## Facts

- A union sought certification as the exclusive bargaining representative for a unit of Du Page County deputy sheriffs using the Illinois Public Labor Relations Act (IPLRA) majority-interest (“card-check”) procedure.
- The union filed a petition with the Illinois Labor Relations Board (ILRB) supported by signed dues-deduction/authorization cards from a majority of employees in the proposed unit.
- The County objected, disputing the sufficiency of the majority-interest showing and asserting a right to review the authorization cards or related proof (with employee identities redacted).
- The ILRB applied its rules permitting majority interest to be shown through dues-deduction authorizations or other reliable evidence and certified the union.
- On administrative review, the appellate court vacated the certification, holding the statute required the ILRB to examine both “dues deduction authorization” and “other evidence,” and that the employer was entitled to review the evidence with redactions.
- The ILRB and union appealed to the Illinois Supreme Court.

## Issues

1. Whether IPLRA § 9(a-5) requires the ILRB to consider both dues-deduction authorizations and “other evidence” of majority support, or permits certification based on either type of evidence.
2. Whether an employer has a statutory or due process right to inspect the authorization cards or other majority-interest evidence submitted to the ILRB, at least in redacted form.

## Decision

- The Illinois Supreme Court reversed the appellate court and upheld the ILRB’s certification.
- The Court construed “and” in § 9(a-5) to operate disjunctively in context, allowing the ILRB to determine majority interest based on dues-deduction authorizations or other reliable evidence, without requiring both.
- The Court held the employer was not entitled to inspect the authorization cards or other submitted majority-interest evidence.
- The matter was remanded for consideration of unresolved issues regarding the appropriateness of the bargaining unit’s composition.

## Legal Principles

- Statutory terms are read in context to effect legislative intent; in limited circumstances, “and” may be interpreted as “or” when a strictly conjunctive reading would frustrate the statutory scheme.
- Under IPLRA § 9(a-5), the ILRB may certify a representative through a streamlined majority-interest procedure based on one sufficient category of proof (dues-deduction authorizations or other reliable evidence).
- Courts give weight to a reasonable agency interpretation of an ambiguous statute the agency administers, particularly where the interpretation aligns with the statute’s purpose.
- In majority-interest proceedings, an employer’s ability to object does not include a right to inspect individual employee authorization cards; confidentiality may be maintained to protect employees from coercion or retaliation.

## Conclusion

The Illinois Supreme Court held that the IPLRA’s majority-interest certification process permits the ILRB to rely on either dues-deduction authorization cards or other reliable evidence, and that employers have no right to inspect the underlying authorization cards or related proof submitted to the ILRB.


Cnty. of Du Page v. Ill. Lab. Rels. Bd., 231 Ill. 2d 593, 900 N.E.2d 1095 (Ill. 2008)