkers in Sudbury for $1 million because of the union's website and a controversial Facebook site.

The suit against the Steelworkers Local 6500, its president, John Fera, and two dozen other executives and members seeks financial damages and a court order forcing the union to stop posting on its websites "all pictures and information relating to, about or belonging to Vale Inco employees, contractors and security personnel."


Such information is endangering those individuals, the company alleges in the suit.

In addition, Vale Inco wants the court to allow it to "monitor the contents of all Facebook postings by the union and its members to ensure compliance with the order."

Vale Inco also asks the courts to order the union disclose the identity of an anonymous contributor to those sites who uses the name "John Doe."

"Doe's identity is known to the union and to the Strikeforce defendants," the claim states,

The suit contains allegations not proven in a court of law.

The union, which has just been served, has to yet file a statement of defence.

In a statement of claim filed in Sudbury court, Vale Inco alleges that starting in November, the union began "targeting Vale Inco employees who have exercised their legal right to return to work during the strike, as well as contractors and security personnel."

The lawsuit alleges the union and its members have published pictures and other personal detail about individuals on the internet and, "by doing so, they are arming their members with information, knowing and intending that it will be used to harass, intimidate, threaten and commit criminal and tortious (wrongful) acts against Vale Inco's employees, contracts and security personnel."

The statement of claim cites the union's website and the Facebook page, "Strikeforce 6500."

[ Read the rest ... ]

I write this personal opinion piece to all those with an interest in the labour dispute with Vale and its workers. I would like to express, on my own behalf, why I am on strike against Vale and still have a “fighting-spirit” even after these eight long months.

Once upon a time, with the huge jump in nickel prices of 2007, my bonus was aired publicly on the news and radio. Why this happened seems illogical, unless you look back at these events from today‘s perspective.

Deep feelings of resentment and bitterness was formed by many who heard nickel bonuses were higher than their own hourly wage. Even my own closest friends expected free suppers and beers out on the town because the local radio station just aired for the 12th time that day I got a bonus cheque. It pains me to see that, even today, these impressions remain in our community. When CVRD (Now Vale) bought Inco, suddenly everything about my employment became dirty laundry, strung out for the public to see. Looking back, these publicity stunts were just the start to Brazil’s public relations machine — and my nightmare.

Now looking beyond those great times and prior to the high nickel prices, I did not get a bonus. That was not aired publicly for the world to hear or read. During 2009, the sum of my bonuses was zero. Prior to 2006, my bonus cheques were less than a week’s wage. Why didn’t the local radio station say I made nothing for my bonuses?. Since the name change from CVRD to Vale INCO, Vale claimed Ontario operations as a loss, despite making record earnings. In consequence, profit sharing was cut to nothing.

Alas, the “out of the ordinary” high-bonuses became my legacy. Forever labelled as “spoiled or overpaid,” because of an unpredicted economic prosperity — however short-lived it might have been.

I made more in my last career choice, but came to “Mother Inco” for a secure future, a good pension, benefits, and some sense of a promise of a bright future through stability and the distinction and prominence Inco held. Inco offered to pay for future education costs, career development, and boundless opportunities for an eager worker willing to train in different fields.

[ Read the rest ... ]

After seven months of enduring anti-union propaganda from Vale's local spokesman, we say welcome to John Pollesel for finally joining the public discussion.

It appears that Vale's vice-president was angered with our International President Leo Gerard's insightful comments about Vale's unparalleled behaviour leading up to and during this strike.


It's almost unbelievable that Pollesel would accuse the union of "yet another assault on the reputation of Vale and Vale Inco." What does he think Vale has been doing with their constant attacks on our members and the union for the past seven months?

Perhaps Pollesel has not been reading or listening to the almost daily belittling and provocative harangues emitted by (Vale Inco spokesman) Steve Ball on behalf of Vale. It has been more than an assault on the union's reputation; it has been an assault on everything our members and both the union and the former Inco have worked so hard to establish in the last half century, including a measure of respect between the parties and a mutual honest desire to work out differences at the bargaining table.

With all due respect to Pollesel, it would appear that he was supplied with some inaccuracies in writing his guest column in an attempt to counter Gerard's articulate and accurate appraisal of the situation.

* When Vale SA won the bidding war for Inco Ltd., against Falconbridge, Phelps Dodge and Teck Cominco for this prized nickel producer, it crowed loud and long about what a fantastic prize they had acquired. Vale SA surely completed due diligence including detailed studies on economic issues, ore reserves, ore grades, high productivity, infrastructure, skilled labour pool, a competent union willing to cooperate on reasonable issues and long-term profitability.


[ Read the rest ... ]

I was reflecting on our national anthem and the pledge we once were taught about protecting “our home and native land — and about how I feel we have been over taken by foreign interests. I believe this is the result of government leadership developing poor regulations on investment and ownership of Canada’s natural resources — which now aids corporate prosperity over communities and CEOs over citizens.

Today, self-centered people seem to have forgotten “true, patriot love, in all thy sons’ command.” I interpret this as we — our troops, our labour, and our wealth — are at the means of our country, for our country — not a few individuals and foreign interests. When developing and growing Canada 160 years ago, (when stock market scams, the buy-low, sell-high by any means, and today’s market and ponzie scams were in their infancy) there was, in Canada, dreams of “with glowing hearts we see thee rise, the true north strong and free.”

And through those years of Canada’s growth, when tyrannies and evil grew in the hearts of men, Canada's sons and daughters answered the call to defend our freedom, many with their lives — “from far and wide, O Canada, we stand on guard for thee.”

There was a time when family doors were unlocked, their hearts and minds were open and parents prayed with their children “God keep our land, glorious and free.”

[ Read the rest ... ]

Employment numbers released by Statistics Canada in January show that the City of Greater Sudbury is losing jobs and seeing unemployment rates rise.


While employment levels decreased 0.1 per cent across Canada, the average was not reflected in Greater Sudbury.


The city ranked last out of 27 major urban centres in Canada, and saw an employment rate drop of eight per cent.


In an article titled Canada's five best and five worst labour markets, Alex Carrick, chief economist with CanaData, wrote that some of the drop in employment was related to the Vale Inco strike in Sudbury.


"Sudbury has been enduring a strike at mining-giant Vale Inco for nearly seven months," he wrote. "While the striking miners are not included in the employment decline, the layoffs by firms and individuals supplying and servicing the mining industry are."


The loss of jobs also factored into the increased unemployment rate. Greater Sudbury's rate rose to 10.4 per cent, landing the city 25th out of 27 urban centres in Canada.

Northern Life

By: Sudbury Northern Life Staff
The strike caused by Vale Inco’s refusal to negotiate for the last seven months regardless of the Steelworkers’ modest proposals, and their insistence on the imposition of their sub-standard global labour practices, will be remembered as an assault on Canadian workers, Canadian values and Canadian labour standards.

There are many “firsts” in this strike that have so many shaking their heads at Vale’s antics. The unusual continual barrage of anti-union pronouncements and unfounded criminal accusations against rank-and-file union members, Vale’s poison pen, full-page ads, their provocation, antagonism and intimidation aimed at sparking a reaction from angry strikers to further feed their union-busting efforts. And of course, their incomprehensible efforts to operate the mines, mill and smelter with unwilling but forced office and technical union members, frustrated management employees, and imported out-of-province and perhaps out-of-country scab workers. All of this, it appears, to try to weaken or break the union, rather than negotiate.

It is difficult to believe that their Sudbury operations spokesman, Steve Ball, and his vitriolic pronouncements, really represent a company as huge as Vale Inco and its parent company. Contrary to all the usual rules of seeking an amicable negotiated agreement, this solitary spokesman, and a small group of multiple-identity anti-union bloggers, continually publicly berate and belittle union members (their employees) while also attempting to divide the community.

Mr. Ball also publicly criticized fellow nickel producer Xstrata as a “slash and burn” operation. Surely, somewhere within Vale’s upper echelons there are more responsible executives who realize that it appears as if Vale is indeed “slashing and burning” its own operation, along with its reputation, labour relations, employee loyalty and future success in Sudbury and in Canada.

It seems that Mr. Ball and his local associates are angry with Xstrata for having the gall to be good corporate citizens who recognized the union’s reasonable proposals and negotiated a fair agreement. Even with a long history of the two mining companies having similar agreements, and Vale being much more profitable lately, Vale’s Steve Ball claims that the two companies are now different “business models” and they cannot follow suit.

What utter balderdash!

Mr. Ball’s highly publicized announcements of imaginary matte shipments to Clydach, Wales, which coincided with news of the Xstrata offer acceptance, probably has two spurious purposes. One is to further antagonize Steelworkers, his fellow employees, into a reaction that he could use to further inflame the situation and defame the union and its members.

Secondly, to try to make the community believe that Vale can operate without 3,300 production and maintenance employees, members of Local 6500 USW. He is not succeeding.

[ Read the rest ... ]

Posted By CAROL MULLIGAN THE SUDBURY STAR



Allowing replacement workers to do the work of striking employees is a recipe for disaster, charges Nickel Belt MPP France Gelinas.

It's a path the Liberal government of Premier Dalton McGuinty began walking when it refused to support her party's "anti-scab" legislation, said the New Democrat MPP.

"Bringing scabs into a strike always leads to the same damned thing," said Gelinas at a rally with striking Steelworkers on Wednesday at the Copper Cliff Smelter Complex picket line.

"It always leads to violence. It always leads to desperate people doing desperate things," said the MPP. "Anybody who doesn't see this has their eyes closed shut."

Gelinas was joined at the rally by Nickel Belt MP Claude Gravelle, the federal NDP's mining critic, and Timmins-James Bay NDP MPP Gilles Bisson.

All lashed out at federal and provincial governments for refusing to help get Steelworkers and Vale Inco Ltd. negotiators back to the bargaining table.

Talks broke off in early July before about 3,200 Steelworkers in Sudbury and Port Colborne walked off the job July 13 over pensions, nickel bonuses and seniority transfer rights.

"When we have a government who turns down anti-scab legislation, they laid the path for whatever happens to happen and we all know where this leads to. When a member of Parliament (Sudbury Liberal MPP Rick Bartolucci) doesn't show up to support anti-scab legislation, he lays the path to what lays ahead," charged Gelinas. "None of this is good. Shame."

[ Read the rest ... ]