CHICAGO — A former Chicago Public Schools transportation manager has secured a new chance to sue CPS for firing him after he claims he exposed a scheme in which private bus vendors allegedly overbilled for services.
In February 2016, Jeffrey Hubert, former director of contract management in CPS’ student transport services department, sued in Cook County Circuit Court under the state whistleblower law, demanding CPS be made to rehire him with back pay, plus interest, after firing him in 2015. Hubert accused bus vendors of “colluding in their bidding contracts amongst themselves and with CPS.” He also alleged vendors inflated ridership numbers, allowing CPS and the vendors to grab reimbursements for which they otherwise would be ineligible.
Cook County Judge Brigid McGrath granted summary judgment in favor of CPS, agreeing Hubert’s termination was valid based on repeated verbal altercations with coworkers and clashes with superiors. Hubert appealed to the First District Appellate Court.
Michael Scotti III
| Roetzel & Andress
Justice John Griffin wrote the opinion, issued June 29; justices Michael Hyman and Daniel Pierce concurred.
“Several of Hubert’s colleagues and subordinates reported that he acted inappropriately and unprofessionally,” Griffin wrote. “Hubert’s supervisor admonished Hubert on multiple occasions about his coarse workplace demeanor and his proclivity to lose his temper with colleagues.”
Hubert, however, insisted he was fired for the protected activity of cooperating with law enforcement, even though a school board investigation he initiated found overbilling of possibly more than $2 million from one vendor. He said his colleagues didn’t take the allegedly fraudulent activity seriously and noted his supervisor, Paul Osland, moved him to duties that would keep him from contact with vendors. He said the workplace conflicts stemmed from his crusade to eliminate abuse of taxpayer resources.
“Osland came to (Hubert) after he took his concerns to a different department in CPS and stated his displeasure with Hubert’s conduct,” Griffin wrote. “Hubert contends that by taking his concerns outside of Osland’s department, Hubert might have created the impression that Osland could not manage his department and, thus, Osland was threatened. Then it was just three weeks later that Hubert’s employment was terminated.”
Both sides, Griffin wrote, presented arguments that “constitute reasonable explanations for why Hubert’s employment might have been terminated. Perhaps it is just a coincidence that Hubert’s employment was terminated at the time it was terminated and under the circumstances presented. But in a retaliatory discharge case, causation may be demonstrated by circumstantial evidence. A jury could believe the narrative advanced by Hubert, and that narrative is supported by at least some evidentiary facts and the inferences that could be drawn therefrom.”
Ultimately, the panel said, there is enough in dispute that the issue should be resolved through a jury trial and not summary judgment. Although the school board said no one knew Hubert was cooperating with law enforcement when he was fired, the panel noted Osland’s role in initiating Hubert’s termination process when he already knew Hubert had worked with the Office of the Inspector General and had sent him an email “about another government whistleblower being fired and Hubert claims that Osland was upset about Hubert going to the Safety and Security Department to further investigate the vendors.”
The panel reversed McGrath’s ruling and remanded the case for further proceedings.
Hubert is represented in the action by attorneys Michael J. Scotti III and Brian Bedinghaus, of the firm of Roetzel & Andress, of Chicago.
CPS has been represented by attorneys with the firm of Jackson Lewis P.C., of Chicago.