ArcelorMittal entered a tense phase of negotiations as it approached the eighth framework agreement in Spain, triggering a 24-hour strike that disrupted production in Sagunto. Workers’ representatives in Sagunto unanimously opposed the latest proposal, while in Asturias the disruption came solely from the CC OO union branch. The company described the pause as uneven, while the union characterized it as a near-total shutdown, except for sites where the so-called abusive minimum services had been approved.
Company leadership reported that the principal factories in Asturias were operating normally. At the Avilés facility, only selected sections of the cold rolling, galvanizing, and tinplate lines continued to operate to maintain minimum essential services. Similarly, the steel mill and heavy plate rolling mill in Gijón remained open, but at a reduced, essential level due to the strike.
CC OO contended that all production sites were effectively paralyzed, with the exception of operations kept alive under the minimum services agreed with UGT and USO back in 2005. They stressed that, even without active mobilization, the union was protecting the rights of workers who chose not to participate in the strikes, while not yielding their broader position in the dispute.
According to CC OO, certain parts of Asturias continued to function only at minimal capacity. A blast furnace in line A was temporarily out of service after a malfunction, and the coke batteries and the sinter plant operated in restricted modes due to the A-line incident. In contrast, the company’s mining area faced machinists’ strikes, and the Gijón steelworks along with related rail, wire rod, and plate production lines experienced stoppages.
In Avilés, the LDA steelworks remained operational under the agreed minimum services, as stated by CC OO. Yet several lines and processes were halted. The hot strip line stopped, along with the pickling lines, tandem trains 1 and 2, galvanizing lines, tin plate lines 2 and 3, continuous annealing, electrolytic cleaning, bell furnaces, annealing, and control lines 1 and 2. The patchwork of stoppages signals deeper tensions between the union leadership and the company over the framework terms.
CC OO defended the strike as a necessary response to what it called ongoing company inaction on the nationwide framework covering all of Spain’s facilities. At the latest meeting, the union argued that the company proposed a nominal wage increase of 0.2 percent, which they claim amounts to a gross rise of about 48 euros per year for employees earning roughly 42,000 euros annually. The union viewed this as a modest gain in a broader negotiation that they expect to yield more substantial improvements.
Meanwhile, the three Asturias committees representing Avilés, Gijón, and the mineral park largely chose not to join the strike, maintaining their positions while continuing discussions. If positions do not converge at the negotiating table within the week, mobilization plans could begin on May 2. The committees emphasized that negotiations over the eighth framework agreement were not considered broken, preserving room for a potential settlement though talks remained at an impasse.
Negotiations had been underway for about a year with a target to complete by the end of March. The Asturias committees, however, set this week as a window to evaluate further steps and keep lines open for a settlement if terms improve. The dispute drew attention to how regional strategies and local union approaches intersect with a national framework meant to align pay and conditions across all ArcelorMittal facilities in Spain.
CC OO reported that the company continued to apply what it described as the same minimum services previously agreed with UGT and USO in 2005. The union labeled this decision unilateral and arbitrary, noting that the arrangements had previously been challenged by the Asturias High Court of Justice after a CC OO lawsuit, with the court’s ruling effectively standing at the time of reporting. An appeal remained in progress, and the union announced legal actions to defend what it framed as infringements on the fundamental right to strike, arguing that repetition and recklessness intensified these violations.
In both Asturias and Sagunto, where the strike had backing from CC OO, UGT, CGT, and Cuadros, meetings took place in front of company facilities as the dispute intensified and both sides prepared for renewed talks and potential mobilizations.