(The Center Square) – Plaintiffs in a lawsuit against House Speaker Emanuel “Chris” Welch, D-Hillside, are requesting that a judge deny Welch’s motion to dismiss a case where Illinois Statehouse staffers are seeking to collectively bargain.
Welch’s motion includes an accusation that the legislative staff forum shopped, which is a strategy of filing a case in a particular venue that the filing party, in this case the staff and lead plaintiff Brady Burden, believes will be more favorable to its interests. Burden said that the staff didn’t do that.
“They accuse us of forum shopping, which is disingenuous considering the whole reason we went to [Illinois Labor Relations Board] was basically at their advice in an attempt to not have to sue the speaker, which is a bad look for everybody,” said Burden. “We even said that ‘we don’t think ILRB has jurisdiction’ and ILRB said the same thing that they don’t have jurisdiction and that we need to go through the courts.”
The Illinois Labor Relations Board, according to Burden, ruled that state statute excludes legislative employees and because of that they can’t rule something unconstitutional or if Welch is required to adhere to recently passed Workers’ Rights Amendment. The amendment, which enshrined in the Illinois Constitution the right of workers to collectively bargain, passed in 2022.
“Because they are an administrative agency, all they can really do is look at existing case law and their statute. What they [ILRB] can’t do is rule something unconstitutional, that’s something for the courts to decide,” Burden said.
The Illinois Labor Relations Board is the state agency that administers the Illinois Public Labor Relations Act, the primary law governing relations between unions and public employers.
Burden said in a request to the court that Welch is not “above the law,” especially law set out now in the Illinois Constitution.
“He has been very pro-labor and I agree with him on a vast majority of issues, but unfortunately there’s something about becoming a boss or a manager that changes the way your outlook and the way you interact with the people you employ,” said Burden. “That’s something he needs to do some soul searching on and resolve that internal conflict.”
When asked about any reprisal for speaking out, Burden said nothing that would stand up in court.
“But the distaste is very clear,” Burden told The Center Square. “People feel scandalized that anybody would dare speak out at all.”
Republicans suggest Welch is fighting this in court and filed a motion to dismiss because Welch’s party, which holds a supermajority in both the House and Senate, won’t be able to pass bills and budgets at 2 a.m. because future contracts may prohibit staff from working into the wee hours of the morning.
The plaintiffs aren’t looking for money but rather they want Welch to meet and confer about the wages, hours and working conditions of legislative staff.
Welch’s motion to dismiss has five parts to it.
“The first argument is basically saying that because he is a legislator doing legislative business he is immune from liability in this instance,” said Burden.
The plaintiffs said Welch has not even attempted to show why a pay raise, a vacation, or protection against sexual harassment would interfere with the enactment of legislation.
Messages from The Center Square seeking comment from Welch’s office were not immediately returned.
In the weeks ahead, Burden expects a hearing about the motion to dismiss. If the motion to dismiss is struck down then the parties could have a court date in September about the substance of the case.
Greg Bishop contributed to this report.
