Granted, the number is too high, and represents some sketchy avoidance of good hiring practices.
But exactly why put out individuals’ names rather than just job titles and locations? Some of our best state employees fit into this category, and some of our worst do not.
Some of the names on the list are high level gubernatorial appointees but many have worked for the state for years and due to work and quality performance have been promoted to higher positions which eventually were high enough they are Rutan exempt. Being on this list is not necessarily saying they are all political appointees. Being on this list under Rauner could mean they could be dismissed at any time and more institutional knowledge would be lost.
It’s definitely a big, big step forward in transparency. I’m sure every Op-Research person in the state and beyond just loaded a ream of paper into their copiers. A lot of these names are familiar to even casual observers. You guys above are right. In and of itself, it doesn’t imply anything negative. The next step is a highlighter. It’s public info. The more sunlight the better.
4(d) is a section of the personnel code that covers these types of positions, and the 3 or the 1 is just more specific.
Walk, there are 50,000 employees under the Governor. I don’t think having 5% of the workforce being management/confidential/spokesperson/policymaking is really that high of a number.
==Why does this list not include Rutan Exempt positions for the other State Constitutional officers?==
=== Talk to them. They are in charge of their offices. ===
I always assumed that CMS had a record of this regardless of whether the office fell under the Governor’s office or a separately elected Constitutional Officer. I guess I was wrong.
Maybe I’m missing it, but where is the Governor’s Office on this list? The OEIG, The Toll Highway Authority, DCEO, IL Power Authority…the list seems a little light.
If I read “4d” in the personnel code right, it means that position is exempt from code jurisdictions ( or some part of) . There are three.
A- classification and pay
B- merit and fitness
C- conditions of employment
Juvenal, Administrative Assistants and Secretaries have confidential information crossing their eyes/desks/ and emails all of the time, which by the very definition that the Supreme Court laid out in Rutan, makes those positions Rutan exempt.
And there were 51,222 employees under the Governor at the end of December.
I think it has to do with the way it’s being rolled out that has my mixed emotions going.
Maybe by having this list isolated as it is, makes it seem more sinister than it needs to be.
If it rolled out, like it being rolled into everyone else, I’d feel quite different. The names would be as open and transparent as everyone else’s. Maybe it’s the “isolated transparency” rollout(?)
Why not the addresses and phone numbers too. I mean if you are going to go all in why not just go full court press.====
You’re kidding, right?
Every Rauner appointee has gone through (justified) scrutiny. After a short hubbub, it abates. It’s not a witch hunt unless there’s a witch. As the moderator says, this stuff is already out there. This just puts it in appropriate context.
My biggest problem with the list is not the publication of the names. It’s the assumption that everyone on that list is a political hire. That’s simply not the case in many instances.
I’m still trying to figure out how Rutan exempt employees can also be unionized (as some of the people on the list appear to be — they are listed as “bargaining unit” rather than “merit comp”.)
I think it might be better to give working titles on the list. If working titles were provided you would be able to see some distinctions in the types of jobs. PSA or SPSA doesn’t tell you very much.
A peek into the workings of our byzantine and expensive state bureaucracy.
But still, it’s confusing. Rutan-exempt, as I understand it, means you don’t have to go through the Rutan hiring process (designed to prevent hiring on the basis of political affiliation)in order to be hired. You can be hired just because you have the right connections (and meet the basic requirements for the job).
Maybe the best deal would be to be Rutan-exempt but in the collective bargaining unit. You can get your job through clout, but once you pass probation you come under the union’s substantial job protections-a lifetime job, or as close as anybody in the working world gets these days. And the union bargains for your wages and benefits-more effective than you doing it on your own.
Should there be folks hired for political reasons. Sure. Politicians should be able to hire their upper level policy staff. But should those folks be in the union? Seems a little third worldish-like those countries where each new govt chief brings in his own people, and they can never be fired, ever. Makes for a lot of bureacrats over time.
++If any employee is outstanding, an asset to the state, should it “matter” outside the optics of the alleged stain of having a label, or not?++ The list of “Rutan exempt state employees” should not be made public. The list serves no one. It does not tell anyone if the employee is good or bad.
And to be even clearer, because I may not be clear, my bad, I don’t think the names should NOT be public.
I have no problem with the names out there, it’s the packaging of them, how the rollout isolates names with some having preconceived notions as to what Rutan-Exempt means.
There’s a strategy to this, and I only see transparency as a part of it. What happens next will confirm my suspicions. I wonder if this isn’t the first step in removing people from having union representation. Quite a few PSAs retained their status even though they could have been excluded under prior legislation. I too wonder if this isn’t a first step toward some other action being taken against people in the list. I hope I’m wrong, and I hope this is done solely to increase the level of transparency in state government.
Rutan-covered employees at DHS, DCFS, HFS handle confidential information every day.
IDOT has three “confidential” secretaries and administrative assistants for every Rutan-exempt manager. I would love to hear the explanation for what kind of secrets a secretary in the division of Traffic Safety is keeping.
My is Sean McCarthy listed under Commerce and Economic Opportunity? I thought he was a senior advisor to the Governor? I get that he is non Rutan but why under DCEO? He doesn’t report to Schultz.
=== **I have a feeling that Governor Rauner will eventually seek to pass a fumigation bill.**
Doubt it. He already knows who they are and he already went through that exercise when he took office. ===
Fumigation denotes that the hire was political. As Demo has already pointed out that’s not always the case. The poor person who took over some of my duties but was placed in my title got fired by Rauner simply for being in that title. Rauner’s people wanted it for a political hire.
The information was always available from CMS. The gripe about the list is that uninformed people think it’s a list of political hacks. Yes, political hacks are there but so are a lot of GOOD people who worked there way up to management positions or were placed in positions because of their abilities.
There has also been a misunderstanding of the Rutan process when it was created. Simply because it was a Rutan hire, it didn’t mean that the position was at will. That was a separate personnel designation.
Whether that should continue to be the case is now part of the discussion.
Honey bear: GO pays exec 16th floor senior staff out of agency budgets all the time. Keeps the exec staff salary count down, and allows GO to add additional DCOS without maxing out GO headcount.
This “list” really needs to be automated & updated real-time, including some filters by agency, title, etc. There’s no “as of” date so I’m confused is this is the current pool or the pool at the time of the EO.
Also, there isn’t a single Gov’s Office or GOMB employee on this list…..what’s up with that. Much of the GOMB/Gov’s office Sr. Staff is paid with agency payrolls and they seem to appear on the list, but I see no GOMB analysts or rank and file Gov staff on this list. Did the Governor seriously not comply with his own EO?
What is the point? Many many of these people have been with the state for 20+ and some even 30 years. One guy on there retired with 30 years of service and is now a 75 day temp employee. That’s a political hire?
===The gripe about the list is that uninformed people think it’s a list of political hacks. Yes, political hacks are there but so are a lot of GOOD people who worked there way up to management positions or were placed in positions because of their abilities.===
And…
===Simply because it was a Rutan hire, it didn’t mean that the position was at will. That was a separate personnel designation.====
It’s the perceived way people are seen on the list, and that tge list inofitself is isolated in a way to, for lack of a better discription, feed into a belief that may not be the case.
The list as presented and isolated gives me my mixed emotions, not the publishing of the names.
Probably the only way my “concerns” would have been put to rest would have been a “passive” rollout, indicating the names, all the names, are now as readily available as any other name in the database.
I’m “sure” it would have been too passive a rolling out of the names, I give you that, but the names would’ve been public all the same.
AC @ 11:22 — What happens next will confirm my suspicions. I wonder if this isn’t the first step in removing people from having union representation.==
SB 981 Senate Amendment 1 would disqualify all Rutan-exempt positions from collective bargaining.
There is another aspect to this that is being missed. Before the vast unionization of almost all positions, there was, and remains, a broken personnel code that defines qualified candidates as A, B, or C. With veterans preference, it is virtually impossible to bring in a new hire without going to a Rutan title. Veterans preference is fine and should remain, but when you layer it upon the A/B/C process, you are forced to hire a veteran with an A grade even though they may have no relevant experience. Fix the personnel code and adopt something that aligns specific qualifications to the ranking, with a 0 - 100 scale, and then add veterans preference. Yes there are certainly political hires, but many of these people are in these categories because its the only way to make a broken personnel code work.
- Give Me A Break - Thursday, Apr 30, 15 @ 12:47 pm:
Some on this list are Adm. Assistants who are in certified positions meaning that they have some protections from being terminated without cause but could be moved out of their current positions.
A number of people on the list are attorneys and some of them are in the union(AFSCME). They are Rutan exempt because they by definition handle confidential matters. Most are not political appointees.
I think that’s what worries me about Rauners obsession with Rutan exempt employees. That’s not the ballgame. The ballgame (and the players) are the double exempt employees. Granted that’s super inside baseball of state hiring. No average citizen usually or cares about that level of detailed involved in state hiring. But…. The GO should get it and distinguish the difference
Juvenal, I will concede the point on IDOT, since they have clearly been misclassifying positions for at least a decade. But for Rutan purposes, confidential doesn’t include federal or statutory confidentiality requirements like HIPPA or tax data. It has more to do with whether a position handles classified in the sense of they could easily leak things to embarrass the bosses, and would have easy access to strategy or policy development types of things.
==[Why] is Sean McCarthy listed under Commerce and Economic Opportunity? I thought he was a senior advisor to the Governor? I get that he is non Rutan but why under DCEO? He doesn’t report to Schultz.==
==Maybe I’m missing it, but where is the Governor’s Office on this list? The OEIG, The Toll Highway Authority, DCEO, IL Power Authority…the list seems a little light.==
==Also, there isn’t a single Gov’s Office or GOMB employee on this list…..what’s up with that. Much of the GOMB/Gov’s office Sr. Staff is paid with agency payrolls and they seem to appear on the list, but I see no GOMB analysts or rank and file Gov staff on this list. Did the Governor seriously not comply with his own EO?==
It would seem so.
For example, working from a press release announcing Governor’s Office staff, here is his legal team, with their placement on the Rutan list:
My initial reaction was that the total number was about right. But, when I read the list something didn’t seem right, and I wasn’t sure what it was. I re-read the list and still come away with a nagging feeling that there’s something wrong but I can’t put my finger on it. I’m going to keep thinking about it.
My agency isn’t listed on here at all and we have several Rutan exempt employees.
- Gone, but not forgotten - Thursday, Apr 30, 15 @ 2:42 pm:
Due to the patronage hiring scandal at IDOT, Gov. Rauner issued EO No.3 which states that “CMS shall conspicuously publish all Rutan-Exempt hires on ITAP in a list that can be sorted by (a) name, (b) employing State Agency division, and (c) employing position title.” This list CANNOT be sorted, therefore CMS did not comply.
Said EO also states “Each State Agency shall provide CMS with the necessary and accurate information to comply with the provisions herein.” It doesn’t look like the agencies complied either, in that this listing is just a compilation of exempt position titles, out-dated and inaccurate. It definitely does not reflect the “political hires”, especially at IDOT!
I recognize an entire department on this list and I know two of the people definitely did not get their jobs through political ties. What exactly does Rutan Exempt mean to us casual observers and why do we need to see a list of names?
Rutan exempt means that a position can be filled with political considerations in mind. That doesn’t mean that is how the position was filled, just that politics can be used.
Bibe, the same thing happened to me. Sat through Rutan interview two years ago then saw my name on the list today. I’m a veteran and sincerely hope this isn’t used to make me a merit comp.
My name is on this list. I am a veteran. Some of my coworkers names are on this list and they were hired 20 years ago under a Republican governor. No one handed me a job. I was hired for my education, work experience, and being a veteran. This is a sad day.
- will reitre in 2018 - Thursday, Apr 30, 15 @ 6:45 pm:
I’ve worked during the tenure of 6 governors including Gov. Rauner. The publishing of this list caused quite a disruption today in the department I work for. At least two persons on the list I know were approached by co-workers, one of whom was very visibly upset. Many of the discussions which took place at lunch or on breaks involved the publishing of the list and whether or not there was any “unspoken” intent in doing so. While the Rauner Administration promulgated the EO under auspices of transparency, which merits support, I really do perceive an unspoken reason pertains to “targeting” per OW’s comments. To be certain, some persons on the list are political “double exempt” hires, but most whom I recognize were hired based mostly on merit. It would be a shame if many of the non-policy making employees on this list lost AFSCME representation and were subject to “employment at will” conditions. This would result in a more, not less politicized working environment in most agencies.
I will only add that many of the names I recognize were there from perhaps the Thompson administration and have been working their way up the ladder through good hard work and have always been above board. Unfortunately, from Ryan to Blago the ranks of upper management were decimated and many of these people filled in but didn’t want to leave the protection of the union. Who could blame them? Others as pointed out before, even administrative assistants have to be out of the union lines because they have confidential and political decision making at their fingertips. Agency lawyers? why would anyone question these positions. Not a whitch hunt, but people need to have a better understanding of the specifics.
The list is incorrect…some people do not even work for the state any longer and some people in MC positions are not even on the list. If you can get an up-to-date any kind of list from the State of IL consider yourself lucky. At the agency I work at the systems are so antiquated it is hard to believe it is 2015. We pull stuff out of electronic systems and still manipulate it in Excel because the systems (tools…sigh) were not designed with input from all stakeholders.
Here’s a link to SB 981 Amendment 1, mentioned above. I fear that if it gets passed all the union members on the list will become merit comps. Hopefully I’m wrong or the bill gets defeated.
I know the Historic Preservation Agency. The people I know who are listed are professionals. They were hired based upon their expertise - not for their voting habits. Some of them have worked for the State for nearly 30 years.
To those on the list, you’ve been tagged with the scarlet letter “P” for political hack. To those who did get your job through politics wear it proudly so long as you perform actual work the people are paying you to do. To those who are only on the list because you’re supervisor(s) used a Rhutan exempt job to employ a quality or needed employee, buff up your resume in case you become victim of the lazy or ignorant. I’m sorry for you and I’m sorry that the state will lose a dedicated employee. We can only hope the Rauner hack will give us a good day’s work.
Norse, I hope you turn out to be wrong on that point, but I fear you may be right. Two or three of my former secretaries/AA’s from when I worked for the State 20+ years ago are on this list. They weren’t politically hired and they aren’t political people. For the life of me, I can’t figure out why one of their jobs is Rutan exempt.
On the other hand, noticed a fairly infamous Blago hack hire and his spouse have maneuvered themselves into certified jobs in the union, albeit Rutan-exempt. A nice day at the Office, indeed.
Just a theory a co-worker came up with, but I think I got on the list because when I got promoted I didn’t have to go through a Rutan interview for my new position even though I went through a Rutan interview for my first position/initial hire.
AA, I hope I’m wrong too for your friends’ sake. I was sickened when the Rauner people arbitrarily fired the person who took my position when I retired.
I am on the list because I took a leave from my union job to an at will job because I was qualified to do the at will position. I was let go and came back off leave to my union position. I see people on this list that are MC who had to interview for the job and be the best qualified person AND there are some people who were hired for who they know or their politcal connections who are not on the list. Whoever pit this list together did not have the latest information. Sheesh! I’ve been a state employee for 16 years and started off as a trainee and worked my way up! I should not be on this list for a job I don’t even have anymore…
What is almost laughable if it wasn’t so sad is that this is Rauner’s idea of providing Illinoisans with government transparency. Meanwhile, we have closed door “working groups” negotiating legislation affecting the lives of people throughout the state. The intent is to come up with an agreed legislative package that will be approved most certainly on the last days of session. People affected will have no ability to even know how these bills affect their lives until it’s too late. They definitely will be helpless to do anything about it.
This list is incomplete and inaccurate. Many people on this list are surprised to find their names on it. Many who know they are rutan exempt are not on it. Too bad the list can’t seperate long term hard working state employees who moved up through the ranks from true political hires.
This list has people on it that have not been employed by the state for many months. Some are still employed by the state, but at other agencies that aren’t on this list (Tollway). My point is that this list is a mess.
A “used to be”: just because someone moved up through the ranks doesn’t mean they are a hard working state employee. Just because someone is a political hire doesn’t mean they don’t work hard. Political hires are there to carry out the agendas of the elected officials…who were elected by voters/the public. That said, it’d be worth tracking how many of these people are brothers, cousins, sons, daughters etc of state legislators, mayors, county board members etc. etc. It is rampant on both sides of the isle.
- Oswego Willy - Thursday, Apr 30, 15 @ 10:32 am:
I tell them “it’s two ‘L’s and a ‘Y’. Every time, the same mistake…
To the Post,
Mixed emotions here;
Are we acknowledging these people, or are we also, “left-handedly” trying to shame them?
If any employee, Rutan-Exempt or not, isn’t fulfilling their duties, they should be made an example of, if it’s warrented.
If any employee is outstanding, an asset to the state, should it “matter” outside the optics of the alleged stain of having a label, or not?
Mixed emotions, but not overjoyed to say the least.
- Ravenswood Right Winger - Thursday, Apr 30, 15 @ 10:33 am:
What does “4(d) exempt” and the number in that column mean?
- walker - Thursday, Apr 30, 15 @ 10:37 am:
Granted, the number is too high, and represents some sketchy avoidance of good hiring practices.
But exactly why put out individuals’ names rather than just job titles and locations? Some of our best state employees fit into this category, and some of our worst do not.
I share OW’s concerns with the “shaming.”
- illlinifan - Thursday, Apr 30, 15 @ 10:39 am:
Some of the names on the list are high level gubernatorial appointees but many have worked for the state for years and due to work and quality performance have been promoted to higher positions which eventually were high enough they are Rutan exempt. Being on this list is not necessarily saying they are all political appointees. Being on this list under Rauner could mean they could be dismissed at any time and more institutional knowledge would be lost.
- Demoralized - Thursday, Apr 30, 15 @ 10:41 am:
==and represents some sketchy avoidance of good hiring practices==
I don’t understand that statement. Why assume that just because someone is exempt that good hiring practices were not followed?
- John A Logan - Thursday, Apr 30, 15 @ 10:41 am:
Nothing better than a good ole public shaming. Lets bring back the stocks while we are at it.
- A guy - Thursday, Apr 30, 15 @ 10:45 am:
It’s definitely a big, big step forward in transparency. I’m sure every Op-Research person in the state and beyond just loaded a ream of paper into their copiers. A lot of these names are familiar to even casual observers. You guys above are right. In and of itself, it doesn’t imply anything negative. The next step is a highlighter. It’s public info. The more sunlight the better.
- Juice - Thursday, Apr 30, 15 @ 10:45 am:
4(d) is a section of the personnel code that covers these types of positions, and the 3 or the 1 is just more specific.
Walk, there are 50,000 employees under the Governor. I don’t think having 5% of the workforce being management/confidential/spokesperson/policymaking is really that high of a number.
- Anonymous - Thursday, Apr 30, 15 @ 10:46 am:
Why does this list not include Rutan Exempt positions for the other State Constitutional officers?
- Juvenal - Thursday, Apr 30, 15 @ 10:49 am:
@Juice
First, there are not 50,000 employees under the governor.
Secondly, several hundred on this list are secretaries or administrative assistants.
Hard to defend.
- Demoralized - Thursday, Apr 30, 15 @ 10:50 am:
==Why does this list not include Rutan Exempt positions for the other State Constitutional officers?==
Talk to them. They are in charge of their offices.
- Oswego Willy - Thursday, Apr 30, 15 @ 10:52 am:
===In and of itself, it doesn’t imply anything negative.===
But there are those, with those highlighters, who aren’t highlighting names to put them on Christmas Card lists.
The names, as a collective, are a target. Targets are never seen positively.
Mixed emotions, to say the least.
This isn’t transparency, this is left-handed shaming for some, that isn’t remotely warranted.
- Rich Miller - Thursday, Apr 30, 15 @ 10:54 am:
===this is left-handed shaming for some, that isn’t remotely warranted. ===
I disagree. You can’t find the problems if you don’t know who is who.
State employee salaries are already online. Why not this?
- Demoralized - Thursday, Apr 30, 15 @ 10:55 am:
Why not the addresses and phone numbers too. I mean if you are going to go all in why not just go full court press.
- Anonymous - Thursday, Apr 30, 15 @ 10:55 am:
==Why does this list not include Rutan Exempt positions for the other State Constitutional officers?==
=== Talk to them. They are in charge of their offices. ===
I always assumed that CMS had a record of this regardless of whether the office fell under the Governor’s office or a separately elected Constitutional Officer. I guess I was wrong.
- Demoralized - Thursday, Apr 30, 15 @ 10:56 am:
==I always assumed that CMS had a record ==
They do their own hiring. Doesn’t go through CMS.
- Wondering Woman - Thursday, Apr 30, 15 @ 10:56 am:
Maybe I’m missing it, but where is the Governor’s Office on this list? The OEIG, The Toll Highway Authority, DCEO, IL Power Authority…the list seems a little light.
- tiredOfIt - Thursday, Apr 30, 15 @ 10:57 am:
List is old
- Macbeth - Thursday, Apr 30, 15 @ 10:58 am:
not that old. 4 weeks maybe. but i do see some folks no longer with state.
- Liberty - Thursday, Apr 30, 15 @ 10:59 am:
If I read “4d” in the personnel code right, it means that position is exempt from code jurisdictions ( or some part of) . There are three.
A- classification and pay
B- merit and fitness
C- conditions of employment
- nobiggie - Thursday, Apr 30, 15 @ 10:59 am:
For those of you who are not aware, this is a result of the ethics EO signed by the Gov.
http://chicago.suntimes.com/politics/7/71/293905/latest-ethics-move-rauner-publish-list-political-hires
- Juice - Thursday, Apr 30, 15 @ 10:59 am:
Juvenal, Administrative Assistants and Secretaries have confidential information crossing their eyes/desks/ and emails all of the time, which by the very definition that the Supreme Court laid out in Rutan, makes those positions Rutan exempt.
And there were 51,222 employees under the Governor at the end of December.
- Oswego Willy - Thursday, Apr 30, 15 @ 11:00 am:
Rich,
I think it has to do with the way it’s being rolled out that has my mixed emotions going.
Maybe by having this list isolated as it is, makes it seem more sinister than it needs to be.
If it rolled out, like it being rolled into everyone else, I’d feel quite different. The names would be as open and transparent as everyone else’s. Maybe it’s the “isolated transparency” rollout(?)
- A guy - Thursday, Apr 30, 15 @ 11:01 am:
=== Demoralized - Thursday, Apr 30, 15 @ 10:55 am:
Why not the addresses and phone numbers too. I mean if you are going to go all in why not just go full court press.====
You’re kidding, right?
Every Rauner appointee has gone through (justified) scrutiny. After a short hubbub, it abates. It’s not a witch hunt unless there’s a witch. As the moderator says, this stuff is already out there. This just puts it in appropriate context.
Does it make people more careful? I bet it will.
- Demoralized - Thursday, Apr 30, 15 @ 11:02 am:
My biggest problem with the list is not the publication of the names. It’s the assumption that everyone on that list is a political hire. That’s simply not the case in many instances.
- Secret Square - Thursday, Apr 30, 15 @ 11:04 am:
I’m still trying to figure out how Rutan exempt employees can also be unionized (as some of the people on the list appear to be — they are listed as “bargaining unit” rather than “merit comp”.)
- A guy - Thursday, Apr 30, 15 @ 11:05 am:
I get your point Demo. That will become apparent soon enough. Some of those folks might be relieved to be separated from the others. Maybe.
- Demoralized - Thursday, Apr 30, 15 @ 11:07 am:
I think it might be better to give working titles on the list. If working titles were provided you would be able to see some distinctions in the types of jobs. PSA or SPSA doesn’t tell you very much.
- Cassandra - Thursday, Apr 30, 15 @ 11:07 am:
Whoever put this together-thanks.
A peek into the workings of our byzantine and expensive state bureaucracy.
But still, it’s confusing. Rutan-exempt, as I understand it, means you don’t have to go through the Rutan hiring process (designed to prevent hiring on the basis of political affiliation)in order to be hired. You can be hired just because you have the right connections (and meet the basic requirements for the job).
Maybe the best deal would be to be Rutan-exempt but in the collective bargaining unit. You can get your job through clout, but once you pass probation you come under the union’s substantial job protections-a lifetime job, or as close as anybody in the working world gets these days. And the union bargains for your wages and benefits-more effective than you doing it on your own.
Should there be folks hired for political reasons. Sure. Politicians should be able to hire their upper level policy staff. But should those folks be in the union? Seems a little third worldish-like those countries where each new govt chief brings in his own people, and they can never be fired, ever. Makes for a lot of bureacrats over time.
- Mama - Thursday, Apr 30, 15 @ 11:08 am:
++If any employee is outstanding, an asset to the state, should it “matter” outside the optics of the alleged stain of having a label, or not?++ The list of “Rutan exempt state employees” should not be made public. The list serves no one. It does not tell anyone if the employee is good or bad.
- Precinct Captain - Thursday, Apr 30, 15 @ 11:09 am:
==- A guy - Thursday, Apr 30, 15 @ 10:45 am:==
A “big step forward in transparency” for a list that was already public record due to a law with an effective date of August 9, 2013.
- Rich Miller - Thursday, Apr 30, 15 @ 11:11 am:
===a list that was already public record due to a law with an effective date of August 9, 2013. ===
The law wasn’t implemented.
- Team Sleep - Thursday, Apr 30, 15 @ 11:13 am:
1. I’m surprised the number is that low.
2. This shows how “busy” AFSCME, ISEA and the Teamsters have been in the last decade.
3. I have a feeling that Governor Rauner will eventually seek to pass a fumigation bill.
- Oswego Willy - Thursday, Apr 30, 15 @ 11:15 am:
Rich,
And to be even clearer, because I may not be clear, my bad, I don’t think the names should NOT be public.
I have no problem with the names out there, it’s the packaging of them, how the rollout isolates names with some having preconceived notions as to what Rutan-Exempt means.
Thanks for allowing me to clarify.
- Demoralized - Thursday, Apr 30, 15 @ 11:16 am:
==I have a feeling that Governor Rauner will eventually seek to pass a fumigation bill.==
Doubt it. He already knows who they are and he already went through that exercise when he took office.
- AC - Thursday, Apr 30, 15 @ 11:22 am:
There’s a strategy to this, and I only see transparency as a part of it. What happens next will confirm my suspicions. I wonder if this isn’t the first step in removing people from having union representation. Quite a few PSAs retained their status even though they could have been excluded under prior legislation. I too wonder if this isn’t a first step toward some other action being taken against people in the list. I hope I’m wrong, and I hope this is done solely to increase the level of transparency in state government.
- Team Sleep - Thursday, Apr 30, 15 @ 11:23 am:
Demoralized - not as much as you think.
- Juvenal - Thursday, Apr 30, 15 @ 11:37 am:
Juice:
Rutan-covered employees at DHS, DCFS, HFS handle confidential information every day.
IDOT has three “confidential” secretaries and administrative assistants for every Rutan-exempt manager. I would love to hear the explanation for what kind of secrets a secretary in the division of Traffic Safety is keeping.
- Honeybear - Thursday, Apr 30, 15 @ 11:37 am:
My is Sean McCarthy listed under Commerce and Economic Opportunity? I thought he was a senior advisor to the Governor? I get that he is non Rutan but why under DCEO? He doesn’t report to Schultz.
- Norseman - Thursday, Apr 30, 15 @ 11:46 am:
=== **I have a feeling that Governor Rauner will eventually seek to pass a fumigation bill.**
Doubt it. He already knows who they are and he already went through that exercise when he took office. ===
Fumigation denotes that the hire was political. As Demo has already pointed out that’s not always the case. The poor person who took over some of my duties but was placed in my title got fired by Rauner simply for being in that title. Rauner’s people wanted it for a political hire.
The information was always available from CMS. The gripe about the list is that uninformed people think it’s a list of political hacks. Yes, political hacks are there but so are a lot of GOOD people who worked there way up to management positions or were placed in positions because of their abilities.
There has also been a misunderstanding of the Rutan process when it was created. Simply because it was a Rutan hire, it didn’t mean that the position was at will. That was a separate personnel designation.
Whether that should continue to be the case is now part of the discussion.
- Anon. - Thursday, Apr 30, 15 @ 11:47 am:
Honey bear: GO pays exec 16th floor senior staff out of agency budgets all the time. Keeps the exec staff salary count down, and allows GO to add additional DCOS without maxing out GO headcount.
- Get a Job! - Thursday, Apr 30, 15 @ 11:49 am:
This “list” really needs to be automated & updated real-time, including some filters by agency, title, etc. There’s no “as of” date so I’m confused is this is the current pool or the pool at the time of the EO.
Also, there isn’t a single Gov’s Office or GOMB employee on this list…..what’s up with that. Much of the GOMB/Gov’s office Sr. Staff is paid with agency payrolls and they seem to appear on the list, but I see no GOMB analysts or rank and file Gov staff on this list. Did the Governor seriously not comply with his own EO?
- Anonymous - Thursday, Apr 30, 15 @ 11:54 am:
What is the point? Many many of these people have been with the state for 20+ and some even 30 years. One guy on there retired with 30 years of service and is now a 75 day temp employee. That’s a political hire?
- Agricola - Thursday, Apr 30, 15 @ 11:55 am:
I’m curious, in the “Employment Status” column, what do the labels “Certified” and “Exempt” represent?
- Oswego Willy - Thursday, Apr 30, 15 @ 12:04 pm:
- Norseman - makes two points that I agree with;
===The gripe about the list is that uninformed people think it’s a list of political hacks. Yes, political hacks are there but so are a lot of GOOD people who worked there way up to management positions or were placed in positions because of their abilities.===
And…
===Simply because it was a Rutan hire, it didn’t mean that the position was at will. That was a separate personnel designation.====
It’s the perceived way people are seen on the list, and that tge list inofitself is isolated in a way to, for lack of a better discription, feed into a belief that may not be the case.
The list as presented and isolated gives me my mixed emotions, not the publishing of the names.
Probably the only way my “concerns” would have been put to rest would have been a “passive” rollout, indicating the names, all the names, are now as readily available as any other name in the database.
I’m “sure” it would have been too passive a rolling out of the names, I give you that, but the names would’ve been public all the same.
- Anon. - Thursday, Apr 30, 15 @ 12:10 pm:
AC @ 11:22 — What happens next will confirm my suspicions. I wonder if this isn’t the first step in removing people from having union representation.==
SB 981 Senate Amendment 1 would disqualify all Rutan-exempt positions from collective bargaining.
- Anon - Thursday, Apr 30, 15 @ 12:16 pm:
===SB 981 Senate Amendment 1 would disqualify all Rutan-exempt positions from collective bargaining===
Even the military veterans on the list? That wouldn’t seem fair and might not sit well.
- Bureaucrat - Thursday, Apr 30, 15 @ 12:36 pm:
There is another aspect to this that is being missed. Before the vast unionization of almost all positions, there was, and remains, a broken personnel code that defines qualified candidates as A, B, or C. With veterans preference, it is virtually impossible to bring in a new hire without going to a Rutan title. Veterans preference is fine and should remain, but when you layer it upon the A/B/C process, you are forced to hire a veteran with an A grade even though they may have no relevant experience. Fix the personnel code and adopt something that aligns specific qualifications to the ranking, with a 0 - 100 scale, and then add veterans preference. Yes there are certainly political hires, but many of these people are in these categories because its the only way to make a broken personnel code work.
- Give Me A Break - Thursday, Apr 30, 15 @ 12:47 pm:
Some on this list are Adm. Assistants who are in certified positions meaning that they have some protections from being terminated without cause but could be moved out of their current positions.
- Anon - Thursday, Apr 30, 15 @ 12:58 pm:
This list looks like a list of AFSCME employees only.
- wapak - Thursday, Apr 30, 15 @ 12:58 pm:
A number of people on the list are attorneys and some of them are in the union(AFSCME). They are Rutan exempt because they by definition handle confidential matters. Most are not political appointees.
- Anon. - Thursday, Apr 30, 15 @ 1:03 pm:
I think that’s what worries me about Rauners obsession with Rutan exempt employees. That’s not the ballgame. The ballgame (and the players) are the double exempt employees. Granted that’s super inside baseball of state hiring. No average citizen usually or cares about that level of detailed involved in state hiring. But…. The GO should get it and distinguish the difference
- Juice - Thursday, Apr 30, 15 @ 1:09 pm:
Juvenal, I will concede the point on IDOT, since they have clearly been misclassifying positions for at least a decade. But for Rutan purposes, confidential doesn’t include federal or statutory confidentiality requirements like HIPPA or tax data. It has more to do with whether a position handles classified in the sense of they could easily leak things to embarrass the bosses, and would have easy access to strategy or policy development types of things.
- crazybleedingheart - Thursday, Apr 30, 15 @ 1:18 pm:
==[Why] is Sean McCarthy listed under Commerce and Economic Opportunity? I thought he was a senior advisor to the Governor? I get that he is non Rutan but why under DCEO? He doesn’t report to Schultz.==
==Maybe I’m missing it, but where is the Governor’s Office on this list? The OEIG, The Toll Highway Authority, DCEO, IL Power Authority…the list seems a little light.==
==Also, there isn’t a single Gov’s Office or GOMB employee on this list…..what’s up with that. Much of the GOMB/Gov’s office Sr. Staff is paid with agency payrolls and they seem to appear on the list, but I see no GOMB analysts or rank and file Gov staff on this list. Did the Governor seriously not comply with his own EO?==
It would seem so.
For example, working from a press release announcing Governor’s Office staff, here is his legal team, with their placement on the Rutan list:
Joe Hartzler, Special Counsel (missing)
Mitch Holzrichter, Deputy Counsel (missing)
Dennis Murashko, Deputy Counsel (CMS)
Emily Bastedo, Associate Counsel (missing)
Donovan Borvan, Associate Counsel (Aging)
Chasity Boyce, Associate Counsel (IDOC)
Emily Gibellina, Associate Counsel (CMS)
Georgia Man, Associate Counsel (missing)
Joseph Wright, Assistant Counsel (public health)
So it would seem that only 4 of 9 members of this crew are budgeted to the “missing” Governor’s Office staff list.
SHAKIN’ UP SPRINGFIEEEEEELD
- steve schnorf - Thursday, Apr 30, 15 @ 1:38 pm:
My initial reaction was that the total number was about right. But, when I read the list something didn’t seem right, and I wasn’t sure what it was. I re-read the list and still come away with a nagging feeling that there’s something wrong but I can’t put my finger on it. I’m going to keep thinking about it.
- Juice - Thursday, Apr 30, 15 @ 1:39 pm:
crazybleedingheart- I can only assume because being a superstar makes you Rutan covered. (snark)
- Demoralized - Thursday, Apr 30, 15 @ 1:50 pm:
I’m pretty sure the Governor’s office is a separate beast. They’re all exempt.
- Norseman - Thursday, Apr 30, 15 @ 1:51 pm:
Steve, other than it’s not up-to-date and missing some Rauner staffers, I can’t help you.
- tired - Thursday, Apr 30, 15 @ 2:09 pm:
My agency isn’t listed on here at all and we have several Rutan exempt employees.
- Gone, but not forgotten - Thursday, Apr 30, 15 @ 2:42 pm:
Due to the patronage hiring scandal at IDOT, Gov. Rauner issued EO No.3 which states that “CMS shall conspicuously publish all Rutan-Exempt hires on ITAP in a list that can be sorted by (a) name, (b) employing State Agency division, and (c) employing position title.” This list CANNOT be sorted, therefore CMS did not comply.
Said EO also states “Each State Agency shall provide CMS with the necessary and accurate information to comply with the provisions herein.” It doesn’t look like the agencies complied either, in that this listing is just a compilation of exempt position titles, out-dated and inaccurate. It definitely does not reflect the “political hires”, especially at IDOT!
- Anonymous - Thursday, Apr 30, 15 @ 3:18 pm:
I recognize an entire department on this list and I know two of the people definitely did not get their jobs through political ties. What exactly does Rutan Exempt mean to us casual observers and why do we need to see a list of names?
- Juice - Thursday, Apr 30, 15 @ 3:24 pm:
Rutan exempt means that a position can be filled with political considerations in mind. That doesn’t mean that is how the position was filled, just that politics can be used.
- low level - Thursday, Apr 30, 15 @ 4:06 pm:
Agree with OW. The transperancy has gotten ridiculous. Bruce may as well list addresses and phone #’s as someone else said.
- Bibe - Thursday, Apr 30, 15 @ 6:03 pm:
I am one of the folks asking why did I sit through a Rutan interview for a union title if my name was going to end up on this list
- Anon - Thursday, Apr 30, 15 @ 6:07 pm:
Bibe, the same thing happened to me. Sat through Rutan interview two years ago then saw my name on the list today. I’m a veteran and sincerely hope this isn’t used to make me a merit comp.
- Anon 2 - Thursday, Apr 30, 15 @ 6:17 pm:
My name is on this list. I am a veteran. Some of my coworkers names are on this list and they were hired 20 years ago under a Republican governor. No one handed me a job. I was hired for my education, work experience, and being a veteran. This is a sad day.
- will reitre in 2018 - Thursday, Apr 30, 15 @ 6:45 pm:
I’ve worked during the tenure of 6 governors including Gov. Rauner. The publishing of this list caused quite a disruption today in the department I work for. At least two persons on the list I know were approached by co-workers, one of whom was very visibly upset. Many of the discussions which took place at lunch or on breaks involved the publishing of the list and whether or not there was any “unspoken” intent in doing so. While the Rauner Administration promulgated the EO under auspices of transparency, which merits support, I really do perceive an unspoken reason pertains to “targeting” per OW’s comments. To be certain, some persons on the list are political “double exempt” hires, but most whom I recognize were hired based mostly on merit. It would be a shame if many of the non-policy making employees on this list lost AFSCME representation and were subject to “employment at will” conditions. This would result in a more, not less politicized working environment in most agencies.
- Tatler - Thursday, Apr 30, 15 @ 7:01 pm:
I will only add that many of the names I recognize were there from perhaps the Thompson administration and have been working their way up the ladder through good hard work and have always been above board. Unfortunately, from Ryan to Blago the ranks of upper management were decimated and many of these people filled in but didn’t want to leave the protection of the union. Who could blame them? Others as pointed out before, even administrative assistants have to be out of the union lines because they have confidential and political decision making at their fingertips. Agency lawyers? why would anyone question these positions. Not a whitch hunt, but people need to have a better understanding of the specifics.
- Not Surprised - Thursday, Apr 30, 15 @ 7:07 pm:
The list is incorrect…some people do not even work for the state any longer and some people in MC positions are not even on the list. If you can get an up-to-date any kind of list from the State of IL consider yourself lucky. At the agency I work at the systems are so antiquated it is hard to believe it is 2015. We pull stuff out of electronic systems and still manipulate it in Excel because the systems (tools…sigh) were not designed with input from all stakeholders.
- Unpreferred Veteran - Thursday, Apr 30, 15 @ 7:22 pm:
Here’s a link to SB 981 Amendment 1, mentioned above. I fear that if it gets passed all the union members on the list will become merit comps. Hopefully I’m wrong or the bill gets defeated.
http://www.ilga.gov/legislation/fulltext.asp?DocName=09900SB0981sam001&GA=99&SessionId=88&DocTypeId=SB&LegID=86426&DocNum=981&GAID=13&Session=
- Tyrone - Thursday, Apr 30, 15 @ 8:38 pm:
I know the Historic Preservation Agency. The people I know who are listed are professionals. They were hired based upon their expertise - not for their voting habits. Some of them have worked for the State for nearly 30 years.
- Norseman - Thursday, Apr 30, 15 @ 9:13 pm:
To those on the list, you’ve been tagged with the scarlet letter “P” for political hack. To those who did get your job through politics wear it proudly so long as you perform actual work the people are paying you to do. To those who are only on the list because you’re supervisor(s) used a Rhutan exempt job to employ a quality or needed employee, buff up your resume in case you become victim of the lazy or ignorant. I’m sorry for you and I’m sorry that the state will lose a dedicated employee. We can only hope the Rauner hack will give us a good day’s work.
- Arthur Andersen - Thursday, Apr 30, 15 @ 10:12 pm:
Norse, I hope you turn out to be wrong on that point, but I fear you may be right. Two or three of my former secretaries/AA’s from when I worked for the State 20+ years ago are on this list. They weren’t politically hired and they aren’t political people. For the life of me, I can’t figure out why one of their jobs is Rutan exempt.
On the other hand, noticed a fairly infamous Blago hack hire and his spouse have maneuvered themselves into certified jobs in the union, albeit Rutan-exempt. A nice day at the Office, indeed.
- Anonymous - Thursday, Apr 30, 15 @ 10:16 pm:
Just a theory a co-worker came up with, but I think I got on the list because when I got promoted I didn’t have to go through a Rutan interview for my new position even though I went through a Rutan interview for my first position/initial hire.
- Norseman - Thursday, Apr 30, 15 @ 10:27 pm:
AA, I hope I’m wrong too for your friends’ sake. I was sickened when the Rauner people arbitrarily fired the person who took my position when I retired.
- State Employee - Friday, May 1, 15 @ 12:22 am:
I am on the list because I took a leave from my union job to an at will job because I was qualified to do the at will position. I was let go and came back off leave to my union position. I see people on this list that are MC who had to interview for the job and be the best qualified person AND there are some people who were hired for who they know or their politcal connections who are not on the list. Whoever pit this list together did not have the latest information. Sheesh! I’ve been a state employee for 16 years and started off as a trainee and worked my way up! I should not be on this list for a job I don’t even have anymore…
- LINK - Friday, May 1, 15 @ 2:58 am:
Bibe, I am in the same boat.
- Pacman - Friday, May 1, 15 @ 6:07 am:
I’m double exempt, not a political hack, and my name is not on the list nor is any one from my agency similarly situated.
- Norseman - Friday, May 1, 15 @ 7:18 am:
What is almost laughable if it wasn’t so sad is that this is Rauner’s idea of providing Illinoisans with government transparency. Meanwhile, we have closed door “working groups” negotiating legislation affecting the lives of people throughout the state. The intent is to come up with an agreed legislative package that will be approved most certainly on the last days of session. People affected will have no ability to even know how these bills affect their lives until it’s too late. They definitely will be helpless to do anything about it.
This is Rauner Transparency!
- A "used to be" - Friday, May 1, 15 @ 8:42 am:
This list is incomplete and inaccurate. Many people on this list are surprised to find their names on it. Many who know they are rutan exempt are not on it. Too bad the list can’t seperate long term hard working state employees who moved up through the ranks from true political hires.
- Anon - Friday, May 1, 15 @ 9:23 am:
This list has people on it that have not been employed by the state for many months. Some are still employed by the state, but at other agencies that aren’t on this list (Tollway). My point is that this list is a mess.
- Anon - Friday, May 1, 15 @ 9:30 am:
A “used to be”: just because someone moved up through the ranks doesn’t mean they are a hard working state employee. Just because someone is a political hire doesn’t mean they don’t work hard. Political hires are there to carry out the agendas of the elected officials…who were elected by voters/the public. That said, it’d be worth tracking how many of these people are brothers, cousins, sons, daughters etc of state legislators, mayors, county board members etc. etc. It is rampant on both sides of the isle.