State seeks to dismiss retiree health lawsuit

In a hearing in Sangamon County Circuit Court on Feb. 21, attorneys for the State argued that lawsuits seeking to overturn a new Illinois law eliminating the guarantee of affordable health care for retirees should be dismissed.

Assistant Attorney General Richard Huszagh argued that the Circuit Court should dismiss four lawsuits that all challenge the legality of the new law (originally SB 1313) which reduces the State’s responsibility to provide health care benefits to state of Illinois and state university retirees.

Previously Illinois law provided that retirees who had worked for the state or a state university for at least 20 years would not have to pay toward the cost of their own health care premiums, although they were still subject to all co-pays and deductibles that active employees had to pay. Employees who retired with less than 20 years paid toward their premiums under a sliding scale based on their years of service.

The new law allows the Illinois Department of Central Management Services to set health care premium contributions for retirees. AFSCME has taken the position that any changes to the current payment structure (which is included in the AFSCME state employee contract) must first be negotiated with the Union.

In addition, AFSCME has joined with the IFT, the FOP and the INA to file a lawsuit challenging the legality of the new law because it violates the Illinois constitution’s prohibition against the diminishment of retirement benefits. Three other lawsuits were also filed on the same grounds and the court has consolidated them so that all will be heard jointly. AFSCME is also arguing that the change in the law represents a breach of contract since the retiree health care benefits were delineated in the Union’s contract with the State.

At the hearing on February 21, Associate Judge Steven Nardulli heard arguments on the State’s Motion to Dismiss all four lawsuits. Assistant AG Huszagh argued that the constitutional prohibition against diminishing benefits was only meant to apply to pensions, not to health care benefits—and thus there was no basis for the case to proceed. He also argued that AFSCME retirees did not have the legal right to enforce their contract rights in the state circuit court. Attorneys for the plaintiffs, including AFSCME attorney, Steve Yokich, made arguments to the contrary.

The judge gave the parties three weeks to submit statements setting forth the separate legal issues in the case in order to streamline possible appeals. He is expected to issue his decision shortly thereafter.

If the judge grants the Motion to Dismiss, AFSCME and the other plaintiffs would have the right to appeal that decision to the Appellate Court.