ShareThis Page

U.S. Steel freezes traditional pensions for long-serving nonunion staff

| Monday, Aug. 24, 2015, 2:09 p.m.

U.S. Steel said it will freeze pension benefits for nonunion workers at the end of the year and offer them a 401(k) retirement plan as it looks to cut costs amid a prolonged downturn in its business.

The shift away from a company-funded pension to a plan in which employees can contribute toward their retirement will affect 1,300 workers who were employed with the company for more than 12 years, a spokeswoman said. The change does not affect union workers.

U.S. Steel spokeswoman Sarah Cassella said the company faces “increasingly significant headwinds and pressures,” including fluctuating oil prices, overcapacity in the global steel market and a high rate of domestic imports.

“We must make responsible decisions we believe will strengthen the financial foundation of our company and continue our transformation as we look to earn the right to grow and drive sustainable profitability, regardless of the business cycle,” Cassella said.

U.S. Steel had replaced traditional pensions that guarantee a fixed payment for life in favor of a plan whose payout depends on the investment performance of contributions — made by employees and the company — for its nonunion staff hired on or after July 1, 2003.

That includes CEO Mario Longhi, who joined the company in 2011. Among U.S. Steel's top 21 executives, only five began working for the company or one of its subsidiaries before July 2003, according to the company's profiles of its top brass.

The move away from defined benefit plans to defined contribution plans is one that many companies have made in an effort to reduce expenses and corral runaway retiree costs. U.S. Steel's pension assets totaled $6.4 billion, with projected obligations of $7.3 billion as of the end of last year, a regulatory filing showed. Pension obligations amounted to $10.2 billion a year earlier, the filing said.

“It's a prudent time to lower costs. No one ever got in trouble lowering costs and reducing debt,” said stock analyst John Tumazos of New Jersey-based Very Independent Research LLC.

Tumazos pointed to recent turbulence in the stock market and falling sales in China's auto market, adding, “It makes sense for U.S. Steel to control any costs that it can control.”

The Downtown company is making the latest change, effective Dec. 31, for the longest-serving members of its white-collar workforce as it seeks health benefit concessions from its unionized workers. The company is in negotiations with the U.S. Steelworkers union to replace a labor agreement that expires Sept. 1. About 18,000 of the company's 30,000 workers worldwide are represented by the union.

“I can tell you that the pension is one of many issues being discussed as part of our current contract negotiations with the company,” union spokesman R.J. Hufnagel said, declining to offer specifics.

U.S. Steel last year posted its first annual profit in six years, reporting net income of $102 million. The company is trying to lower costs and improve efficiency in a profit-expanding initiative known as Carnegie Way as it struggles with a slump in business. The company has idled mills across the country and laid off thousands of workers in response to a downturn in its business that it has blamed largely on competition from cheap imports and lower demand, especially from the oil and gas sector. U.S. Steel announced the pension decision in an Aug. 17 filing with the Securities & Exchange Commission.

Tom Fontaine is a staff writer for Trib Total Media. He can be reached at 412-320-7847 or

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.