Barrall v. Board of Trustees of John A. Logan Community College, 182 N.E.3d 81

In March 2016 John A. Logan Community College reduced full‑time faculty; 27 tenured faculty (including seven plaintiffs) received layoff notices under the Public Community College Act (110 ILCS 805/3B‑5).
Plaintiffs alleged the Board subsequently hired adjunct (part‑time) instructors to teach courses plaintiffs had previously taught and that sufficient work existed to recall them full‑time.
Plaintiffs sought a writ of mandamus for recall, back pay/benefits, and a permanent injunction barring the Board from hiring adjuncts or other non‑tenure staff to render services tenured faculty are competent to render during the 24‑month recall period.
The trial court dismissed the petition, relying on Biggiam v. Bd. of Trustees, which had allowed hiring adjuncts; the appellate court reversed, holding adjuncts are “other employee[s] with less seniority” and the statute protects individual courses (services).
The Illinois Supreme Court affirmed the appellate court, overruling Biggiam: it held adjunct instructors are “other employees with less seniority,” “employed to render a service” includes hiring to teach a course, and the protection applies to individual courses/services, not only full positions.
The case was remanded for further proceedings consistent with the Supreme Court's statutory interpretation; Chief Justice Burke dissented, arguing the clause must be read in context to refer only to employees in positions where seniority accrues.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether adjunct instructors are “other employee[s] with less seniority” under 3B‑5	Adjuncts are employees hired for wages who accrue no seniority, so they have less seniority than tenured faculty and fall within the phrase	The phrase refers only to other employees in positions where seniority accrues (i.e., not adjuncts); Biggiam supports that reading	Held: Adjuncts are “other employee[s] with less seniority” (plain meaning supports inclusion)
Whether the statutory protection covers individual courses/services or only full positions entailing services	The statute bars hiring any employee to render a service a tenured faculty is competent to render, so it protects individual courses	The first clause speaks of reappointment to a "position," so the proviso must be limited to positions, not individual courses	Held: The clause applies to services (including individual courses), not just positions
Effect of Biggiam precedent	Plaintiffs argued Biggiam was wrongly decided and should not control	Board relied on Biggiam as controlling precedent permitting adjunct hires	Held: Biggiam was wrongly decided on these points and is overruled

Biggiam v. Board of Trustees of Community College Dist. No. 516, 154 Ill. App. 3d 627 (Ill. App. 1987) (earlier appellate decision excluding adjuncts from 3B‑5 protections; overruled here)
Piatak v. Black Hawk College Dist. No. 503, 269 Ill. App. 3d 1032 (Ill. App. 1995) (interprets relationship of clauses in 3B‑5 and reads proviso as condition on reappointment right)
Peters v. Board of Education of Rantoul Township High School Dist. No. 193, 97 Ill. 2d 166 (Ill. 1983) (discusses seniority/bumping principles in education reductions in force)
Hancon v. Board of Education of Barrington Cmty. Unit Sch. Dist. No. 220, 130 Ill. App. 3d 224 (Ill. App. 1985) (explains bumping in seniority systems)
Birk v. Board of Education of Flora Cmty. Unit Sch. Dist. No. 35, 104 Ill. 2d 252 (Ill. 1984) (stating legislature’s purpose in tenure: protect job security for experienced teachers)