|
|
With the Cincinnati Reds’ opening day comes the promise of pitches, players, peanuts — and pissed-off union workers.
Every time the Reds steal a base, AK Steel donates $200 to charity. But the United Steelworkers of America (USWA) contend the company cares more about charity than about ending labor disputes. At a game in April, USWA plans to distribute handbills declaring, “The only thing AK steals are jobs from Mansfield families.”
The “stolen jobs” refer to a September 1999 lockout of 620 union workers at the company’s Mansfield plant. Following a breakdown in negotiations, the company began operating the plant with replacement workers.
“AK Steel has a reputation for taking a pretty hard-line approach to labor relations,” says union spokesman Tony Montana.
The National Labor Relations Board has ruled the lockout is legal.
USWA members were willing to work under their old contract until negotiations could be settled, according to Montana. But the company was unwilling to continue, and shut out the workers, he says.
Security guards are in place around the plant since the lockout, sometimes wearing riot gear.
“Their sole purpose is to harass and intimidate workers on the picket line,” Montana says. “As far as we’re concerned, locking out your employees is a hostile and radical approach.”
But union workers’ behavior make the show of force necessary, according to Alan McCoy, vice president of public affairs for AK Steel.
“When they have to, they have riot gear available to them,” McCoy says. “The Steelworkers and their mob put eight people in the hospital.”
Montana admits union supporters turned violent Sept. 10, 1999. But he says the real violence is by the company.
“Yeah, we did send eight scabs and goons to the hospital,” Montana says. “Four minutes of violence in 1999 in no way compares to the 18 months of economic terrorism by AK.”
Montana says the union does not condone violence, encouraging members to protest peacefully. The people involved in the upheaval were a group of USWA supporters, but not all were members of the Mansfield union, he says.
Beverly Bogantz, records clerk at the Mansfield Police Department, says the lockout has led to numerous police complaints.
“We have a file that’s probably 5 inches thick of reports they’ve made against each other,” Bogantz says.
Montana asserts the security guards’ real assignment is to give protesting union workers a tough time. Montana believes AK Steel’s goal is to “try and starve (the workers) into accepting a substandard contract that’s not going to fly with us.”
McCoy says he believes the company and the workers will eventually reach an agreement.
“All labor disputes get worked out eventually,” he says.
Montana says a union rally in Mansfield last year attracted 4,500 people. He hopes the same sort of crowd will turn out May 12 to hear Leo Gerard, president of the USWA, speak at Middletown’s Lefferson Park.
On the company’s turf
Leafleting a Reds game is part of an effort to take the union struggle to AK Steel executives’ home turf. Union members have been handing out handbills in AK executives’ neighborhoods in Montgomery, Indian Hill and Middletown. Earlier this year Indian Hill Rangers charged two union representatives with violating city ordinances against trespassing and solicitation. The city dropped the charges when USWA file suit in federal court.
“Our law department is in the process of rewriting the ordinance,” says Rangers Capt. John Cresie.
McCoy says USWA representatives have passed out handbills in his Montgomery neighborhood and near other executives’ homes, attacking AK Steel’s lockout in Mansfield and alleged environmental damage in Middletown.
“They come down to Cincinnati and Hamilton County about once a week to put leaflets in the doors,” McCoy says. “They’ve used this environmental issue to try to paint AK Steel as a bad company.”
The U.S. Department of Justice is suing AK Steel on behalf of the Environmental Protection Agency for alleged violations of the Clean Water Act, Clean Air Act and the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act.
“We dispute the allegations,” McCoy says.
McCoy says anticipated amendments to the Clean Air Act could cost the company as much as $80 million. If this happens, the company will be able to buy steel slabs cheaper than it can make them, McCoy says. As a result, 2,000 of the 3,700 jobs at the Middletown plant could “disappear.”
“We would have to take a look and say ‘Does it make sense to do all this?’ ” McCoy says.
Although the USWA does not represent the Middletown workers, Montana is still offended by the company’s assertion that it can’t fix its pollution problems and afford to keep workers in the mill.
“The Steelworkers’ take on this is that nobody has to lose their job for a company to act in an environmentally friendly way,” Montana says.
McCoy says AK Steel has spent $500 million on pollution-control efforts in the past 40 to 50 years, even going above EPA standards in some areas.
“The government has unfairly distorted our record and mischaracterized our intent, and that is reprehensible,” McCoy says. “We have a better environmental record than many federal facilities.”
But Montana says AK Steel, which turned a $132 million profit in 2000, should have made even more efforts to plan ahead for possible changes in environmental regulations.
“Our point is here’s a company that’s been almost obscenely profitable,” he says. “This company’s management is very on the ball when it comes to financial stuff, and I think they’re playing hardball with the government.” ©
This article appears in Mar 28 – Apr 3, 2001.