The Illinois Appellate Court has affirmed a decision that denies monetary damages for emotional distress to two former correctional officers who protested unsafe working conditions. On August 16, 2024, the court upheld the Illinois Labor Relations Board's (ILRB) ruling in favor of the Cook County Sheriff's Office, rejecting claims from Justin Janda and Paul Bollinger.
Janda and Bollinger, both correctional officers at the Cook County Jail, were assigned to Division 11, which houses maximum and medium security inmates. On December 25 and 26, 2020, they were informed that due to staffing shortages exacerbated by COVID-19, they would need to engage in "cross watching," a practice where one officer supervises two housing units simultaneously. This practice had been deemed unsafe and was supposed to be eliminated following a federal Agreed Order in 2010.
Bollinger spoke out against cross watching on December 25, arguing it compromised safety. Janda refused his cross-watching assignment on December 26 and also voiced concerns about its safety and compliance with their Collective Bargaining Agreement. Their protests led to threats from superiors: Lieutenant Robert Lucas warned Janda that "they’ll come for your job," while Superintendent Salomon Martinez told him he would "never work in this building again."
Following these events, Martinez filed complaints against Janda and Bollinger with the Office of Professional Review (OPR). Michael Miller, Executive Director of Operations for the Cook County Department of Corrections (CCDOC), transferred them out of Division 11 pending investigation. Janda was moved to Division 9 and Bollinger to Division 10—both maximum security divisions considered less desirable.
On December 29, 2020, Janda and Bollinger filed OPR complaints alleging retaliation for protesting unsafe conditions. They later filed charges with the ILRB claiming violations of Sections 10(a)(1) and (2) of the Illinois Public Labor Relations Act. The ILRB held hearings in June 2022 where both officers testified about their adverse experiences post-transfer.
The administrative law judge (ALJ) found that the Sheriff’s office violated Section 10(a)(1) by retaliating against Janda and Bollinger but did not find grounds for constructive discharge claims. The ALJ ordered remedies including cessation of interference with employee rights, withdrawal of complaint registers against the officers, dismissal of OPR investigations related to cross-watching protests, expungement of related records from employment files, and posting notices around the jail informing employees of these decisions.
However, Janda and Bollinger challenged the ALJ’s denial of consequential damages for emotional distress before the ILRB's Local Panel. They cited a National Labor Relations Board (NLRB) decision in Thryv Inc., which expanded make-whole remedies under federal labor law but did not explicitly cover emotional distress damages. The ILRB rejected their argument as meritless.
Upon appeal to the Illinois Appellate Court, it was ruled that neither state law nor precedent supports awarding damages for emotional distress under these circumstances. The court noted that traditional remedies like reinstatement or back pay are typically confined to quantifiable pecuniary losses rather than nonpecuniary harms such as emotional distress.
Attorneys involved include Peter Kramer representing the Sheriff's office; Justices Tailor delivered the judgment with Presiding Justice Oden Johnson and Justice Hyman concurring; Case ID is No.1-23-1466.