Repository: UIHistories Project: Board of Trustees Minutes - 1980 [PAGE 272]

EXTRACTED TEXT FROM PAGE:

262

BOARD OF TRUSTEES

[April 20

tween pro-Israeli and pro-Palestinian students. It is alleged that the disciplinary charges against plaintiffs were vague and overbroad and resulted in punishment for the exercise of First Amendment rights of speech, assembly, and petition. It is also alleged that the disciplinary hearing procedures deprived the plaintiffs of procedural due process in a number of ways and prevented their obtaining a fair and impartial hearing. It is also claimed that the disciplinary punishment was disproportionate and denied plaintiffs the equal protection of laws. T h e complaint seeks injunction against the University preventing it from suspending the plaintiffs until there is compliance with the federal constitution. It is also requested that all records of the suspension and discipline be expunged and that the court declare that the defendants have deprived the plaintiffs of their civil and constitutional rights. In addition, $10,000 compensatory damages is sought for each plaintiff and $25,000 of punitive damages is also sought for each plaintiff. The plaintiffs further seek payment of reasonable attorney fees plus costs of the action. Pursuant to previous delegations by the Board of Trustees the university counsel has been given interim authorization to take such steps as are necessary or appropriate, including the employment of special counsel, to protect the interests of the University in this matter and to provide representation for those University employees who request the same and represent that their actions were taken in the performance of their University duties. The university counsel has recommended that such authorization be ratified, approved, and confirmed in all respects. I concur.

Litigation Initiated by Certain Nonacademic Employees Seeking Payment of Prevailing Rates

(36) A complaint has been filed in the Circuit Court of Champaign County (Case No. 79 L 407) by five individuals (a water station operator, a building operating engineer, a steam distribution operator, a machinist, and a stage hand — Assembly Hall) who are employed at the Urbana-Champaign campus. T h e suit is filed by the plaintiffs in their respective individual rights and also as representing a class of employees consisting of those nonacademic employees of the University who are in the same classifications as the plaintiffs. The defendants are a University employee, Donald Ward, in his capacity as university director of personnel services, and the "University Civil Service System Merit Board of the University Civil Service System." T h e complaint is in four counts and seeks certain writs of mandamus and declaratory judgments. All are based on the applicability of the provisions of Public Act 79-1091 (H.B. 622) enacted in 1975 and providing that in certain circumstances individuals employed by "any State officer, agency, or authority" in a capacity which would entitle the individual to the prevailing rate of wages under the State Personnel Code if the code were applicable, is to be paid the prevailing rate notwithstanding the nonapplicability of the code. T h e applicability of Public Act 79-1091 to the University is also currently being litigated in a case filed in the Circuit Court of Cook County by certain construction laborers at the Medical Center campus. Count I of the complaint s»eks a writ of mandamus directing that the defendants determine that the plaintiffs are entitled to "prevailing rate of wages" effective from October 1, 1975, to the present. Count I I seeks a declaratory judgment that P.A. 79-1091 applies to the University for purposes of determining the plaintiffs' entitlement to the prevailing rate of wages effective October 1, 1975. Counts I and I I are filed by the plaintiffs in their individual capacities. Counts I I I and I V of the complaint are designed to be class actions on behalf of all University employees with the same classifications as the plaintiffs and seek the same relief in terms of writs of mandamus and declaratory judgments as Counts I and I I seek on behalf of the individual plaintiffs.