What was your experience in Tubacex?

I entered Tubacex in 1965, shortly after I finished my studies. Production had not yet begun. In a way, I was a pioneer and gradually developed my professional work.

First I was Director of Administration, then Director of Finance, then Assistant Director-General, then Director-General and Chief Executive Officer from 1980 to 1992 and Chairman of the Management Board.

What were the hardest moments, those of 1992?

We always had a pretty hard life. There were times when the company's economy was good, but not so good. In 1967, when Olarra and Aceros de Llodio were parent companies (originally called Olarra Special Pipes), we suffered a very strong financial crisis. We managed not to cancel the payments by taking the money out and looking for capital income.

Until 1986 the journey was in progression and positive, with different ups and downs. However, when the Spanish State joined the European Economic Community in 1986, export tax relief disappeared.

In the case of the steel industry, that was the protective measure, even more so for a company like Tubacex. At that time, 80% of sales were already abroad, and from one day to the next we were free of tax relief of 14%. Very significant losses immediately occurred.

In this context, we saw that the company had to make a change in favour of value-added products. At the time, I was working on carbon products. It had no added value, but thanks to the deductions it was competitive.

When the aid disappeared, the infrastructure had to be exploited with value-added products.

So it started the process that ended in 1992, we abandoned carbon and we focused on the stainless.

The process was difficult. There were few producers and the more developed countries were fighting against us. They didn't like the appearance of Tubacex.

However, we have been doing well for those years, with various financial operations.

In some accounts Alvaro Videgain has assumed the stake in stainless tubes, but from what you said, the process was already underway before assuming responsibilities, right?

Yes, we started working stainless in 1986. It must be acknowledged that Tubacex had problems in maintaining the regularity of the diameter, which led to customer rejection.

There were tests and mistakes, but in 1992 there was a big step forward.

From the company's point of view, this process took place and spread from 1992 onwards. In this regard, without going into the social, and focusing exclusively on the economic and financial area, the management of Videgain was good.

In 1992 the carbon still had several weights in the company and then it has been worked only in the stainless.

Did the biggest crisis come in 1992?

Yes, the value of the peseta increased against the dollar, due to the policies of the Government of Spain. The increase in value was 20% and Tubacex production was 80% export. So the dollars we were charging were reduced by 20 percent.

This led to a terrible lag that left enormous losses. The banks abandoned us and gave us no funding.

The result was that we had to suspend payments.

A number of measures were proposed to deal with the suspension of payments and you, who did not agree, left your post, right?

Yes, but two things happened at a time. I left it and the Management Board also received it well. I wanted to develop other policies and I did not see myself capable of doing so.

In fact, I wanted to maintain my commitment as a manager. I committed the Works Council and the workers to maintaining jobs. Consequently, I wanted to seek solutions without redundancies.

The first thing that happened in the context of the suspension of payments was the appearance of the administrative courts and the assumption by them of the company’s management.

In addition, the suspension of payments, in my case, caused me a health crisis. I was in a very serious situation and I was on leave for a month.

By the time I returned, it was already in the hands of the administrative courts the management of the company and the sanitation plan to reduce the number of employees, either before retirement or with low incentive. If I'm not mistaken, it was 200 casualties.

I said that I did not share that approach, because my commitment was in a different direction.

That is to say, by the time I returned, the Management Board had already elected Álvaro Bidegain as CEO and I was chairman of the Management Board, but not directly managed, but at a corporate level.

That was the case until February 1993. At that time, the redundancies of workers were not under way, although they were working in that direction.

So I decided not to participate in that plan and I said. The Management Board found it very good and that was where my commitment to the company ended.

Then I was a strategic advisor to find financial solutions and recover Tubacex. That's how I went for several years, but I wasn't part of the company.

What was the position of the Basque Government in all these positions?

The administrative courts and the council requested the Basque Government to cooperate and the body called for a sanitation plan to ensure the continuity of the company and to include dismissals, as is customary in this type of company.

I was out of this approach.

To justify the most frequent evictions (not only in Aiaraldea, but in workshops around the world), management has recalled that the situation in 1993 is similar to the current one. But, as far as you are aware, and bearing in mind that the company has EUR 180 million in the fund, that is not the case, is it not?

The context and business situation are very different. There is parity in the global crisis. I speak from the outside because I do not know what the economic and financial situation is, so I understand that the situation is serious and has to do with what happened in 1992.

In any event, the 1992 crisis was serious and the accumulated losses were very significant. To this must be added that the banks did not give us money. Consequently, the only solution that was considered was the suspension of payments. We couldn't buy anything because we didn't have a way to pay for the purchases. The suppliers requested payment by hand, the activity was closing.

The data that I know are those that have been made public, that last year there were losses of more than EUR 20 million. But, as I see it, there has been no need from outside to suspend payments. Therefore, in my view, the current and the 1993 contexts are different.

However, the problem is not the need to abandon carbon products or increase the value of the peseta. The exceptional situation caused by COVID-19 has been the interruption of activity.

In addition, the climate change crisis will require an energy transition. That is a challenge for management, because products are linked to oil and gas, and many believe that this type of economy should be abandoned. I believe that the financial markets will penalise that and will lead to a green transition.

Consequently, just as carbon was discarded in our time, hydrogen related products or similar things will have to be investigated to ensure the company’s economic viability.

I am suffering from the crisis as a former worker of Laudioarra and Tubacex, which is very serious for the workers and the people. I would like to think that the problem will be solved by the readmission of the dismissed.

Tubacex’s leadership emphasizes the transition of the business model in recent years, but it doesn’t talk so much about changing wage scales, right?

It is also inevitable to point out that contexts are very different. It was my turn to live for another time and our social policy was very advanced. We pioneered the organization of union elections. In the 1970s and 1980s, there was another context, and it was a very progressive experience.

Within the company this has been questioned by many others. In his view, Tubacex was very focused on the social aspect and was economically harmful. I wouldn't say that what we've done was perfect, but I had some social ideas and I thought the economic part didn't have to condition the social part. In other words, when there was a crisis, I believe that other ways should be sought, not to the detriment of the social side. I was probably a little utopian, because the economy conditions everything in this world. Until 1992, however, we were consistent with this line. Since then I have not been responsible.

How do you assess the strike in force?

The workers are engaged in a very supportive and coherent fight in defending the positions of trabajo.En that sense, I have identified with that attitude and I hope that the company will show a more flexible attitude to finding a solution. When strikes prolong so much internal inequalities arise and I hope that the situation will be the most conducive to finding a solution.