* SJ-R…
The Illinois Labor Relations Board on Monday issued a written version of its Nov. 15 ruling that an impasse exists in contract talks between the state and Council 31 of the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees.
AFSCME spokesman Anders Lindall said after the written version was issued that the union is appealing the ruling to the state appellate court based in Chicago.
The union had filed a lawsuit in St. Clair County circuit court seeking an injunction to block the Rauner administration from implementing its final contract offer before a written opinion was issued. A ruling had been expected as early as Monday. […]
The full board ruled that because privatization - or subcontracting - was such a critical issue, the parties should be considered to have reached overall impasse.
Lindall said the union is asking the appellate court to block implementation of the state’s final offer because many components
The governor’s office claimed yesterday that any TRO by that St. Clair County judge would be moot, but he went ahead and issued it today anyway. Click here to read it…
Another hearing is set for January 13th, unless the Rauner administration asks for an expedited process.
Awaiting Rauner administration react.
*** UPDATE 1 *** Catherine Kelly…
“With this order, AFSCME’s hand-picked judge blatantly ignores yesterday’s written ruling which memorialized and reinforced the Labor Board’s final decision, made at its November 15th meeting confirming that the parties are at impasse. In addition, the order ensures that taxpayers and employees will not be able to benefit from common sense solutions such as overtime after 40 hours of work, workplace safety task forces, bereavement leave, and $1,000 merit bonus payments for eligible employees.”
Back to slamming the judicial branch, I see.
*** UPDATE 2 *** Council 31…
Although the Board’s written decision was issued while the TRO request was pending, the judge found that “by implementing new terms and conditions of employment without notice to and the agreement of the union”, the Rauner administration “has violated that Tolling Agreement” that extends the terms of the current contract.
Under the TRO, the administration must honor the tolling agreement and rescind any changes it has made, at least until a hearing now set for January 13 (possibly sooner).
“Although temporary, this order sends a message to Governor Rauner that he is not above the law,” AFSCME Council 31 Executive Director Roberta Lynch said. “Instead of sparking further conflict in the courts and at state worksites, Governor Rauner should return to bargaining and work with us to find common ground.”
- Politix - Tuesday, Dec 6, 16 @ 3:14 pm:
I’m not terribly interested in the gov’s reaction as it’s sure to be something hateful, childish and unnecessary.
- blue dog dem - Tuesday, Dec 6, 16 @ 3:16 pm:
As my kids say, FWIW.
- blue dog dem - Tuesday, Dec 6, 16 @ 3:17 pm:
…..for what its worth.
- Allen D - Tuesday, Dec 6, 16 @ 3:23 pm:
this is bound to be comically interesting … AFSCME is just losing face with every turn…
- Deft Wing - Tuesday, Dec 6, 16 @ 3:25 pm:
Judge LeChien’s Order means very little … other than a local Democrat from the Bench did a solid for his union friends & supporters to try and buy them some time.
The law is absolutely on the Administration’s side so this temporary Order won’t hold too long beyond the temporary.
- COPN - Tuesday, Dec 6, 16 @ 3:26 pm:
This TRO order looks an awful lot like a preliminary injunction order…uses the balance of hardship element in the order, which isn’t necessary for a TRO, and talks about a permanent injunction hearing being the next step when I’m pretty sure the TRO should be in effect only until a preliminary injunction hearing is held. Will be interesting if the Appellate Court knocks the TRO order down for procedural reasons…if appealed by the Gov, the Appellate Court should be issuing their ruling by the end of next week.
- Anon - Tuesday, Dec 6, 16 @ 3:34 pm:
Waaaahhh - now I don’t get my $1,000 bonus and it’s all the Union’s fault! Jk
- DHSJim - Tuesday, Dec 6, 16 @ 3:41 pm:
So this TRO lasts until 1/13, when AFSCME will seek a permanent injunction? Am I reading that right?
- Uncommon Sense - Tuesday, Dec 6, 16 @ 3:48 pm:
Death by 1,000 self inflicted wounds.
- Anonymous - Tuesday, Dec 6, 16 @ 3:50 pm:
Burning up those hard earned Union dues. Get real!
- Melian Dialogue - Tuesday, Dec 6, 16 @ 3:54 pm:
This is an unexpected victory. We’ll see what happens now.
- DHSJim - Tuesday, Dec 6, 16 @ 4:01 pm:
AFSCME needs needs needs to use this extra time to prepare for a strike.
- Chucktownian - Tuesday, Dec 6, 16 @ 4:03 pm:
I still have yet to figure out how this is an impasse if only one side (the governor) isn’t coming to the bargaining table…
- Hottot - Tuesday, Dec 6, 16 @ 4:05 pm:
The law is on the administration’s side? The AL judge didn’t think so.
- Oswego Willy - Tuesday, Dec 6, 16 @ 4:05 pm:
===taxpayers===
Oh “ck”, next time shake that Rauner Word Jumble one more time.
You’re bashing the judicial, “legislatin’ from the bench” while not appropriate, I know you have that in your Rauner Word Jumble somewhere.
===taxpayers===
Pretty pathetic, but it’s “ck” whose name is on this, so others are cool with it.
- Anonymous - Tuesday, Dec 6, 16 @ 4:08 pm:
She forgot to say that it also ensures we won’t be able to benefit from doubled insurance costs and privatized jobs.
- Oswego Willy - Tuesday, Dec 6, 16 @ 4:10 pm:
In the next paragraph, not posted here, “ck” states she hope that if this all goes to an appeal, it’s at the courthouse in Madeupville…
- Crispy - Tuesday, Dec 6, 16 @ 4:12 pm:
“Moot” ruling or not, one of these days all this slammin” of “hand-picked judges” and “corrupt judiciary” is going to come back to haunt the Rauner crew–and the Schadenfreude will be delicious. …
- Norseman - Tuesday, Dec 6, 16 @ 4:13 pm:
=== Burning up those hard earned Union dues. ===
Another silly troll comment.
This is an existential issue for the union. It’s a great use of the dues.
- C.R. Blanche - Tuesday, Dec 6, 16 @ 4:14 pm:
Rauner obviously has his sites on the White House.
- RNUG - Tuesday, Dec 6, 16 @ 4:15 pm:
I’ll just observe that judges do not take kindly to people who question their authority and judgment …
- Northside Dude - Tuesday, Dec 6, 16 @ 4:19 pm:
Perhaps the argument Lisa Madigan successfully made in a Cook County Court that state employees could only be paid federal minimum wage absent a budget should be made again in January to the St.Clair County Court that issued an order to pay state employees full wages without a budget. Paying minimum wage would lead to swift resolution of the matter or to put it another way, pour some gas on this dumpster fire.
- JS Mill - Tuesday, Dec 6, 16 @ 4:19 pm:
What happened to Governor Calm Down?
I guess when he is tweaked, it is just fine and dandy to fire up the nasty rhetoric machine.
What a spoiled little rich boy.
- Union Thug Gramma - Tuesday, Dec 6, 16 @ 4:19 pm:
Hmm….AFSCME doesn’t accept the Labor Board’s ruling, a labor board that includes 4 of 5 that were appointed by Rauner…not that Rauner would stack the deck or anything…
I’m pretty sure, considering other underhanded, anti worker legislation/lawsuits Gov. Ruiner has already filed in the past, if the Labor Board had ruled against him, not only would he have filed an injunction, but found a way to toss the Labor Board Appointees! He needs to quit being a whiny diaper baby and grow up.
- Cubs in '16 - Tuesday, Dec 6, 16 @ 4:21 pm:
“blatantly ignores yesterday’s written ruling”
Um, yeah. That’s what judges do when they believe the plaintiff has a valid argument that should be heard on appeal. It’s a checks and balances thing to protect AFSCME members from hand-picked ILRB boards CK.
- Anonymous - Tuesday, Dec 6, 16 @ 4:21 pm:
Great news, but if I’m not mistaken, AFSCME could have gone straight to the appellate court. I believe that was the original plan until Rauner started chomping at the bit to implement before a written LB decision. This means more delay in getting to final resolution since whoever loses will file an appeal anyway. But a win’s a win and I’ll take it.
- Sue - Tuesday, Dec 6, 16 @ 4:24 pm:
Rich- Rauner is right. Any lawyer will tell you a TRO is not intended to run for 5 weeks without a hearing on the merits. This Judge is what they are saying- handpicked and perhaps not impartial
- Anonymous - Tuesday, Dec 6, 16 @ 4:24 pm:
AFSCME asked for the TRO in the absence of a written ILRB decision. I’ll take my $1k,…it might help while I’m on strike.
- ILGOV2018 - Tuesday, Dec 6, 16 @ 4:26 pm:
This is the reason union dues are paid. To fight union busting politicians like Rauner.
- Reality Check - Tuesday, Dec 6, 16 @ 4:27 pm:
@ck - you mean like the Rauner-appointed board “blatantly ignored” the administrative law judge’s written ruling?
- A - Tuesday, Dec 6, 16 @ 4:27 pm:
This was the TRO motion to block Rauner from implementing before the written decision, not after.
- Team Sleep - Tuesday, Dec 6, 16 @ 4:28 pm:
I’m not a fan of slamming judges but I’m also not a fan of venue shopping or running for reelection instead of retention.
http://www.bnd.com/news/local/article32427582.html
- Grandson of Man - Tuesday, Dec 6, 16 @ 4:31 pm:
It’s a very temporary victory, but a welcome one.
“common sense solutions such as overtime after 40 hours of work, workplace safety task forces, bereavement leave, and $1,000 merit bonus payments for eligible employees”
Rauner left stuff out: doubling or more of healthcare costs, merit pay that might not be given for merit work (minimum of 25% of workforce), step freezes, no COLA’s, privatization without efficiency and economy, loss of layoff protections.
- Nick Name - Tuesday, Dec 6, 16 @ 4:32 pm:
Danglin’ the $1,000 bonus carrot again…
- PoW - Tuesday, Dec 6, 16 @ 4:34 pm:
AFSCME common ground is code for—See that little patch of ground over there? Yep, the one where we get everything and you get nothing!
That is the common ground.
Reality Check—pretty sure Quinn and Blago appointed the board members, at least the majority of the menbers
- blue dog dem - Tuesday, Dec 6, 16 @ 4:34 pm:
I am certainly no expert. It appears to me that AFSCME knows that it can’t strike. Whether its the fact its members will cross the line in mass or the fear of replacement workers. It doesn’t matter. Rauner knows it. He smells it. He feels it.
My feelings are for the workers. But I can offer no answers. As Honey often writes, leave if you can. Everything happens in life for a reason. If you can, don’t let the RAUN Man make you a pawn.
- Gr8dane - Tuesday, Dec 6, 16 @ 4:38 pm:
Just looked at the calendar, January 13th is on a Friday–ugh! Here’s hoping it is a lucky day for state workers.
- Reality Check - Tuesday, Dec 6, 16 @ 4:38 pm:
@PoW, nope, there is only one member not appointed by Rauner.
- Cubs in '16 - Tuesday, Dec 6, 16 @ 4:45 pm:
There are two ILRB members (I think) who were originally appointed by Quinn and reappointed by Rauner.
- DHSJim - Tuesday, Dec 6, 16 @ 4:49 pm:
Blue Dog Dem, we’ll have no other choice to strike if Rauner implements his terms. This is why the union must use these 5 weeks to educate its members on why they need to vote for a strike.
- Arthur Andersen - Tuesday, Dec 6, 16 @ 5:20 pm:
TS, that plan the St. Clair judges tried didn’t work out too well.
Baricevic went down the tubes with his kid, a truly Plummeresque level of fail.
- A - Tuesday, Dec 6, 16 @ 5:36 pm:
Maybe we’ll get lucky and Mendoza will get our pay stopped before then.
Blue Dog Dem, we’ll have no other choice to strike if Rauner implements his terms. This is why the union must use these 5 weeks to educate its members on why they need to vote for a strike.
- A Jack - Tuesday, Dec 6, 16 @ 5:47 pm:
January 13th. Two days after the new GA is sworn in. Thirteen days after the temporary budget expires. The New Year’s Eve fireworks have been rescheduled to the second week of January.
- Anonymous - Tuesday, Dec 6, 16 @ 5:51 pm:
1. Is it true that the judge’s TRO is only good for 5- weeks?
2. What happens on week- 6?
3. If AFSCME is forced to Strike, is there a law that only allows the union to strike for an ‘X’ amount of time or is it limitless?
- RNUG - Tuesday, Dec 6, 16 @ 6:02 pm:
The union can strike for as long as they can hold out for …
- RNUG - Tuesday, Dec 6, 16 @ 6:08 pm:
As issued, and until challenged or superceded, the TRO is in effect until at least the January 13 case management conference. Assuming that court retains jurisdiction, it could then be extended beyond that date.
- Sue - Tuesday, Dec 6, 16 @ 6:36 pm:
I am not involved or advising Rauner but he can ask for a change of venue assuming no State filings have been submitted. The agovernor has an absolute right to ask for a new judge assigned. Hope his staff reads these posts
- Truthteller - Tuesday, Dec 6, 16 @ 6:37 pm:
If the judge could be bought, Rauner would certainly outbid AFSCME. Rauner’s real beef is, unlike downstate Republican legislators, the judge is not for sale.
- blue dog dem - Tuesday, Dec 6, 16 @ 6:39 pm:
DHSJim and A. If and when, I will send $ to your relief fund.
- Fixer - Tuesday, Dec 6, 16 @ 7:01 pm:
Sue, he can ask. He can also be rejected.
- foster brooks - Tuesday, Dec 6, 16 @ 7:16 pm:
every afscme member I’ve talked to wont be going out on strike.
- Anonymous - Tuesday, Dec 6, 16 @ 7:17 pm:
Because they wouldn’t have thought of that on their own.
I am not involved or advising Rauner but he can ask for a change of venue assuming no State filings have been submitted. The agovernor has an absolute right to ask for a new judge assigned. Hope his staff reads these posts
- thechiguy - Tuesday, Dec 6, 16 @ 7:41 pm:
- foster brooks - Tuesday, Dec 6, 16 @ 7:16 pm:
every afscme member I’ve talked to wont be going out on strike.
The dozens I’ve talked to would disagree
- RNUG - Tuesday, Dec 6, 16 @ 7:46 pm:
== every afscme member I’ve talked to wont be going out on strike. ==
The ones I’ve talked to don’t want to go out on strike but seem pretty resigned that they probably will, just a question of when.
- Robert the 1st - Tuesday, Dec 6, 16 @ 7:52 pm:
If you think AFSCME has been losing the PR battle, just wait until they strike. It’s what Rauner’s wanted since day one.
- Anon - Tuesday, Dec 6, 16 @ 9:46 pm:
Every one of my coworkers said they wouldn’t strike privately. Even so, Rauner may back off if he thinks he’s going to lose this fight.
- Honeybear - Tuesday, Dec 6, 16 @ 10:05 pm:
Strike or not the workforce is self-destructing. With every passing day we become less and less able to function as a state. 38k AFSCME’s to 30k AFSCME’s in under two years. 21% people. That’s when it was not as bad. How’s it going to be when we’re forced to choose between a strike and continual molestation? Battle all you want but the state IS going to go down. REGARDLESS
This winter will see actual deaths because of it. Actual Deaths.
- Anonymous - Tuesday, Dec 6, 16 @ 10:30 pm:
I agree with Honeybear. We are seeing many retirements. 20, 30, 40 years of experience replaced by no one.
- Annonnie - Wednesday, Dec 7, 16 @ 7:46 am:
Notice the Gov’s response did not include the pending layoffs and replacement staff contracts already in place?
- On My Own - Wednesday, Dec 7, 16 @ 8:53 am:
==Notice the Gov’s response did not include the pending layoffs and replacement staff contracts already in place?==
Do you have legitimate proof of these layoffs and replacement contracts?
- Rabid - Wednesday, Dec 7, 16 @ 9:18 am:
Got to hand it to them, unclean hands, hand picked, that’s underhanded talk
- Honeybear - Wednesday, Dec 7, 16 @ 9:24 am:
Bite me Deft. You are an IPI lickspittle nothing more. So are you paid per post or by the hour. I work every day for the poor disabled and elderly of this state. Keep it up. You contribute a lot to the reason why good irreplaceable public servants are leaving state employment in droves. Can’t wait for the schadenfreud of you needing something from the state and it not being there. Better put blankets food and water in your car for winter. If you slide off the highway no one will be there to get you.
- JT_video_Man - Wednesday, Dec 7, 16 @ 1:12 pm:
Dear Colleagues,
As you know, since the Labor Board’s ruling on November 15 that the State and AFSCME are at impasse, we have begun implementing $1,000 bonuses and other merit pay, instituted bereavement leave, and asked AFSCME to join us in jump-starting workplace safety task forces.
AFSCME responded by going to court to stop the State from implementing these and other common sense measures.
Once employees found out about AFSCME’s efforts, we started receiving questions like this one: “I was curious if the union blocked my $1000.00 bonus that I have earned or if the state was able to issue my check.”
Unfortunately, AFSCME obtained a court order that blocked bonuses, bereavement leave, and workplace safety task forces. On December 5, appearing before a judge who we believe has no jurisdiction to even hear the case, AFSCME got a temporary restraining (TRO) order that blocks the State’s implementation efforts. Until the TRO is lifted, no bonuses may be issued, nor may the State implement any other common-sense proposals.
We will of course vigorously challenge the TRO on appeal and keep you updated on the progress.
Sincerely,
JT
John Terranova
Deputy Director
CMS Office of Labor Relations
- A - Wednesday, Dec 7, 16 @ 1:34 pm:
So offensive! Does he really think anyone would rather have $1,000 (before taxes) than affordable healthcare, raises, and job security? No one believes that…. do they?