APPELLATE COURT OF ILLINOIS, FIRST DISTRICT, FIFTH DIVISION
523 N.E.2d 154, 168 Ill. App. 3d 1026, 119 Ill. Dec. 686 1988.IL.542
Petition for review of order of Illinois State Labor Relations Board.
JUSTICE MURRAY delivered the opinion of the court. SULLIVAN and PINCHAM, JJ., concur.
DECISION OF THE COURT DELIVERED BY THE HONORABLE JUDGE MURRAY
This case involves cross-appeals by the petitioner, District 925, Service Employers International Union, AFL-CIO (Union), and respondent, Township of Worth (Township), from a February 26, 1987, decision of the respondent, Illinois State Labor Relations Board (Board). The decision of the Board involved the firing of Colleen McLaughlin, an ex-employee of the Township for alleged unlawful labor practices.
The facts underlying the case disclose that it arose from a dispute over the firing of Colleen McLaughlin (McLaughlin) as an administrative assistant to a duly elected clerk of the Township of Worth. Evidence in the record suggests that McLaughlin was discharged either for political reasons, for cause, or for her labor union activities. In any event, on or about February 1986, McLaughlin was fired from her position as an employee of the Township of Worth clerk's office. On February 21, 1986, the plaintiff Union filed a charge with the State of Illinois State Labor Relations Board alleging that the Township had engaged in unfair labor practices within the meaning of section 10 of the Illinois Public Labor Relations Act (Ill. Rev. Stat. 1985, ch. 48, par. 1610). The matter was assigned to a hearing officer. On December 16, 1986, the hearing officer entered his order containing detailed findings of fact and Conclusions of law. Among the Conclusions of law are the following:
(1) That the Township violated the Illinois Public Labor Relations Law by discharging McLaughlin because of her labor union activities;
(2) that the appropriate remedy for the violations of the Illinois Labor Relations Law were the reinstatement of McLaughlin with back pay, interest at 6%, and no loss of seniority or benefits;
(3) that the appropriate remedy for that and labor law violations as to other employees was a cease and desist order and posting of notices; and
(4) that the Township, highway district and general assistance office are not separate units of local government and, because together they employ more than 35 public employees, the defendant Board had jurisdiction to hear the matter.
Based on these and other Conclusions, the hearing officer ordered, among other things:
(1) That the Township offer immediate reinstatement of McLughlin without prejudice to her seniority right and make "her whole" for any ...