East St. Louis’ quiet push to settle police back pay raises labor law concerns
While East St. Louis officials publicly fight a multimillion-dollar legal judgment for police back pay, some officers say the city privately pressured them to waive the interest they’re owed, raising new questions about city hall’s labor practices.
The continuing controversy over pay raises is approaching 10 years as it puts a spotlight on East St. Louis’ financial troubles and labor relations. The police officers’ union contends the city’s secretive settlement attempts violate labor law and undermine collective bargaining, while many officers—frustrated by years without promised pay—face a difficult choice between holding out for full compensation or accepting a quicker, smaller settlement.
In October, a St. Clair County judge ruled that East St. Louis owes its police union $2.1 million. The amount includes $1.2 million in retroactive 2% pay raises dating back to the expiration of the officers’ contract in December 2015, as well as $900,000 in interest and $27,000 in legal fees.
The city has until Nov. 17 to file an appeal and has already indicated it intends to do so.
Meanwhile, several officers told the Belleville News-Democrat that East St. Louis Police Chief Kendall Perry and other officers approached them individually by phone asking them to sign a waiver that would surrender their claims to interest payments and their share of the legal fees.
David Amerson, attorney for the Police Benevolent & Protective Association, which represents the East St. Louis officers, said it is illegal for a public employer to make such side deals with union members without the union’s consent.
Amerson said the union intends to file unfair labor practice charges with the Illinois Department of Labor.
“First, it is illegal for a public employer to engage in side deals with union members without their knowledge or approval,” he said. “Second, how can the city claim in court that it was not authorized to pay union members their back pay while simultaneously going behind the union’s back and paying only certain individuals?”
City Attorney C.J. Baricevic declined to comment.
Perry initially denied calling any officers about signing a waiver. He later clarified that he contacted two former officers—who are no longer union members—and advised them they would get paid sooner if they agreed to forgo the added interest.
Under the new contract, Perry qualifies for a prorated payment for his time on the East St. Louis Police Department prior to his joining the administration. Before becoming chief of police, he was a patrol sergeant and K-9 supervisor and had served a term as the union president.
Perry said he pursued payment without interest so he could get receive his back pay immediately.
“If they wanted to do the same, I told them I could let them talk to the finance director,” Perry said. “I wanted my money.”
Robert Sallie, a former East St. Louis police officer and former union president, is owed back pay plus interest. He said Perry called him on Sept. 25 at 12:15 p.m. about signing the waiver.
“He said it would be best if I would take the money without the interest because the city couldn’t afford the interest,” Sallie said. “I told him to send it to me and let me look at it and I would get back to him.”
Sallie said he never received the waiver and was not contacted again.
Albert Harris, another former officer and union member, also said Perry called him about signing the waiver. Perry told Harris he could get his money immediately if he agreed not to take the interest, Harris said.
Like Sallie, Harris said he won’t waive any part of what the court ruling says is owed to him.
“I never had any intention of giving up my money. I want it all,” he said. “They have had us waiting for nearly 10 years and now they want us to accept just the back pay. If really they wanted us to get our back pay, they would not have stalled for so long.”
Sallie added that not all union members were offered the same opportunity to accept an interest-free payment.
“Even if they were, it is still a breach of contract. The conditions of the contract said if they defaulted they would pay interest,” he said. “It did not say if they defaulted they would contact officers to see who would take a lesser amount than what they are owed.”
Luther Woods, president of the Police Benevolent & Protective Association, confirmed that “nine or 10” officers signed the waiver. Perry said some of those officers have already received their back pay.
Harris said he is not surprised the officers signed the waiver.
“They got tired of the waiting-around games,” Harris said. “There is no telling how long they (the city) are going to do this.”
The East St. Louis officers were members of the Fraternal Order of Police when their collective bargaining agreement expired Dec. 31, 2015. A new agreement was reached in 2019, providing annual 2% raises that were never paid.
A court-appointed arbitrator, Jacalyn Zimmerman, later ruled that the city must honor the negotiated contract and provide the police with their raises and retroactive pay.
In July 2023, now represented by the Police Benevolent & Protective Association, the officers petitioned St. Clair County court to confirm the arbitration award and enforce payment—including interest and legal fees. This led to Judge Stacy Campbell’s ruling last week.
“It has been nearly a decade since we sued them for our money, and we are still fighting to get our money, even with a court order,” Harris said. “The city is notorious for stalling, and the hardship is not on the city—it is on the officers…”
