What Thyssenkrupp, its steel division, and IG Metall are currently staging in public is a ghastly spectacle. For months, the dispute over the steel division's independence, and the necessary financial backing has escalated. The Thyssenkrupp Steel division board has developed a business plan that does not go far enough for the parent company, and requires more financial support than Thyssenkrupp is willing to provide. But the stalled discussions do not justify taking the matter public, and particularly not resorting to disturbing verbal attacks, or symbolic gestures such as the mock funeral of a puppet representing Thyssenkrupp CEO Miguel López. Enough is enough!

Those who can are turning away in disgust. Recently, three board members and four supervisory board members, including the respective chairs of these bodies, exited the steel division. And investors have been voting with their feet in recent months. Thyssenkrupp's market capitalisation has fallen below 2 billion euros. In contrast, as of June 30, the company's cash reserves, after subtracting debts, stood at 3.2 billion euros. However, this valuation is not entirely irrational, as the balance sheet on the same date also showed pension liabilities of 5.65 billion euros.

The uncompromising stance of the parties involved is understandable on an individual basis. Thyssenkrupp wants to offload the unwanted steel division as soon as possible – while spending as little money as possible. Only then is there any chance of putting the remaining part of the traditional company back on economically viable footing.

It is by no means the case that the remaining businesses are high performers. Even López, who has become the scapegoat, does not claim this. On the other hand, the steel division board has developed a business plan meant to chart the way forward. This plan requires significant investment, which must come from the parent company. Without investments in green steel production, there will be no future for the site in question. Therefore, the steel division board has no choice but to demand as high a financial settlement as possible during negotiations.

IG Metall also has its own agenda in this matter, as Thyssenkrupp Steel is one of the remaining major companies with significant worker representation, which comes with various governance privileges. Additionally, the unionisation rate at Thyssenkrupp's steel division is extremely high. Any winding down or drastic downsizing would inevitably result in substantial damage to IG Metall's image.

The Krupp Foundation is advancing its own agenda as well. The historic institution has failed in the past to diversify its assets, which consist solely of a 21 percent stake in Thyssenkrupp. Thus, its focus is on preserving Thyssenkrupp, but not necessarily Thyssenkrupp Steel.

Despite understanding each party’s internal perspective, the maximum level of escalation has now been reached, if not exceeded. Thyssenkrupp, as the primary owner of Thyssenkrupp Steel, cannot shirk its responsibility, no matter how pressing the billion-euro pension liabilities may be. While it might be the right approach to spin off the steel division, this path leads to a dead end without solid financial backing. A new steel division board will not change this, especially since the current plan has been validated by Roland Berger and McKinsey with no major changes requested. Relying on the state to protect the steel workers and ensure the future of green steel is a risky gamble that could end in losses for all involved.