International Union of Operating Engineers Local 965 v.Illinois Labor Relations Board, State Panel, 30 N.E.3d 1191

In April 2013 the Union and the Office of the Comptroller (Comptroller) entered into collective-bargaining agreements (CBAs) covering units that included employees classified as public service administrators (PSAs); the CBAs ran through June 30, 2015.
On April 5, 2013, the Illinois Public Labor Relations Act was amended to exclude PSAs under the Comptroller from the Act’s definition of "public employee." The amendment became effective the same day.
The Comptroller treated the exclusion as self-effectuating and refused to recognize Union grievances from PSAs; the Union disputed that the amendment could operate during the life of the CBAs.
On May 13, 2013, the Comptroller filed a unit-clarification petition with the Illinois Labor Relations Board (Board) seeking exclusion of PSAs from the bargaining units effective April 5, 2013. The Union sought to intervene and asked the Board to stay proceedings.
The ALJ recommended granting the unit-clarification petition, finding the amended statute removed PSAs from coverage as of April 5, 2013 and a formal hearing was unnecessary. The Board adopted the ALJ’s recommendation and certified exclusion of the PSAs.
The Union sought review in this court, arguing (1) the ALJ failed to timely rule on its intervention request depriving it of due process, and (2) the Board erred by applying the amendment before the CBAs expired. The appellate court affirmed the Board.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the ALJ's alleged failure to timely rule on Union's intervention request deprived the Union of due process	ALJ's delay denied due process; Union was prejudiced by lack of timely ruling	Issue was forfeited: Union did not meaningfully raise it below or cite authority on appeal	Forfeited — Union failed to preserve/support the due-process argument on review
Whether amended §3(n) could exclude Comptroller PSAs from bargaining units prior to CBA expiration (i.e., whether the amendment was retroactive or could be applied prospectively immediately)	The amendment cannot apply to PSAs until the CBAs expire in 2015; applying it now would be retroactive and impair contractual expectations	Amendment is substantive (not retroactive in the Landgraf sense when applied prospectively); legislature did not limit its effective date, so PSAs are excluded going forward as of April 5, 2013; Board may clarify units when statutory change occurs	Affirmed — amendment is substantive and cannot be applied retroactively, but its prospective effect beginning April 5, 2013 removes PSAs from bargaining units immediately; Board properly granted unit-clarification

Landgraf v. USI Film Products, 511 U.S. 244 (framework for assessing retroactivity)
Hayashi v. Illinois Department of Financial & Professional Regulation, 25 N.E.3d 570 (applying Landgraf in Illinois context)
People v. Atkins, 838 N.E.2d 943 (Statute on Statutes limits Landgraf analysis)
First of America Trust Co. v. Armstead, 664 N.E.2d 36 (legislature’s ongoing right to amend statute; no vested right in continuance of law)
State v. State, 848 N.E.2d 118 (IL App — Board may remove excluded positions from existing units)
City of Washington v. Illinois Labor Relations Board, 891 N.E.2d 980 (unit-clarification appropriate to remove statutorily excluded employees)
White v. Retirement Board of the Policemen’s Annuity & Benefit Fund, 18 N.E.3d 92 (distinguishing substantive vs. procedural amendments)