(Trinidad Guardian) ArcelorMittal Point Lisas Limited owes US$315 million to creditors, a figure that is four times its assets of US$70 million.
This was disclosed yesterday at a meeting of the creditors at the Queen’s Park Oval, Port-of-Spain. The event itself, however, was full of high drama as a group of former workers, led by Steel Workers Union president Christopher Henry, forced its way into the meeting after initially being denied entry by security officers. The workers, who were adamant that they should be part of the meeting since they considered themselves creditors as well, converged on the entrance to the facility, smashing a glass door. This caused a major concern and a large contingent of heavily armed police officers was called in to support the security on site. With things getting tense and a little physical, the workers eventually were allowed in.
During the meeting, it was disclosed hundreds of companies were owed money. In a document leaked to the T&T Guardian, some of the creditors and money owed in US currency include: The National Gas Company — $12,635,661; ArcelorMittal Treasury — $85,771,547; ArcelorMittal Finance — $66,576,910 and Super Industrial Services Limited — $143,023.
At yesterday’s meeting, the process of dissolving the company commenced with the appointment of liquidator Christopher Kelshall to oversee the process. The process is to ensure the creditors are paid out of the money that will be collected from the sale of the plant. Speaking with the media after the meeting, Henry said while the figures did not look realistic the union would not give up the fight for some sort of relief and justice.
“The process of liquidation just started and we are saying the issue of investors will now come into play in a week or two. We await that because there are investors who are still interested.
“We would like to see and would be very keen in taking a position. We will be looking at the whole process closely because the lives of the workers depend on it,” he said.
One of the questions posed by Henry was the company’s obligation to the workers in the area of pension.
He said: “We asked the question as it relates to the Privy Council judgment that we would have won but we did not get that clear response.
“Any payment to the workers as it relates to a severance for the workforce…because while the company would have terminated the services of 644 workers, we had that in the court because we did nothing to be terminated.
“That was a ploy to use to get away from the severance payment they owe us and the process of the winding up. The liquidator must explain and say where we are as it relates to that,” Henry added.
