|
ILLINOIS
SUPREME COURT DENIES CHICAGO POLICE UNION REQUEST TO DESTROY MISCONDUCT
RECORDS
Illinois Policy Institute/
Mailee Smith
While
Illinois law explicitly states union contracts trump all other state
laws, the Illinois Supreme Court ruled a police contract allowing the
destruction of disciplinarily records defies public policy and cannot be
enforced. |
|
 The Illinois Supreme Court issued an opinion June 18 denying a
police union request to destroy police disciplinary records five years after the
date of the incident or discovery of the incident.
The Fraternal Order of Police argued its collective bargaining agreement with
the City of Chicago requires the destruction of records, despite state law to
the contrary. The court disagreed.
The ruling helps provide much needed transparency in a city that has been rocked
with police misconduct scandals in the past, and during nationwide calls for
police reform.
The union contract between the city and the Fraternal Order of Police has
inhibited public knowledge and investigation of police misconduct for decades.
Baked into section 8.4 of the contract is the following provision:
All disciplinary investigation files, disciplinary history card entries, IPRA
and IAD disciplinary records, and any other disciplinary record or summary of
such record other than records related to Police Board cases, will be destroyed
five (5) years after the date of the incident or the date upon which the
violation is discovered, whichever is longer…
This section effectively allowed the union to hide police misconduct once five
years passed. Not only were such files unobtainable by the public, but they also
were no longer accessible in subsequent internal investigations of officer
misconduct.
But on June 18, the Illinois Supreme Court ruled the enforcement of section 8.4
defies state law establishing “a well-defined public policy favoring the proper
retention of important public records for access by the public.”
Specifically, the court held the provision in 8.4 is trumped by the state’s
Local Records Act, which prohibits the destruction of public records.
And that means the union can no longer hide police misconduct once five years
have passed.
[
to
top of second column] |
While the case involved only the Fraternal Order of
Police contract, substantially similar provisions also are included
in the City of Chicago’s contracts with sergeants, lieutenants and
captains.
In addition to championing transparency, the
court’s decision strikes a blow to Illinois’ collective bargaining
laws. The Illinois Public Labor Relations Act states the following:
(b) Except as provided in subsection (a) above, any collective
bargaining contract between a public employer and a labor
organization executed pursuant to this Act shall supersede any
contrary statutes, charters, ordinances, rules or regulations
relating to wages, hours and conditions of employment and employment
relations adopted by the public employer or its agents.
After citing this section, the court went on to hold that union
contracts, and arbitration awards based on those contracts, cannot
trump state law where a “public policy exception” exists.
The court repeated precedent that it “will not enforce a
collective-bargaining agreement that is repugnant to established
norms of public policy.”
In his dissent from the majority opinion, Justice Thomas L. Kilbride
noted the state’s labor laws establish a “‘well-defined and
dominant’ public policy” favoring collective bargaining and the
enforcement of arbitration awards.
In other words, the court was deciding between competing public
policies: the non-destruction of public records versus the
enforcement of collective bargaining agreements and arbitration
awards.
And the court chose public interest over enforcement of those union
contract provisions.
While the Illinois Supreme Court did not explicitly overrule the
Illinois statutory provision allowing collective bargaining
agreements to trump state law, this decision certainly undermines
its effect.
Click here to respond to the editor about this article
|
