We do talk quite a bit. The U.S. side of the union shared their analysis of the IRA in advance, particularly on some of the domestic content requirements. We always work together. There's always a delicate balance with the rest of the larger U.S. labour movement, but as much as possible, we're very united in promoting a binational approach.
When it comes to the history of cheap imports that have flooded North American markets and hurt manufacturing jobs, Canada is never the problem. We're the best trading partner.
We talk at the highest levels of the union. We share our analyses. A third of the total membership is in Canada, so we're very influential in terms of the union's policies overall.
Even if we see a problem now with certain aspects of the IRA that we think might hurt our membership, we'll talk with our folks in the U.S. They work quite closely with the Democratic Party in particular and have influence there, as well as with the AFL-CIO. When we originally saw in a previous iteration the U.S. content rules for EVs and batteries, we were able to work with our leadership in the union in the United States to ensure they had influence over the AFL-CIO's position and the steelworkers' position.
Being an international union was extremely helpful regarding the section 232 tariffs. We immediately responded by saying that Canada was not the problem, and we were able to use our influence in the United States, working with the Canadian side, to get those repealed eventually.