ArcelorMittal throws down gauntlet on gun law

July 1, 2010
Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrintBookmark and Share

The first round in a likely legal shootout over Indiana’s new guns-at-work law was fired this week by ArcelorMittal, the Luxembourg–based steelmaking giant that operates mills in northwest Indiana.

Workers cannot bring guns to work despite the new law, which took effect July 1, the company warned in a letter to its employees, and any worker who brings a gun to work could be fired.

ArcelorMittal said federal law trumps state law, but in a statement to The Times of Munster, a company spokeswoman didn’t specify which law. However, ArcelorMittal might fall under an exemption granted under a maritime security law.

The law, which sailed through the General Assembly, allows leaving guns and ammunition in locked vehicles out of plain sight.

It’s hard not to imagine this conflict tumbling into the courts. Indiana Chamber of Commerce President Kevin Brinegar said several companies are considering challenging the statute. Read IBJ's story here.

Ice Miller labor attorney Paul Sinclair suspects a couple of years or more will pass before property-rights complaints from businesses reach an equilibrium with those of gun owners.

Lawsuits, or even complaints that could lead to suits, might be taken up the Legislature, Sinclair says. Or a court decision could force the General Assembly to tweak the statute. If an ArcelorMittal worker sues, a court decision would be anticipated within about 18 months, he predicts.

“It’s hard to tell,” he says. “The arguments haven’t had the opportunity to be filtered through, which ones make sense and which ones don’t.”

Ultimately, Sinclair adds, companies will want to know what they’re obligated to do to protect employees while meeting the law. They’ll also want to know why some types of businesses fall under the statute and others, such as day cares, do not.

As an aside, Indiana actually isn’t a huge gun state, if an assessment by The Daily Beast online site is any indication. The Hoosier state ranked 27th last year based on FBI background checks on gun purchases. There were 11,614 checks per 100,000 population.

That was nothing compared to top-ranked Kentucky’s 134,028 checks and even No. 2 Utah‘s 30,315. A caution The Daily Beast acknowledges: Not all states report the data consistently. Kentucky, for instance, does some checks on a monthly basis. So make your own guesses on the actual rate of gun ownership.

Any thoughts about guns and work?

  • Questions
    I have a few questions about the law allowing employees to brings guns into a workplace (although locked in vehicles out of plain sight).

    1. Are employers at extra risk from civil lawsuits should an employee fire a gun at the workplace? Or does the statute alleviate some safety responsibility, if only slightly?

    2. Are employers' insurance rates rising because of the new law?

    3. Can employers require workers to report whether they are bringing guns onto the premises?

    4. Can employees' guns be stored on a motorcycle? Bicycle? Evidently, if an employee walks to work, the law doesn't apply.
  • bikes
    can my job make me give them a copy of my gun permit and make a copy to carry my gun to work under new law and put a sticker on my car saying i have a gun and park away from every body
  • They are already there
    The guns are at work now, you would be surprised to know how many people take guns to work now.The ones you need to worry about are the ones that are there illegally.The law doesn't address those, only the ones the law abiding citizens bring to work

Post a comment to this blog

We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in IBJ editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

Sponsored by
  1. Of what value is selling alcoholic beverages to State Fair patrons when there are many families with children attending. Is this the message we want to give children attending and participating in the Fair, another venue with alooholic consumption onsite. Is this to promote beer and wine production in the state which are great for the breweries and wineries, but where does this end up 10-15 years from now, lots more drinkers for the alcoholic contents. If these drinks are so important, why not remove the alcohol content and the flavor and drink itself similar to soft drinks would be the novelty, not the alcoholic content and its affects on the drinker. There is no social or material benefit from drinking alcoholic beverages, mostly people want to get slightly or highly drunk.

  2. I did;nt know anyone in Indiana could count- WHY did they NOT SAY just HOW this would be enforced? Because it WON;T! NOW- with that said- BIG BROTHER is ALIVE in this Article-why take any comment if it won't appease YOU PEOPLE- that's NOT American- with EVERYTHING you indicated is NOT said-I can see WHY it say's o Comments- YOU are COMMIES- BIG BROTHER and most likely- voted for Obama!

  3. In Europe there are schools for hairdressing but you don't get a license afterwards but you are required to assist in turkey and Italy its 7 years in japan it's 10 years England 2 so these people who assist know how to do hair their not just anybody and if your an owner and you hire someone with no experience then ur an idiot I've known stylist from different countries with no license but they are professional clean and safe they have no license but they have experience a license doesn't mean anything look at all the bad hairdressers in the world that have fried peoples hair okay but they have a license doesn't make them a professional at their job I think they should get rid of it because stateboard robs stylist and owners and they fine you for the dumbest f***ing things oh ur license isn't displayed 100$ oh ur wearing open toe shoes fine, oh there's ONE HAIR IN UR BRUSH that's a fine it's like really? So I think they need to go or ease up on their regulations because their too strict

  4. Exciting times in Carmel.

  5. Twenty years ago when we moved to Indy I was a stay at home mom and knew not very many people.WIBC was my family and friends for the most part. It was informative, civil, and humerous with Dave the KING. Terri, Jeff, Stever, Big Joe, Matt, Pat and Crumie. I loved them all, and they seemed to love each other. I didn't mind Greg Garrison, but I was not a Rush fan. NOW I can't stand Chicks and all their giggly opinions. Tony Katz is to abrasive that early in the morning(or really any time). I will tune in on Saturday morning for the usual fun and priceless information from Pat and Crumie, mornings it will be 90.1