The Illinois Supreme Court has ruled cities cannot do end-runs around the Illinois Public Safety Employee Benefits Act, which governs insurance payments to disabled firefighters and police, by redefining the term "catastrophic injury" to specifically exclude conditions caused by "stress or strain," narrowing the number of firefighters who could qualify for enhanced benefits.
The decision was penned by Justice Rita Garman, with concurrence from Chief Justice Anne Burke and justices Robert Carter, David Overstreet, P. Scott Neville Jr., Mary Jane Theis and Michael Burke.
The ruling favored the International Association of Firefighters Local 50 in its action against the city of Peoria.
Illinois Supreme Court Justice Rita Garman
| Illinoiscourts.gov
The case revolves around the Illinois Public Safety Employee Benefits Act. The Act requires an employer to pay lifetime health insurance benefits for firefighters, police, correctional officers and probation officers, as well as their spouses and dependents, if the employee "suffers a catastrophic injury or is killed in the line of duty." The Act does not define outright what constitutes a "catastrophic injury."
In June 2018, the Peoria City Council passed an ordinance that defined "catastrophic injury" as “an injury, the direct and proximate consequences of which permanently prevent an individual from performing any gainful work.” The Council defined “gainful work” as “full- or part-time activity that actually is compensated or commonly is compensated.”
An "injury" was defined as a "traumatic physical wound directly and proximately caused by external force, chemicals, electricity, climatic conditions, infectious disease, radiation, virus, or bacteria." The council noted "injury" does not include any "occupational disease" or condition caused by "stress or strain."
The union took the city to Peoria County Circuit Court, claiming the definitions were inconsistent with the state law, and would disqualify certain firefighters who would otherwise be covered by the law. The union wanted the definitions declared invalid.
Associate Judge Mark Gilles agreed with the union, finding the terms as used in the Act, when viewed in context and in light of judicial rulings on the Act, were not ambiguous and did not need any further definition by the city. The Illinois Third District Appellate Court backed up Gilles in early 2021.
Justice Garman also agreed with the lower courts.
"The ordinance’s definitions of 'catastrophic injury' and 'gainful work' operate to impermissibly disqualify those who would otherwise be 'persons covered under [the] Act,'" Garman said, quoting from the Act.
Garman said there were several ways in which the city's definitions ran up against the Act.
The city said for an injury to be catastrophic, it must prevent a firefighter from performing "gainful work," but the Act only requires a firefighter be prevented from working in the fire department, Garman noted.
"Under the" city's definition, "if a firefighter can volunteer part-time as a store greeter, he or she will not be considered to have suffered a catastrophic injury," Garman pointed out.
Another problem, in Garman's eyes, is the city introduced the requirement that for a disabled firefighter to be covered by the city, he or she must show they were disabled because of the "direct and proximate consequences" of an injury.
"Neither the language of the Act nor case law requires such a showing. In fact, to be entitled to a line-of-duty disability pension, a 'firefighter need not prove that his or her acts of duty were the sole or even the primary cause of the disability,'" Garman said, quoting a 2019 Third District Appellate Court opinion.
Further, Garman determined the Act does not limit an injury to "traumatic physical wound[s]" or "traumatized physical conditions[s]" as the city would have it. Moreover, disability may even be based on the "'aggravation of a preexisting condition,'" Garman said, again quoting from the Third District opinion.
As an example, osteoarthritis could be aggravated by duties common to a firefighter, such as crawling through buildings with 80 pounds of gear, leading to disability, according to Garman.
The city of Peoria has been represented by Esther Seitz, of the Springfield office of Chicago-based Hinshaw & Culbertson.
The union has been represented by Jerry J. Marzullo and Joseph E. Weishampel, of Puchalski Goodloe Marzullo, of suburban Northbrook. The union has also been represented by Thomas W. Duda and Scott Moran, of the Law Office of Thomas W. Duda, of suburban Palatine.
The Illinois Public Employer Labor Relations Association filed a friend-of-the-court brief in support of the city.
The Associated Firefighters of Illinois and Illinois AFL-CIO, as well as the Metropolitan Alliance of Police and the Police Benevolent and Protective Association of Illinois, filed briefs on behalf of the union.