Lake County Circuit Clerk Keith Brin said he has decided not to take an appellate court ruling on the formation of a union in the circuit clerk’s office to the Illinois Supreme Court.
Brin said he will not appeal the ruling of an Illinois appeals court that the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees has been properly certified as the bargaining representative of clerks in his office.
In a statement released by his office, Brin said that although his position throughout the litigation has been that the union used “fraud and coercion” to obtain the signatures needed to serve as the certified representative of the employees, he will respect the appellate ruling.
“My arguments have been heard and the appellate court was not sufficiently persuaded — therefore, my duty is to follow the law and begin to negotiate,” Brin said in a statement. “We will abide by the law.”
The 2nd District Appellate Court recently upheld a ruling by the Illinois Labor Relations Board and an administrative law judge that a vote to unionize by some employees of the Lake County Circuit Court’s office did not involve fraud or coercion, as alleged by the office’s administration.
The ruling held that AFSCME Council 31 held a legal vote to unionize nonmanagement workers in the office earlier this year.
Following the Appellate Court ruling, Circuit Court Chief Deputy Clerk Jeanne Polydoris had said in a statement that “the people of Lake County deserve better.”
“We’ve seen what AFSCME has done to the state of Illinois and with that said, we are disappointed that the Appellate Court did not agree with the fraud and coercion (evidence) we presented,” Polydoris said.
Polydoris was cited in the appellate ruling as having submitted information that she was told by four employees that prospective union members were sought out at their homes in an attempt to get them to sign up with the union and that some said they felt uncomfortable as a result.
Brin’s new statement says that his “steadfast position has been that he was elected to represent the taxpayers in the process, and that taxpayers are already struggling under the weight of government overspending and high taxes.”
Brin said he took steps during his first term in office to consolidate top management positions, eliminating nearly $400,000 in salaries and benefits and reducing the office’s overall budget by over $2.5 million, amounting to more than 20 percent in savings.
He also said he has restructured the circuit clerk’s office to reduce head count, made user-friendly technology accessible to the general public and increased services to the community.
Following the Appellate Court ruling, Erin Cartwright Weinstein, Brin’s Democratic challenger in the November general election, said she was happy with the court’s decision.
“I was pleased to learn that the 2nd District Appellate Court in Elgin dismissed Keith Brin’s frivolous complaint against his hardworking union employees,” she said. “Mr. Brin spent over $100,000 of hard-earned money from the residents of Lake County on a Chicago law firm contesting his employees’ lawful choice to be represented by AFSCME.”
According to information in the Appellate Court ruling, on Jan. 20, the union submitted a majority-interest petition to unionize clerk’s office members under the Illinois Public Labor Relations Act.
On Jan. 21, the circuit clerk’s office was notified of the petition and directed to respond if it so chose. The notice included a statement that if the office believed that the union had used fraud or coercion to obtain the signatures necessary to demonstrate majority support, it was required to present clear and convincing evidence of the fraud or coercion in its response to the petition, according to court records.
On Feb. 6, the clerk’s office filed a response alleging that the union had used fraudulent information and had threatened employees in an effort to coerce them into signing dues-deduction cards, according to the ruling.
The Appellate Court ruling concluded “that the (Labor Relations) Board and the (administrative law judge) properly determined that the evidence did not rise to the necessary (level) because the clerk did not present evidence of threats, retaliation, or other adverse consequences” that the employees would experience unless they signed the dues-deduction cards.
More Top Picks Best Amazon Prime Day E Reader Deals 2026
Twitter @jimnewton5