ILSA Issues Statement Following Suppression of House Bill 4148
Union condemns House Speaker Welch and Senate President Harmon after bill to establish framework for legislative staff to unionize is effectively killed.
We are the Organizing Committee of the Illinois Legislative Staff Association.
When House Bill 4148 was passed by the House in November last year, we dared to hope that a new day had begun in Illinois. We looked forward to the opportunity to work with the Senate to refine the bill, work out some of its shortcomings, and to begin the process of good-faith negotiations with the Speaker’s office toward which we had worked for so long.
Sadly, this has not been the case. Instead, once HB 4148 arrived in the Senate, it was sponsored by Senate President Don Harmon, who simply sat on it. It was not voted on, it was not debated, it was not assigned to a committee, it was not so much as considered. And when we reached out to Harmon’s staff to begin a dialogue on October 25, 2023, November 28, 2023 and February 9, 2024, we were ignored.
There will no doubt be a great deal of hand wringing and excuses about how the Speaker “can’t control the Senate.” Indeed, we’ve already been subjected to just this type of disingenuous rhetoric during our most recent perfunctory meeting with the Speaker’s team.
It’s easy to see why such excuses don’t hold water. Just look at Senate Bill 2412, which abolished the practice of parties slating candidates for election. That bill came out of nowhere on a Wednesday and was not only passed by both House and Senate, but signed into law by Governor Pritzker, by that Friday.
That is what happens when legislative leadership prioritizes a bill.
The handling of HB 4148–and the return of leadership to their former policy of stonewalling us–confirms what we already suspected, that there was never any intention of this bill becoming law. It is clear to us that Speaker Welch and President Harmon had an understanding: Welch would pass a bill to deflect rising criticism, and Harmon would make sure that the bill went no further.
Speaker Welch took advantage of our sincere desire to work with him and used it to score political points while continuing to undermine our efforts to organize. This whole exercise was nothing but a hollow ruse, meant to gaslight us while we drafted his bills, staffed his committees, crafted his talking points and analyzed his budget.
Following the introduction of HB 4148, Speaker Welch implied for all the world that ‘allowing’ us to unionize was his idea. We chose to tolerate this political theater while there appeared to be a good faith dialogue between ourselves and management. As long as there was finally going to be progress, we were content to allow Speaker Welch to save face.
But now, the Speaker and his team have chosen to spurn our goodwill and abuse our trust.
The truth is that Speaker Welch first had his aides rebuff his staff, then repeatedly ignored us for ten months, whined to other members of the House that we were ‘bullying’ him, and only accepted that he’d have to act after being repeatedly embarrassed in the press and realizing that we weren’t going away. Even then, he thought that he’d get away with passing a bill that created an empty husk of a union without the power to achieve any meaningful change.
Speaker Welch promised that there would be a new day in Springfield, but his stance when it comes to this issue shows that he intends to continue right on living in the Madigan era. It’s time for this Speaker to decide what his legacy will be in the context of workers’ rights. Will he deliver on his promise, or is he just another machine politician?
With the 2024 elections approaching, we hope our union siblings throughout Illinois are paying attention. We hope they are watching how Speaker Welch treats unions when they don’t have the money to fund his war chest—or to help him hamstring his political opponents during the primary season. We hope they are considering what this means for them–and whether their trust in the Speaker is misplaced. We hope they are asking themselves whether Speaker Welch will be there for them if, someday, they should need him more than he needs them. The same goes for President Don Harmon. We encourage our union siblings to think long and hard, and to act accordingly.
We hope businesses and chambers of commerce see how Speaker Welch is comfortable telling them to work with unions while he does the opposite. We hope they see how his stance on unions suddenly changes the moment it is he who would be potentially inconvenienced, not just the “little people.” “Unions for thee but not for me.”
With the DNC fast approaching, it’s also perplexing that the Speaker is comfortable showing such blatant hypocrisy when it comes to unions, given the unequivocal support for the right of every worker to organize explicitly laid out in the Democratic Party platform. Time will tell whether the DNC is so comfortable saying one thing while doing another that this is who they feel should represent the Democratic Party in Chicago this summer.
Where does that leave us? Now that it’s clear that there’s nothing to be gained by following any “process” laid out by the Speaker’s office, we’re through bending over backwards to be cooperative and collegial. We have always maintained that no new law is required to enable us to unionize, and that the Workers’ Rights Amendment guarantees all workers in Illinois the right to organize and bargain through their chosen representatives. We now intend to exercise that right, with or without the Speaker’s cooperation and without waiting an additional year, or more, for another poison-pill “legal framework”. The Speaker had the chance to craft a framework with which he was comfortable, and squandered it. That ship has sailed.
A legislative staff union has been formed and will negotiate on behalf of willing legislative employees. It is only a question of when–and of how much unpleasantness must impede the people’s work before that can happen. That decision is entirely Speaker Welch’s to make, and we call on him to make it.
ILSA would have preferred that it not have come to this. We would have preferred for the Speaker and his aides to have had the maturity, character and integrity to deal with us openly and honestly. But, sadly, this has not been the case.
Speaker Welch should put aside his misguided, union busting policies and voluntarily recognize ILSA’s proposed bargaining unit or hold an election administered by an impartial third party.
Regardless of the Speaker’s decision, ILSA will continue to fight until our rights are taken seriously. If Speaker Welch thought that charades and delaying tactics would put this behind him, then he is about to discover that he has been mistaken.
The people of Illinois deserve a government that embodies the principles it advocates, that conducts itself with integrity and that can effectively serve its constituents. Speaker Welch and President Harmon are not living up to that standard.
We are the Illinois Legislative Staff Association. We’ve said before that we are not giving up or going away. We will not be intimidated. We will not be dismissed. We will not be ignored.
- Nagidam - Tuesday, May 21, 24 @ 11:28 am:
A strike the last week of session would probably get leaderships attention. What are they going to do fire them and validate their concerns?
- Slugger O'Toole - Tuesday, May 21, 24 @ 11:30 am:
==We are the Illinois Legislative Staff Association. We’ve said before that we are not giving up or going away. We will not be intimidated. We will not be dismissed. We will not be ignored.==
If and only I could post a crybaby emoji.
- Joe Bidenopolous - Tuesday, May 21, 24 @ 11:31 am:
===If and only I could post a crybaby emoji.===
Ok, snowflake. You have no idea what these kids - mostly fresh out of college - go through. Grow up.
- Donnie Elgin - Tuesday, May 21, 24 @ 11:33 am:
=It’s easy to see why such excuses don’t hold water. Just look at Senate Bill 2412, which abolished the practice of parties slating candidates for election. That bill came out of nowhere on a Wednesday and was not only passed by both House and Senate, but signed into law by Governor Pritzker, by that Friday=
This sort of criticism is generally offered by GOP interest - refreshing to see an honest assessment of the crony legislative process from a Dem-aligned group.
- Rich Miller - Tuesday, May 21, 24 @ 11:36 am:
Good point, Donnie. That release had some real bite to it lol
- Blazzzer - Tuesday, May 21, 24 @ 11:47 am:
Well, that’s gotta make things a little awkward. With “friends” like these…
Maybe Harmon will amend the speakers bill to allow only house staff to unionize? Snark.
Jokes aside….Yeah being on staff was tough. That’s why you busted your rear to get out as soon as you could. A legislator always had someone who needed a job. It was a revolving door.
So what if they walked out? There are enough former staffers roaming the halls of the Capitol these days that I bet no one would even notice…
It is a different day in the house.
- Norseman - Tuesday, May 21, 24 @ 11:50 am:
This is becoming the stuff show I expected. I’ll turn the volume up grab the popcorn and enjoy the show.
- levivotedforjudy - Tuesday, May 21, 24 @ 11:50 am:
Welch and Harman are in a situation where if you talk the talk, you have to walk the walk. It’s pretty easy to pass laws that impose costs on other’s bottom lines. Even if they don’t want to do this, they must to maintain credibility with their pro-labor constituents.
- Rich Miller - Tuesday, May 21, 24 @ 11:51 am:
===There are enough former staffers roaming the halls of the Capitol these days that I bet no one would even notice===
Are you suggesting that lobbyists would drop their paying clients to work on the state budget during the final week of session?
- Blazzzer - Tuesday, May 21, 24 @ 11:54 am:
@Rich It’s one way to ensure their clients get taken care of in the budget. Heavy Snark.
- Been There - Tuesday, May 21, 24 @ 11:54 am:
Are they an association or a union. Big difference under the law. Associations can’t strike and have to be careful on using that word. They can have a contract dispute and encourage members to not show up. But they won’t have the protections that come with a union going out on strike.
- MG85 - Tuesday, May 21, 24 @ 11:57 am:
I remember sneering when the likes of Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren recognized their own campaign staffers organizing and recognizing such efforts.
Democrat or Republican, the employer is the employer. Mercedes is a German company whose country has some of the best labor laws on the planet, yet in Alabama they oppose basic rights their own country would find repugnant.
Likewise, here we are in deep blue, pro-union Illinois and leaders of the Democratic party are preventing their own workers from enjoying basic rights because it:
a) protects their bottom-line
b) concentrates their own power
It cannot be just obnoxious when GOPers are anti-union. We must hold Democrats accountable for these actions as well.
I stand with workers always. Especially in those corners where the law is literally against them.
- Larry Bowa Jr. - Tuesday, May 21, 24 @ 11:57 am:
“A legislator always had someone who needed a job. It was a revolving door.”
Only the best and brightest, in other words.
- Bob - Tuesday, May 21, 24 @ 11:59 am:
It only took them how many months to realize they were getting played by the Speaker?
- Norseman - Tuesday, May 21, 24 @ 12:01 pm:
Joe Bidenopolous, I know what these “kids” go through. I went through it. Unless they have their heads in a hole, they should know what to expect.
- JS Mill - Tuesday, May 21, 24 @ 12:02 pm:
=We will not be dismissed. We will not be ignored.=
A tour de force on how not to get what you want. Or, at least how to make it more difficult. And I get these folks are overworked and underpaid but there has to be a better way to achieve your goals.
- Excitable Boy - Tuesday, May 21, 24 @ 12:06 pm:
- Unless they have their heads in a hole, they should know what to expect. -
They do, which is why they voted to form a union. It’s amazing how proud anti union folks are to be boot lickers.
- Elmer - Tuesday, May 21, 24 @ 12:07 pm:
What do you think MJM would have done about this?
- Rich Miller - Tuesday, May 21, 24 @ 12:09 pm:
Elmer, why is that your question?
- Frida’s boss - Tuesday, May 21, 24 @ 12:12 pm:
Awkward
- Linda - Tuesday, May 21, 24 @ 12:31 pm:
The 2024 Session is proving to be quite complicated. Perhaps we will see our first overtime with JB as Governor?
- Seventh Floor - Tuesday, May 21, 24 @ 12:32 pm:
This is all about power and the leaders not wanting to give up an inch over their domains. The irony is they set themselves up for this when they passed the Workers Rights Amendment. Legislative staff had been pushing/whispering about unionization for years, even before the WRA. Now with the WRA it is impossible for them to continue to be ignored.
- Rich Miller - Tuesday, May 21, 24 @ 12:38 pm:
===The irony is they set themselves up for this when they passed the Workers Rights Amendment===
Yep…
“Employees shall have the fundamental right to organize and to bargain collectively through representatives of their own choosing for the purpose of negotiating wages, hours, and working conditions, and to protect their economic welfare and safety at work.”
- Who else - Tuesday, May 21, 24 @ 12:44 pm:
I do not understand why they don’t just pay their employees fairly and give them time off and benefits.
- Give Us Barabbas - Tuesday, May 21, 24 @ 12:53 pm:
Sauce, goose, gander. Welch opened the door, now he has to go through it, or be seen as a hypocrite and someone who doesn’t honor a deal. Ultimately, that takes more power from him than just getting on board with the union. In politics, your word on a deal, once made, is your major currency.
- Hannibal Lecter - Tuesday, May 21, 24 @ 12:55 pm:
=== A strike the last week of session would probably get leaderships attention. What are they going to do fire them and validate their concerns? ===
Yes - that would be the prudent thing to do actually.
- Pot calling kettle - Tuesday, May 21, 24 @ 12:56 pm:
How easy or difficult the job might be is beside the point. Workers in Illinois have the right to organize and bargain. Speaker Welch and President Harmon have the opportunity to set an example; unfortunately, they are setting the wrong one.
Pass the bill, recognize the unit, bargain in good faith, sign a contract.
- VK - Tuesday, May 21, 24 @ 1:03 pm:
Could we get someone check the structural integrity of all of the pearls that are being clutched in this comment section? It’s a smidge higher than normal.
Heaven help a group of people who were fed lip service might be a little irritated about being denied the right to unionize by the political party who can’t stop telling people that everyone has the right to unionize.
- Rich Miller - Tuesday, May 21, 24 @ 1:04 pm:
===that would be the prudent thing to do actually===
lol
Yeah, no blowback for doing that whatsoever. Nope. It’ll all be fine.
- Hannibal Lecter - Tuesday, May 21, 24 @ 1:10 pm:
=== I do not understand why they don’t just pay their employees fairly and give them time off and benefits. ===
They do get paid time off and benefits. They just don’t like their salaries. They can bargain all they want over salaries, but management doesn’t have to budge.
These staffers do not have nearly as bad of conditions as the staff of old. They do not even work campaigns. The overworked angle is laughable if you consider the way things used to be. And before criticizing me for talking about the “good old days”, know that the job is hard. Some people use it as an opportunity to hone their skills and develop their craft and use it as a stepping stone to a much more rewarding career, at least from a financial standpoint. Others do not.
The biggest reason why unionization is a bad idea here is because these staffers are supposed to be politically exempt from hiring and firing rules. What good is a staffer that has a propensity for writing negative press releases that politically hurts their bosses? Creating political problems for your boss when you are yourself a political employee is a ridiculous way to try and make money. Arguably, it is a terminable offense. That is what makes it different from the trades and even what makes them different from the public sector unions. SEIU and AFSCME do not have policymaking employees in their ranks.
- Rich Miller - Tuesday, May 21, 24 @ 1:11 pm:
===They do not even work campaigns===
Approp staff did not generally work campaigns in “the days of old.”
- Hannibal Lecter - Tuesday, May 21, 24 @ 1:12 pm:
=== Yeah, no blowback for doing that whatsoever. Nope. It’ll all be fine. ===
There will be blowback either way. Might as well show your cards when the opportunity presents itself.
- Hannibal Lecter - Tuesday, May 21, 24 @ 1:12 pm:
=== Approp staff did not generally work campaigns in “the days of old.” ===
That is true. For some reason they got to skate.
- Been There - Tuesday, May 21, 24 @ 1:15 pm:
==== Perhaps we will see our first overtime with JB as Governor?====
Pretty sure 2019 went at least a few days over.
- VK - Tuesday, May 21, 24 @ 1:20 pm:
==what good is a staffer that has a propensity for writing negative press releases that politically hurts their bosses?==.
Careful on that slippery slope lest you hit that straw man you just put up. Went to “they won’t be professional enough to realize they shouldn’t do the opposite of their job” real fast.
- King Louis XVI - Tuesday, May 21, 24 @ 1:20 pm:
=== Approp staff did not generally work campaigns in “the days of old.” ===
They might be thrown into a few spots at the end to fill holes in some GOTV operations.
- Minnesotan - Tuesday, May 21, 24 @ 1:22 pm:
===These staffers do not have nearly as bad of conditions as the staff of old.===
Just because other people worked in poor conditions, they should too?
- Thoughts - Tuesday, May 21, 24 @ 1:22 pm:
I am not sure who thinks approp staff did not work on campaigns, a lot of them did. Not true at all.
- Hannibal Lecter - Tuesday, May 21, 24 @ 1:23 pm:
=== Just because other people worked in poor conditions, they should too? ===
As I stated above, the biggest reason why unionization is a bad idea here is because these staffers are supposed to be politically exempt from hiring and firing rules. What good is a staffer that has a propensity for writing negative press releases that politically hurts their bosses? Creating political problems for your boss when you are yourself a political employee is a ridiculous way to try and make money. Arguably, it is a terminable offense. That is what makes it different from the trades and even what makes them different from the public sector unions. SEIU and AFSCME do not have policymaking employees in their ranks.
- Rich Miller - Tuesday, May 21, 24 @ 1:25 pm:
===these staffers are supposed to be politically exempt from hiring and firing rules===
And yet, some campaigns are unionized.
- Soccermom - Tuesday, May 21, 24 @ 1:30 pm:
=== Are you suggesting that lobbyists would drop their paying clients to work on the state budget during the final week of session? ===
Haha! That might work out VERY nicely for their paying clients.
- Rich Miller - Tuesday, May 21, 24 @ 1:32 pm:
The House is right now debating a bill that would allow Assistant State’s Attorneys, Assistant Public Defenders, and Assistant Appellate Defenders to unionize without no-strike provisions https://ilga.gov/legislation/billstatus.asp?DocNum=2371&GAID=17&GA=103&DocTypeID=SB&LegID=147263&SessionID=112
- Hannibal Lecter - Tuesday, May 21, 24 @ 1:35 pm:
=== And yet, some campaigns are unionized. ===
I also disagree with that.
- Hannibal Lecter - Tuesday, May 21, 24 @ 1:37 pm:
=== The House is right now debating a bill that would allow Assistant State’s Attorneys, Assistant Public Defenders, and Assistant Appellate Defenders to unionize without no-strike provisions ===
Really bad policy there. House shooting itself in the foot.
- Rich Miller - Tuesday, May 21, 24 @ 1:37 pm:
…And the bill passed 73-36
- low level - Tuesday, May 21, 24 @ 1:38 pm:
==Approp staff did not generally work campaigns in “the days of old.”==
I seem to recall most targeted campaigns had one issues staffer and one research / approp staffer. Am I wrong?
- JS Mill - Tuesday, May 21, 24 @ 1:38 pm:
=Pass the bill, recognize the unit, bargain in good faith, sign a contract.=
This. If you have any fiscal acumen or communication skills bargaining is not that big of a deal. Not saying unions won’t try to get what they can (they should to some extent) or that all unions are good actors (see CTU) but in my experience collective bargaining is far easier and solves a lot of problems for me.
We have to stop falling for every boogeyman argument and focus on getting things done.
- Peach pit - Tuesday, May 21, 24 @ 1:38 pm:
The senate should amend it by giving free bus rides to seniors and send it back to the house.
- Pot calling kettle - Tuesday, May 21, 24 @ 1:44 pm:
If the current situation for staff is good, there is no guarantee it will continue to be. A contract would help ensure those good conditions continue. If there are concerns, they can be raised by union leadership rather than individual staffers who might be concerned bringing something up could result in dismissal.
Unions support workers and help level the playing field between individual workers and their employer. It is difficult for me to understand what a staff union would hurt other than dictatorial bosses who don’t like to have their authority and pronouncements questioned.
- new kid on the block - Tuesday, May 21, 24 @ 1:46 pm:
Linda, are you new here? 2019, 2021 and 2023 all went overtime.
- 8657 - Tuesday, May 21, 24 @ 1:57 pm:
The GA is about to pass a bill that prohibits businesses from having mandatory employee “union busting meetings.” Ironically, the bill exempts the GA from this prohibition. SB 3649 on Second Reading in the House.
https://ilga.gov/legislation/fulltext.asp?DocName=10300SB3649ham001&GA=103&SessionId=11
2&DocTypeId=SB&LegID=153595&DocNum=3649&GAID=17&SpecSess=&Session=
- low level - Tuesday, May 21, 24 @ 1:59 pm:
Im about as old school as they come. 25 years ago I would have laughed at the idea of staff unionizing. That ship sailed w WRA passage. I still dont really care for the idea but its a new day. Leadership needs to get on with it. They are delaying the inevitable and making themselves look bad in the process.
- Rich Miller - Tuesday, May 21, 24 @ 2:03 pm:
===Ironically, the bill exempts the GA===
LOL
- ChrisB - Tuesday, May 21, 24 @ 2:21 pm:
Can Scabby make a road trip?
- TJ - Tuesday, May 21, 24 @ 2:38 pm:
The speaker claiming that he hopes something is signed into law sounds akin to a prosecutor saying that he’s hopeful that a grand jury would vote to indict. If you’re worth your salt in that position, it’s not even close to a matter of “if,” unless the “if” is in reference to “if they want it or not.”
- wildcat12 - Tuesday, May 21, 24 @ 3:23 pm:
=Linda, are you new here? 2019, 2021 and 2023 all went overtime.=
Depends on how you define overtime. The GA went past its scheduled adjournment date in 2023 but still adjourned before May 31. I personally define overtime as anything past May 31 when the requirement for a supermajority to pass bills kicks in.
But yes, 2019 and 2021 both fit that bill.
- Saluki - Tuesday, May 21, 24 @ 3:39 pm:
I was on approp staff from 98-03 and worked my fair share of campaigns.
- saluki - Tuesday, May 21, 24 @ 3:42 pm:
I was an approp staffer from 98-03 and worked my fair share of campaigns. Although I think it’s a bad idea, I do think Welch and Harmon need to negotiate in good faith and let the bill move forward.
- Excitable Boy - Tuesday, May 21, 24 @ 3:43 pm:
- because these staffers are supposed to be politically exempt from hiring and firing rules. -
Those rules can all be negotiated in a contract. What you seem to want is for management to be able to do whatever they feel like at any given moment.
- Dr. Love - Tuesday, May 21, 24 @ 4:16 pm:
How can a legislative body whose composition is subject to change and (in theory) change of control every two years bind itself to workforce with cumbersome union hir ing and firing restrictions? This is daft. Only in Illinois.
- Just Me 2 - Tuesday, May 21, 24 @ 5:23 pm:
The only drama this story needs but doesn’t have yet is for Harmon to put the same language on a different bill and pass it to the House.
That’s never been done before.
- Hannibal Lecter - Tuesday, May 21, 24 @ 5:26 pm:
===
- because these staffers are supposed to be politically exempt from hiring and firing rules. -
Those rules can all be negotiated in a contract. What you seem to want is for management to be able to do whatever they feel like at any given moment. ===
No. There are certain positions that are political in nature that are at will and can consider politics in employment decisions. It is an inherent management right. That should be non-negotiable from “management’s” perspective. You need people in political positions to be in lockstep with you politically - not create political problems for you. Anyone who has ever been in management in a government setting would agree. You have to retain autonomy over those positions.
- Rich Miller - Wednesday, May 22, 24 @ 12:49 am:
===whose composition is subject to change and (in theory) change of control every two years===
Now do private businesses, which are infinitely subject to change.
- Excitable Boy - Wednesday, May 22, 24 @ 5:44 am:
- There are certain positions that are political in nature that are at will and can consider politics in employment decisions. -
Joe Biden’s campaign was union in 2020 and is again. There are ways to make this work if you have an ounce of creativity and can’t just mimic the way things were when you did something.