AK Steel’s Defense: Misconduct Allegations
AK Steel countered that Gumm was terminated for legitimate reasons, citing numerous complaints from his subordinates describing him as abrasive, demeaning, and unprofessional.
According to the company, an anonymous complaint in November 2019 accused Gumm of making racist remarks and showing hostility toward Black workers. Following an internal investigation, AK Steel said it concluded that the allegations were credible and terminated Gumm in January 2020.
By the time of his firing, AK Steel had already become a subsidiary of Cleveland-Cliffs Inc., one of North America’s largest iron ore producers, after being acquired in 2020.
Courts Side With the Company
Gumm’s argument that the firing was a pretext for retaliation failed to persuade the courts. In March, the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals upheld a Michigan federal judge’s decision granting summary judgment to AK Steel.
The appellate panel ruled that even if Gumm disagreed with how the investigation was handled, his objections didn’t prove the company lacked a “reasonable belief” in the accusations. The court emphasized that the short time span between Gumm’s discrimination complaint and his termination was not enough to establish retaliation without additional supporting evidence.
Gumm’s petition to the Supreme Court claimed this interpretation allowed companies to “concoct false narratives” and rely on unverified allegations to escape accountability — a trend he said undermines employee protections and the integrity of the judicial process.
