UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS,
EASTERN DIVISION
CLAY, et al. v. CITY OF CHICAGO, Case No. 07 C 4211
To: All persons who worked for the City of Chicago (the "City") after June 30, 2003, retired in 2004 pursuant to the early retirement incentive program (ERIP) and were represented until retirement by the American Federation of State, County & Municipal Employees Council 31 ("AFSCME") union that negotiated with the City regarding the 2003-2007 collective bargaining agreements (CBAs).
This notice informs you about a class action lawsuit to recover retroactive wage increases
allegedly due to a class of persons who worked for the City after June 30, 2003, retired from
employment pursuant to the ERIP offered to City employees, and who, during their employment,
were in bargaining units represented by the AFSCME union that negotiated jointly with the City
of Chicago regarding the 2003-2007 CBAs and who did not designate the AFSCME union as
their bargaining representatives after their retirement for purposes of the 2003-2007 CBAs.
On September 24, 2008, the United States District Court certified the class of persons
identified above. As a member of this class, you may be entitled to back pay and possibly an
increase in pension benefits.
The District Court has authorized this notice to inform you about the case. This is not a
solicitation from a lawyer. You have not been sued.
Why Did You Receive this Notice?
The District Court certified the class of persons identified above. The named plaintiffs
(Mary Clay, Earnestine Russell, Marian Hoover, Nona Smith and Nance L. Dulaj) sued the City
for failing to pay class members the hourly wage or rate of pay agreed to for current employees
under the 2003-2007 CBAs for the period of June 30, 2003 to July 18, 2005. The City has listed
you as one of the employees in the class. That is why you have received this notice.
What Is a Class Action? In a class action lawsuit, one or more people called "Class Representatives" (in this case,
Mary Clay, Earnestine Russell, Marian Hoover, Nona Smith and Nance L. Dulaj) sue on behalf
of a class of persons who have similar claims. The court decides the issues for everyone in the
class, except for those who choose to exclude themselves from the Class.
What Does this Lawsuit Claim? The Class Representatives claimed that the City should have given the retroactive pay
increases required under the 2003-2007 CBAs not only to persons still working for the City when
the CBAs were adopted in 2005 but also to those who retired pursuant to the ERIP in 2004. The
Class Representatives had five counts or legal bases for recovery. They contended that the City
promised such retroactive payment by a written letter agreement to extend the expired CBAs. In
the alternative, they contended that they had an implied contractual entitlement to a reasonable
rate of pay for work they performed before retiring. That is, even if there were no express
contract fixing wages, they still had a legal claim to the same rate of pay received by others
performing the same work. Under either bases, the Class Representatives contended they should
be paid at the same hourly rate as active employees were under the CBAs adopted in 2005, after
the class members retired. In addition, the Class Representatives contended that the City denied
the class members due process and equal protection under the Fourteenth Amendment to the U.S.
Constitution when the City denied class members said retroactive pay increases and an
opportunity to be heard or to receive certain information relating to the pay increases in a timely
manner. The City has denied that it is liable under any of these claims.
The District Court has not granted final judgment as to liability or damages or determined
the amount of monetary relief. The Class Representatives seek as damages retroactive pay
increases from June 30, 2003 until the date each class member retired. In addition, the Class
Representatives seek prejudgment interest on that amount, and an adjustment in class members'
pension benefits to reflect the higher rate of pay claimed by the Class Representatives.
In short, there is no final judgment at this time. Furthermore, when there is a final
judgment, the City of Chicago may appeal the judgment.
It is not possible to say at this time
when or how the class action will be resolved.
What Happens If I Do Nothing At All? You are already a member of the class. You have the right to remain a class member or
exclude yourself from this lawsuit. You must decide this now.
If you want to be included as a class member and keep the possibility of receiving money
or benefits from this lawsuit, you do NOT have to do anything. By doing nothing, you will
remain a member of the class. All rulings made by the court will apply to you, and any
settlement between the parties would include you, unless you are notified otherwise.
If you move or change your mailing address, you should notify the lawyers representing
the class (Class Counsel) so that they can inform you of any final judgment or settlement and
send you any money to which you may become entitled.
Why Might Anyone Want to be Excluded From this Lawsuit? You may not want to be part of this lawsuit because you want to bring your own lawsuit
or you do not believe the City did anything wrong. If you exclude yourself from this lawsuit to
start your own case, you should consult an attorney soon because your claims are subject to a
statute of limitations.
If you exclude yourself from this class, you will play no further role in this lawsuit, and
you will not benefit from any judgment or settlement in this lawsuit.
How Do I Ask the Court to Exclude Me?
If you do not want to be part of this suit, you must write to Class Counsel at the addresses
listed below and clearly state your request to be excluded with a statement like: "I want to be
excluded from the Class in Clay et al. v. City of Chicago." Be sure to include your name and
address and sign the request. You may also email Class Counsel at
info@frankelandcohen.com and state that you want to be excluded from the Class. You must mail or email your request
within sixty (60) days of the postmark on this notice.
Who Are My Lawyers in this Case? The District Court has decided that the following lawyers are qualified to represent you and the other class members as Class Counsel. The Class Counsel are:
Thomas Geoghegan, Jorge Sanchez - Despres, Schwartz & Geoghegan - 77 West Washington St., Ste. 711, Chicago, IL 60602 (312) 372-2511.
Robert R. Cohen, Scott J. Frankel, Matthew D. Lango - Frankel & Cohen - 77 W. Washington St., Ste. 1720, Chicago, IL 60602 (312) 759-9600.
How Will Class Counsel Be Paid? If there is a final judgment as to the proper wages, benefits and prejudgment interest, if
any, due to you and other members of the class, the Class Counsel plan to file a petition for their
legal fees and expenses. When they file such a petition, they may seek to recover up to a third of
the total recovery to the class as payment for legal fees and expenses in bringing this class action.
When Class Counsel file such a petition, you will receive a notice of a Fairness Hearing
to determine whether or not the District Court should award the requested fees and expenses. All
members of the Class will receive notice of the Fairness Hearing and will have an opportunity, if
they wish, to object to the requested fees and expenses.
At this time, Class Counsel have not filed such a petition, and no Fairness Hearing has
been scheduled.
Will I Receive an Additional Notice? As stated above, if you do not choose to exclude yourself from this lawsuit, you will
receive at least one additional notice when final judgment is entered or the case is settled. You
will receive an additional notice when the final judgment is entered and when the petition for
legal fees has been filed. You will have an opportunity to object at the "Fairness Hearing" that
will be scheduled on the petition for legal fees and costs. The procedures for the "Fairness
Hearing" will be explained in the notice that you will receive later. In the meantime, you can
learn about any significant change in the status of the case at the following website:
www.frankelandcohen.com/claycityofchicagoretireecase.jsp DO NOT CALL THE COURT
What Happens Now? At the appropriate time, the District Court shall issue a ruling on liability and on
damages, if any. If a final judgment for liability and damages has been entered, Plaintiffs'
counsel will file a petition for legal fees. At that time, you will receive the additional notice by
mail, just as you received this one.