Latest Post | Last 10 Posts | Archives
Previous Post: Pritzker embraces big state and local education spending increases
Next Post: Ives’ new pension legal theory
Posted in:
* AFSCME Council 31…
Fighting state workers and our union every step of the way—and insisting on using a high-priced outside law firm to do so—Bruce Rauner has already run up a legal tab of more than $6 million.
Now on his way out the door, Rauner hasn’t changed his stripes. Refusing to accept yet another court ruling won by AFSCME—the appellate court decision stating that the Rauner-appointed state labor board erred in finding that the governor and the union had reached impasse in state contract negotiations—on Nov. 27 his administration asked for another 60 days in which to file an appeal to the state Supreme Court.
AFSCME now has an opportunity to respond, after which the justices will consider whether to allow the governor’s late appeal.
Rauner’s ongoing delay tactics and refusal to accept legal findings make clear that he’s never had any intention of bargaining in good faith with state workers.
What’s certain is that Rauner’s $6 million meter counting the public dollars he’s wasted on costly lawyers will keep ticking even higher.
* So, what’s with that $6 million legal tab? Rauner has used outside counsel to fight AFSCME and bargain with other unions instead of using the state’s lawyers. Council 31 has used the FOIA laws to track his spending, which it claims is $6 million and still climbing.
I asked for documentation and they sent me a spreadsheet. Click here.
There are three tabs on that spreadsheet. The union says each tab shows the invoices paid by the Rauner administration to the law firm Laner Muchin. The firm “exclusively represents management in employment-related litigation, labor relations,” etc.
At the bottom of each tab, you’ll see a total amount for the time period…
Jan. 2015-Nov. 2016: $2.82 million
Dec. 2016-Oct. 2017: $1.31 million
Oct. 2017-Sept. 2018: $1.86 million
Not all of these expenses are directly related to AFSCME. Some are about other unions. Anyway, have a look and tell us what pops out at you.
posted by Rich Miller
Wednesday, Nov 28, 18 @ 10:41 am
Sorry, comments are closed at this time.
Previous Post: Pritzker embraces big state and local education spending increases
Next Post: Ives’ new pension legal theory
WordPress Mobile Edition available at alexking.org.
powered by WordPress.
Looks like the impasse hearings were the biggest single expense. Which is odd, because didn’t the final ruling determine that an impasse was never reached?
“Sucker state indeed,” laughed Laner Muchin.
Comment by 47th Ward Wednesday, Nov 28, 18 @ 10:45 am
Sore loser is what it tells me.
Comment by Steward As Well Wednesday, Nov 28, 18 @ 10:46 am
The bigger issue is why hasn’t he yet paid those state workers? Shouldn’t they be paid what they are owed immediately? Rauner gets to play above the law while the lowest paid workers suffer. He should be held in contempt of court and ordered to pay immediately.
Comment by Real Wednesday, Nov 28, 18 @ 10:53 am
It’s not just the costs for legal representation. It’s also the interest costs that are racking up every day he doesn’t pay the back step increases that are owed. This Governor seems to like to “run up the tab” on everything. No budget. Ran up the tab of interest owed. Refusing to abide by court orders. Run up the tab on interest owed. How he managed to make it in business is beyond me. He doesn’t seem to be all that great of a “businessman” at least when it comes to operating the business of government.
Comment by Demoralized Wednesday, Nov 28, 18 @ 10:54 am
AFSCME also has legal counsel on staff but consistently spends over $1 million per year on legal fees for Cornfield and Feldman and Dowd, Bloch, Bennett, Cervone, Auerbach & Yokich. Most companies have legal staff but attorneys on retainer. Is the state an outlier in this regard?
“The firm “exclusively represents management in employment-related litigation, labor relations,” etc.”
What were they expecting? AFSCME’s representation Dowd et al profile reads: “Our attorneys provide general counseling and representation to labor unions in all areas of their activity…” and their URL is laboradvocates.com
Comment by City Zen Wednesday, Nov 28, 18 @ 10:56 am
City Zen
But taxpayers aren’t paying for AFSCME lawyers. Big difference smart guy.
Comment by Real Wednesday, Nov 28, 18 @ 10:58 am
For what it is worth, Laner Muchin handled labor relations matters for the Quinn administration too. A FOIA to CMS should identify several contracts with the firm going back to 2013 if not earlier.
Not that it matters for AFSCME or Rauner at this point when it comes to giving the full picture, but I’m not sure there was much “insisting” on the part of the administration to go with the same firm Quinn used.
Comment by Reserved Wednesday, Nov 28, 18 @ 11:02 am
City Zen
You really don’t see the difference? You’re smarter than that.
Comment by Demoralized Wednesday, Nov 28, 18 @ 11:02 am
Demoralized. Rauner running up the tab on everything reminded me of the oft quoted Goodfellas.
“And, finally, when there’s nothing left, when you can’t borrow another buck from the bank or buy another case of booze, you bust the joint out.”
Comment by don the legend Wednesday, Nov 28, 18 @ 11:02 am
Laner Muchin has been working for the state since before Rauner.
Would be interesting to see their bills during the Quinn years.
Seems to be quite a bit billed to “General Governor’s Office” and “General Counseling”.
Comment by Henry Francis Wednesday, Nov 28, 18 @ 11:04 am
When Pritzker resumes negotiations after taking office the impasse appeal would be tossed, right?
Comment by El Conquistador Wednesday, Nov 28, 18 @ 11:12 am
Pritzker presumably will be appointing more union-friendly members to the Labor Relations Board as well. No more strained impasse findings.
Comment by Anonymous Wednesday, Nov 28, 18 @ 11:31 am
El Conuistador, almost certainly; even if the state didn’t it wouldn’t really matter, as the new governor would need to negotiate a new contract.
Comment by Perrid Wednesday, Nov 28, 18 @ 11:31 am
Demoralized - City Zen doesn’t believe that state workers are tax payers, so in his own little reality Afscme must be passing their lawyer expenses to “real” taxpayers, like himself. /s
Comment by Ike Wednesday, Nov 28, 18 @ 11:40 am
With the useless time to file an appeal to the Illinois Supreme Court request, Rauner’s doing one final spit on AFSCME. He purposely and needlessly hurt many of the most vulnerable, caused billions of dollars of damage and ripped off state workers to the tune of hundreds of millions of dollars.
AFSCME is still standing while Rauner’s political career lies in a big heap.
Pritzker will be governor soon, so as the employer he should have the power to restart negotiations with AFSCME. This Rauner decision seems to be just a nasty parting shot.
Comment by Grandson of Man Wednesday, Nov 28, 18 @ 11:41 am
The contract negotiations will be interesting. I mean, AFSCME and Pritzker will presumably negotiate a contract retroactive to July 1, 2015, which will mean even more back pay for missed COLAs.
And they’ll have to finish that quickly, because assuming they agree to a four-year contract, they’ll have to immediately resume bargaining for a new contract to begin on July 1, 2019.
What a mess. Thanks, Brucie.
Comment by Nick Name Wednesday, Nov 28, 18 @ 11:41 am
In spite of all the dollars spent, and time wasted by Rauner on anti-union activities, he “accomplished” none of his goals. Rauner wasn’t even good at being bad.
Comment by Molly Maguire Wednesday, Nov 28, 18 @ 11:42 am
==But taxpayers aren’t paying for AFSCME lawyers.==
So all the attorneys working for the state are distinctly qualified to represent the state in each and every aspect of all legal matters?
Comment by City Zen Wednesday, Nov 28, 18 @ 11:44 am
Rauner as always has been trying to increase amounts owed so he could have the state declare bankruptcy or pay a % on money owed. He also wants to bankrupt the union and others with legal fees.
Comment by Barrington Wednesday, Nov 28, 18 @ 11:47 am
===So all the attorneys working for the state are distinctly qualified to represent the state in each and every aspect of all legal matters?===
Are you saying that CMS has no attorneys who are expert in labor law?
Comment by Nick Name Wednesday, Nov 28, 18 @ 11:48 am
Labor and union expertise is so lacking within the GOP they have to have it hired out.
Even back in my days, conservatives didn’t even bother to study these fields of government. GOP upstarts never thought that unions would be around long enough to learn the subject.
The ignorance between pro and anti union debaters is astounding. Neither side understands the other.There cannot be compromise without respect. There is little respect.
So Rauner hired out. He couldn’t find anyone to do the job within his administration. Sad.
Comment by VanillaMan Wednesday, Nov 28, 18 @ 11:49 am
==But taxpayers aren’t paying for AFSCME lawyers.==
So all the attorneys working for the state are distinctly qualified ….–
You sure are quick to change the subject when your original nonsense is called out.
Comment by wordslinger Wednesday, Nov 28, 18 @ 11:56 am
==Rauner as always has been trying to increase amounts owed so he could have the state declare bankruptcy or pay a % on money owed.==
It’s hard to believe that Rauner is that stupid.
==He also wants to bankrupt the union and others with legal fees.==
Maybe. But couldn’t they get the court to get the state to pay their fees if the won?
Comment by Da Big Bad Wolf Wednesday, Nov 28, 18 @ 11:58 am
Well, but, actually, taxpayers are paying for those union legal fees. You’ll see it under the section entitled “union dues” on their paycheck.
Comment by A State Employee Guy Wednesday, Nov 28, 18 @ 12:00 pm
I do not know the math, but would be interested to understand what the total $ amount is paid to union members in salary and benefits and compare that number to $6 million over 4 years. It seems to me that it may be fiscally prudent to get outside expertise when the relative cost is a small portion of the amount reviewed.
Comment by Mod Dem Wednesday, Nov 28, 18 @ 12:03 pm
Technically, Rauner needs to seek outside counsel. Normally, when the State wants to go to court, it needs to be represented by the AG. Considering that the AG disagreed with Rauner on these issues. He needed outside counsel. That said, he wasted a lot of money on nothing. But if his plan was to waste a lot of AFSCME money, he did that by making them spend money on outside counsel instead of spending money on lobbying efforts or employee representation.
Comment by Unionman Wednesday, Nov 28, 18 @ 12:05 pm
=== actually, taxpayers are paying===
No they are not. Don’t be so silly. That money belongs to the union members.
Comment by Rich Miller Wednesday, Nov 28, 18 @ 12:07 pm
Mod Dem, that’s a good starting point, but you’d also have to consider the increase to the pensions for all those employees that result from the increased salaries and benefits. But of course, you have to consider losing the cases you spend millions, and having to pay all those salary/benefit increases anyway, but now you owe them interest on the back pay.
Comment by A State Employee Guy Wednesday, Nov 28, 18 @ 12:08 pm
Union members aren’t taxpayers, or…?
Comment by A State Employee Guy Wednesday, Nov 28, 18 @ 12:08 pm
White whale hunting is expensive..this pales compared to the billion in interest cost Rauner has left us with.
Comment by Anotheretiree Wednesday, Nov 28, 18 @ 12:15 pm
A state employee guy - I think Rich misinterpreted your comment.
Comment by Ime Wednesday, Nov 28, 18 @ 12:17 pm
==You sure are quick to change the subject==
I’ll take that to mean the answer is no.
Do you have the meeting notes for the “2015 State Police Troopers Negotiations - ISP” or “Impasse Hearing”? I’m sure we can get to the bottom of this.
Comment by City Zen Wednesday, Nov 28, 18 @ 12:17 pm
There’s also the taxpayer money Rauner wasted, and is still wasting, on the 7% interest on the backpay he illegally withheld per appellate court decision.
Comment by Anon Wednesday, Nov 28, 18 @ 12:24 pm
CZ- but I thought Rauner had the best of the best working for him. Wouldn’t that include his legal staff through CMS? Thought he only hired superstars.
Comment by Fixer Wednesday, Nov 28, 18 @ 12:37 pm
“Union members aren’t taxpayers, or…?” Sounds like a logic puzzle. “All Union members are tax payers, but not all tax payers are union members.” Yes, I know if the question says “All” or “Never” the answer is false, please don’t get pedantic.
Comment by Skeptic Wednesday, Nov 28, 18 @ 12:48 pm
I see strike plan legal expenditures just as AFSCME contact negotiations were starting. If I’m reading this right, it looks like a strike was what Rauner wanted or expected all along—shutting things down for a while.
Comment by Grandson of Man Wednesday, Nov 28, 18 @ 12:50 pm
I wonder if the IPI considered this $6million in its $54 million potential cost savings proclamation.
Prediction. There will be less AFSCME members in four years as there is today.
Comment by Blue Dog Dem Wednesday, Nov 28, 18 @ 12:57 pm
Is. Are.
Comment by Blue Dog Dem Wednesday, Nov 28, 18 @ 12:58 pm
A State Employee Guy, once wages are paid to employees, the money is no longer “taxpayer dollars”. AFSCME is solely funded from wages earned by members paid in the form of dues deducted from those earnings. My income comes from taxpayer dollars but my income is not taxpayer dollars. It is mine.
Comment by Steve Polite Wednesday, Nov 28, 18 @ 1:13 pm
Surprising to me was the $ spent on the State Police negotiations and all the “Not Subject to State Indemnification” on the last tab.
Seems to me it would be wise and a simple for any administration to hire someone skilled in Labor relations/negotiations.
Comment by nadia Wednesday, Nov 28, 18 @ 1:20 pm
AFSCME should have given Rauner the strike he wanted in 2015 instead of signing an agreement with him. Theyveither got outsmarted or figured the majority of the men Sergio is maxed out on pay and would have crossed the line and left the newer hires hanging out to dry.
Comment by Anon Wednesday, Nov 28, 18 @ 1:20 pm
==but I thought Rauner had the best of the best working for him.==
Without any context as to the nature of these proceedings, the quantity of legal work in general, state priorities, skill sets, etc, or context in relation to previous administrations and similar negotiations, how can we assess the quality of staff?
I’m by no means advocating the expense as I’m sure there are better ways to spend money than on lawyers. I just find it humorous that a union with attorneys on staff outsources their legal duties but expects the state to use its own employees.
Comment by City Zen Wednesday, Nov 28, 18 @ 1:49 pm
“AFSCME should have given Rauner the strike he wanted in 2015 instead of signing an agreement with him.” Nobody wins in a strike.
Comment by Skeptic Wednesday, Nov 28, 18 @ 2:28 pm
Anon- what are you talking about? We never signed an agreement with Rauner. We took him to court and kicked his can.
Comment by Honeybear Wednesday, Nov 28, 18 @ 2:55 pm
“Nobody wins in a strike.”
Nobody wanted a strike. That’s the so-called nuclear option, the last resort. The union worked very hard to either settle things through arbitration or return to the bargaining table.
Rauner apparently knew very early that he was going to try to force state workers to eat a [expletive] sandwich and force a strike. Terrible faith and intent.
Comment by Grandson of Man Wednesday, Nov 28, 18 @ 3:17 pm
==Prediction. There will be less AFSCME members in four years as there is today.==
Helluva prediction. Any particular reason why Honeybear?
Comment by MG85 Wednesday, Nov 28, 18 @ 3:20 pm
MG85, that was BDD, not Honeybear.
The fact that they were looking at strike options that early on isn’t overly surprising, given the fact that he had already made comments to the effect of he might have to take a strike to get what he wanted. It does show a distinct lack of good faith in negotiations though, to me. Someone with more experience than me might be able to say if that’s a common practice during contract negotiations or not.
Comment by Fixer Wednesday, Nov 28, 18 @ 3:29 pm
==I just find it humorous that a union with attorneys on staff outsources their legal duties but expects the state to use its own employees.==
You’ve completely missed the point. The point is that the state has been spending money on a losing battle. I agree with AFSCME that it’s been a waste of time.
Comment by Demoralized Wednesday, Nov 28, 18 @ 3:33 pm
== The point is that the state has been spending money on a losing battle.==
You just described 50% of all legal battles.
Comment by City Zen Wednesday, Nov 28, 18 @ 4:35 pm
City Zen == So all the attorneys working for the state are distinctly qualified to represent the state in each and every aspect of all legal matters? ==
Actually, the AG is the only one qualified to represent the State in court.
Comment by Whatever Wednesday, Nov 28, 18 @ 5:06 pm
Hi all, here every one is sharing these experience, thus it’s nice to read this website, and I used to pay a visit this webpage every day.
Comment by bachelorette parties Thursday, Nov 29, 18 @ 4:59 am
^
What that bot said.
Comment by A State Employee Guy Thursday, Nov 29, 18 @ 8:59 am
Honeybear, I was referring to the tolling agreement.
Comment by Anon Thursday, Nov 29, 18 @ 11:47 am