AK Steel Corporation is an American steel company whose predecessor, Armco, was founded in 1899 in Middletown, Ohio. Today, the company's corporate headquarters is situated in West Chester, Ohio, (a suburb of Cincinnati) after having moved from Middletown, Ohio, in August 2007
AK Steel's main products are carbon, stainless and electrical steels, cold rolled and aluminium coated stainless steel for automakers.
One of Armco's best-known products may be the crash barriers installed around many auto-racing tracks, particularly in Formula One. These barriers are commonly called "Armco".
Another product is bent corrugated steel panels that can be bolted together to make culverts. These are known as "Armco culverts".
AK Steel Corp. (NYSE:AKS) sued Donald Earley, Dona Ashby and Jonathan Salisbury on Friday in state court in Ohio, where AK has its headquarters near Cincinnati.
The suit does not name ThyssenKrupp as a defendant. ThyssenKrupp declined to comment on the suit or confirm the employment status of the defendants. The Press-Register was unable to locate the defendants Tuesday or find out if any had hired lawyers.
ThyssenKrupp, which will begin the earliest phases of production this year, has hired a number of people from other steelmakers.
"While most of our team members don't come from the industry, certainly some do," said ThyssenKrupp spokesman Scott Posey. "The fact is that, especially in the current economy, there are a lot of people who are attracted to the unique company and culture our team is creating."
AK claims its former employees violated Ohio law and the confidentiality agreements they signed when AK hired them. The suit asks the court to order the three to quit their jobs at ThyssenKrupp, return all confidential information, and pay damages and court costs. AK claims unspecified damages worth more than $25,000.
"AK Steel has invested substantial amounts of money to develop and protect these proprietary manufacturing technologies, which would be of great value to a competitor," the suit says.
ThyssenKrupp and AK Steel compete across a wide range of businesses. AK's plant in Rockport, Ind., where the three worked, processes carbon steel and stainless steel. That's "precisely what ThyssenKrupp Alabama will produce," said AK spokesman Alan McCoy.
AK has been a prominent player in an effort to prevent ThyssenKrupp from gaining tariff exemptions from the U.S. government for certain products ThyssenKrupp will import to its $5 billion complex on the Mobile-Washington county line.
Earley, a senior process engineer who had worked for AK since 1997, took a similar job at ThyssenKrupp.
The suit says that just before he left the Rockport plant, Earley sent "dozens of e-mails, spreadsheets, communications with vendors, photographs of AK Steel facilities, and other files to a personal e-mail address."
After he left, the suit says Earley stayed in touch with Ashby, who was a quality coordinator, and Salisbury, who was a senior electric maintenance engineer. AK claims the two "willfully and wantonly accessed confidential information and trade secrets within AK Steel's computer systems and unlawfully provided Earley with the information."
The suit doesn't allege that Ashby and Salisbury got jobs with ThyssenKrupp in exchange for the AK information. It says Ashby discussed a job at ThyssenKrupp in an e-mail exchange that also included Earley's requests for information.
Armco and the Armco Employees Independent Federation (AEIF; an employee labor union) had a collective bargaining agreement in place in 2004 that required AK Steel to employ 3,114 workers, a "minimum base force guarantee". The agreement also authorized AK Steel to suspend the minimum number. On January 13, 2004, AK Steel informed the AEIF that it was suspending the minimum. The union then filed a grievance contesting the suspension. An arbitrator upheld the decision by AK Steel on July 1, 2004, subject to certain limitations, through at least May 10, 2005. The union sought and was granted a new hiring, and on July 1, 2005 the arbitrator issued a comprise total workforce. As part of the agreement the arbitrator allowed AK Steel to set aside financial payments to a fund, in lieu of hiring to the minimum, the amount of which was set by the arbitrator on October 7, 2005. On September 29, 2005, the AEIF filed a lawsuit against AK Steel in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Ohio (AEIF v. AK Steel Corp.; Case No. 1:05-CV-639), in which the AEIF sought to vacate that portion of the July 1, 2005 Award. AK Steel answered the complaint and filed counterclaims (AK Steel Corp. v. AEIF, Case No. 1:05-CV-531) on November 2, 2005.[9][10]
On March 1, 2006, AK Steel began a lockout of around 2700, workers, at their Middletown Works plant, in Middletown, Ohio.[11][12] By the next day, the mill was operated by 1,800 salaried and temporary replacement workers. In late October, AK offered a "final" contract, which was rejected by the union at a vote of 2 to 1.[13] One year after the lockout started, on February 28, 2007, AK Steel reached a labor deal with the labor union,[14][15] The lockout was over when the union members ratified the proposed contract on March 14, 2007.[16][17] This lockout was the longest labor stalemate in the 105-year history of the Middletown Works.[18] The previous longest stalemate was a six-day company lockout in 1986.[19][20] As part of the agreement the AEIF and AK Steel reached a joint settlement of their five total counter lawsuits, with AK Steel paying $7,702,301. A third of the amount was for profit sharing, a third for an assistance fund for employee benefits of employees not recalled to work, and a third an escrow account to settle employee disputes and claims as a result of the lockout.
AK Steel's main products are carbon, stainless and electrical steels, cold rolled and aluminium coated stainless steel for automakers.
One of Armco's best-known products may be the crash barriers installed around many auto-racing tracks, particularly in Formula One. These barriers are commonly called "Armco".
Another product is bent corrugated steel panels that can be bolted together to make culverts. These are known as "Armco culverts".
AK Steel Corp. (NYSE:AKS) sued Donald Earley, Dona Ashby and Jonathan Salisbury on Friday in state court in Ohio, where AK has its headquarters near Cincinnati.
The suit does not name ThyssenKrupp as a defendant. ThyssenKrupp declined to comment on the suit or confirm the employment status of the defendants. The Press-Register was unable to locate the defendants Tuesday or find out if any had hired lawyers.
ThyssenKrupp, which will begin the earliest phases of production this year, has hired a number of people from other steelmakers.
"While most of our team members don't come from the industry, certainly some do," said ThyssenKrupp spokesman Scott Posey. "The fact is that, especially in the current economy, there are a lot of people who are attracted to the unique company and culture our team is creating."
AK claims its former employees violated Ohio law and the confidentiality agreements they signed when AK hired them. The suit asks the court to order the three to quit their jobs at ThyssenKrupp, return all confidential information, and pay damages and court costs. AK claims unspecified damages worth more than $25,000.
"AK Steel has invested substantial amounts of money to develop and protect these proprietary manufacturing technologies, which would be of great value to a competitor," the suit says.
ThyssenKrupp and AK Steel compete across a wide range of businesses. AK's plant in Rockport, Ind., where the three worked, processes carbon steel and stainless steel. That's "precisely what ThyssenKrupp Alabama will produce," said AK spokesman Alan McCoy.
AK has been a prominent player in an effort to prevent ThyssenKrupp from gaining tariff exemptions from the U.S. government for certain products ThyssenKrupp will import to its $5 billion complex on the Mobile-Washington county line.
Earley, a senior process engineer who had worked for AK since 1997, took a similar job at ThyssenKrupp.
The suit says that just before he left the Rockport plant, Earley sent "dozens of e-mails, spreadsheets, communications with vendors, photographs of AK Steel facilities, and other files to a personal e-mail address."
After he left, the suit says Earley stayed in touch with Ashby, who was a quality coordinator, and Salisbury, who was a senior electric maintenance engineer. AK claims the two "willfully and wantonly accessed confidential information and trade secrets within AK Steel's computer systems and unlawfully provided Earley with the information."
The suit doesn't allege that Ashby and Salisbury got jobs with ThyssenKrupp in exchange for the AK information. It says Ashby discussed a job at ThyssenKrupp in an e-mail exchange that also included Earley's requests for information.
Armco and the Armco Employees Independent Federation (AEIF; an employee labor union) had a collective bargaining agreement in place in 2004 that required AK Steel to employ 3,114 workers, a "minimum base force guarantee". The agreement also authorized AK Steel to suspend the minimum number. On January 13, 2004, AK Steel informed the AEIF that it was suspending the minimum. The union then filed a grievance contesting the suspension. An arbitrator upheld the decision by AK Steel on July 1, 2004, subject to certain limitations, through at least May 10, 2005. The union sought and was granted a new hiring, and on July 1, 2005 the arbitrator issued a comprise total workforce. As part of the agreement the arbitrator allowed AK Steel to set aside financial payments to a fund, in lieu of hiring to the minimum, the amount of which was set by the arbitrator on October 7, 2005. On September 29, 2005, the AEIF filed a lawsuit against AK Steel in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Ohio (AEIF v. AK Steel Corp.; Case No. 1:05-CV-639), in which the AEIF sought to vacate that portion of the July 1, 2005 Award. AK Steel answered the complaint and filed counterclaims (AK Steel Corp. v. AEIF, Case No. 1:05-CV-531) on November 2, 2005.[9][10]
On March 1, 2006, AK Steel began a lockout of around 2700, workers, at their Middletown Works plant, in Middletown, Ohio.[11][12] By the next day, the mill was operated by 1,800 salaried and temporary replacement workers. In late October, AK offered a "final" contract, which was rejected by the union at a vote of 2 to 1.[13] One year after the lockout started, on February 28, 2007, AK Steel reached a labor deal with the labor union,[14][15] The lockout was over when the union members ratified the proposed contract on March 14, 2007.[16][17] This lockout was the longest labor stalemate in the 105-year history of the Middletown Works.[18] The previous longest stalemate was a six-day company lockout in 1986.[19][20] As part of the agreement the AEIF and AK Steel reached a joint settlement of their five total counter lawsuits, with AK Steel paying $7,702,301. A third of the amount was for profit sharing, a third for an assistance fund for employee benefits of employees not recalled to work, and a third an escrow account to settle employee disputes and claims as a result of the lockout.
Last edited: