Illinois Fraternal Order of Police Labor Council v. Town of Cicero, No. 1-97-3376 1st Dist. 11-17-98 |
SECOND DIVISION
November 17, 1998
1-97-3376
| ILLINOIS FRATERNAL ORDER OFPOLICE LABOR COUNCIL, Plaintiff-Appellant v. THE TOWN OF CICERO, ILLINOIS, ANDTHE BOARD OF FIRE, POLICE ANDPUBLIC SAFETY COMMISSIONERS,TOWN OF CICERO, Defendants-Appellees | Appeal from the Circuit Court of Cook County No. 97 CH 7768 Honorable Albert J. Green, Judge Presiding |
JUSTICE COUSINS delivered the opinion of the court:
Three Cicero police officers were given notice that they were to be fired for violation of anordinance requiring employees of the town to live in Cicero. The officers sought to have theircases heard before a neutral arbitrator, as they said was provided for in the collective bargainingagreement between the town and their union. The town refused to go to arbitration based on itsview that the collective bargaining agreement did not obligate it to do so. The union filed suit tocompel arbitration pursuant to the Uniform Arbitration Act (710 ILCS 5/1 et seq. (West 1994)).The Cicero Board of Fire, Police and Public Safety Commissioners intervened as a defendant,claiming that the officers' cases could not be heard before an arbitrator since it alone hadauthority to determine cause for dismissal of police officers in the town. The town filed a section2-615 motion to dismiss, which the judge granted. 735 ILCS 5/2-615 (West 1994). The unionnow appeals this dismissal.
The union claims the trial court erred by: (1) finding that the town and the union did not have theauthority to provide for termination procedures other than those set out in the ordinanceestablishing the Board of Fire, Police and Public Safety Commissioners; (2) finding that, even ifthe arbitration procedure agreed upon by the town and the union was not ultra vires, the officers'cases would not qualify as arbitrable grievances under applicable state and local law; and (3)ruling that the collective bargaining agreement itself contained a provision barring arbitration ofgrievances relating to residency requirements.
BACKGROUND
The Illinois Fraternal Order of Police Labor Council (Union), the plaintiff in this suit, is a labororganization that serves as the exclusive bargaining representative of full-time peace officers ofthe rank of patrolman employed by the Town of Cicero (Town). The Town, the originaldefendant, is a home rule municipal corporation in Cook County. The Board of Fire, Police andPublic Safety Commissioners of the Town of Cicero (Board), an intervening defendant, is agovernmental unit given the authority for discipline and discharge of Cicero firefighters andpolice officers.
In 1994, the Union entered into a collective bargaining agreement (Agreement) with theTown, pursuant to the Illinois Public Labor Relations Act (the Act) (5 ILCS 315/1 et seq.(West 1994)).
In May and June of 1997, three patrolmen working for the Town of Cicero were notifiedthat charges seeking their discharge had been filed before the Board due to theirviolation of the Town's residency ordinance, which reads:
"(a) All persons accepting appointment or employment with the town as officers, oremployees, certified or noncertified, must make their residence and maintain their domicilewithin the Town of Cicero no later than six (6) months after commencing their employmentand keep such domicile during the term of their appointment or employment.
(b) All persons presently appointed or employed with the town as officers, officials,or employees, certified or noncertified, must make their residence and maintaintheir domicile within the Town of Cicero no later than six (6) months after theeffective date of this section and keep such domicile during the term of theappointment or employment.
(c) Failure of any above-described person to comply with the residency and domicilerequirements will be sufficient cause for termination of employment or removal fromservice in a manner prescribed by law." Code of Ordinances of the Town of Cicero