ILCS » Chapter 5 · Act 315
Illinois Compiled Statutes

5 ILCS 315/17 (2026)

Right to strike

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section IL-ILGAilga.gov JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
(5 ILCS 315/17) (from Ch. 48, par. 1617)
    Sec. 17. Right to strike.
    (a) Nothing in this Act shall make it unlawful or make it an unfair labor practice for public employees, other than security employees, as defined in Section 3(p), peace officers, fire fighters, and paramedics employed by fire departments and fire protection districts, to strike except as otherwise provided in this Act. Public employees who are permitted to strike may strike only if:
        (1) the employees are represented by an exclusive
    
bargaining representative;
        (2) the collective bargaining agreement between the
    
public employer and the public employees, if any, has expired, or such collective bargaining agreement does not prohibit the strike;
        (3) the public employer and the labor organization
    
have not mutually agreed to submit the disputed issues to final and binding arbitration;
        (4) the exclusive representative has requested a
    
mediator pursuant to Section 12 for the purpose of mediation or conciliation of a dispute between the public employer and the exclusive representative and mediation has been used; and
        (5) at least 5 days have elapsed after a notice of
    
intent to strike has been given by the exclusive bargaining representative to the public employer.
    In mediation under this Section, if either party requests the use of mediation services from the Federal Mediation and Conciliation Service, the other party shall either join in such request or bear the additional cost of mediation services from another source.
    (b) An employee who participates in a strike, work stoppage or slowdown, in violation of this Act shall be subject to discipline by the employer. No employer may pay or cause such employee to be paid any wages or other compensation for such periods of participation, except for wages or compensation earned before participation in such strike.
(Source: P.A. 86-412.)

    
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 11 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1995–2023 · leading case: State of Illinois Dep't of Cent. Mgmt. Servs. v. State of Illinois Labor Relations Bd., 869 N.E.2d 274 (Ill. App. Ct. 2007).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
State of Illinois Dep't of Cent. Mgmt. Servs. v. State of Illinois Labor Relations Bd., 869 N.E.2d 274 (Ill. App. Ct. 2007). · cites it 4× “5 ILCS 315/17 (West 2002) (general right-to-strike provision).”
Chicago Transit Auth.. v. Illinois Labor Relations Bd., 898 N.E.2d 176 (Ill. App. Ct. 2008). · cites it 5× “•2 Next, the CTA contends that the employees were prohibited from striking at any time because the requirements for a lawful strike pursuant to section 17(a) of the Act (5 ILCS 315/17(a) (West 2000)) were not satisfied.”
Town of Cicero v. Illinois Ass'n of Firefighters, 788 N.E.2d 286 (Ill. App. Ct. 2003). “See 5 ILCS 315/17, 14(m) (West 1996). As an alternative, section 2 of the Act provides: “To prevent labor strife and to protect public health and the safety of the citizens of Illinois, all collective bargaining disputes involving persons designated by the Board as performing…”
Admin. Off. of the Illinois Courts v. State & Mun. Teamsters, Chauffeurs & Helpers Union, Local 726, 657 N.E.2d 972 (Ill. 1995). “(5 ILCS 315/17 (West 1992).) A strike that would otherwise be permitted under the Act may be barred, however, if it represents "a clear and present danger to the health and safety of the public.”
Champaign-Urbana Pub. Health Dist. v. Illinois Labor Relations Bd., 821 N.E.2d 691 (Ill. App. Ct. 2004). “s Board (5 ILCS 315/5 (West 2002)) and set forth the relationship parameters between public employers and exclusive representatives regarding, inter alia, the duty to bargain collectively (5 ILCS 315/7 (West 2002)), grievance procedures (5 ILCS 315/8 (West 2002)), elections (5…”
Chicago Transit Auth. v. Illinois Labor Relations Bd., 830 N.E.2d 630 (Ill. App. Ct. 2005). · cites it 2× “5 ILCS 315/17 (West 2000). In its decision, the Board omitted any reference to the requirement under the Act that the parties must not have agreed “to submit their disputed issues to final and binding arbitration” in order to lawfully strike.”
Policeman's Benevolent & Prot. Ass'n of Illinois v. City of Chicago, 2023 IL App (1st) 220762-U (Ill. App. Ct. 2023). “Because plaintiffs’ members are sworn employees who do not have the right to strike under the Illinois Public Labor Relations Act (Labor Act) (5 ILCS 315/17 (West 2018)), plaintiffs, upon impasse, invoked the contractual interest arbitration process outlined in the CBAs and…”
IL Dep't of Cent. Mgmt. Servs. v. IL Labor Relations Bd. (Ill. App. Ct. 2007). · cites it 4× “5 ILCS 315/17 (West 2002) (general right-to-strike provision).”
Chicago Transit Auth. v. Illinois Labor Relations Bd. (Ill. App. Ct. 2008). · cites it 3× “” 5 ILCS 315/17(a) (West 2000). 14 1-07-2269 The CTA claims that the above statutory provision applies to all strikes and four of the five requirements were not satisfied at any relevant time prior to the Union engaging in activities in furtherance of a strike.”
Chicago Transit Auth. v. Labor Relations Bd. (Ill. App. Ct. 2005). · cites it 2× “5 ILCS 315/17 (West 2000). In its decision, the Board omitted any reference to the requirement under the Act that the parties must not have agreed “to submit their disputed issues to final and binding arbitration” in order to lawfully strike.”
Town of Cicero v. Illinois Ass'n of Firefighters (Ill. App. Ct. 2003). “See 5 ILCS 315/17 & 315/14(m). As an alternative, section 2 of the Act provides that: " *** To prevent labor strife and to protect public health and the safety of the citizens of Illinois, all collective bargaining disputes involving persons designated by the Board as performing…”
— 5 ILCS 315/17(a) — 2 cases
Chicago Transit Auth.. v. Illinois Labor Relations Bd., 898 N.E.2d 176 (Ill. App. Ct. 2008). “•2 Next, the CTA contends that the employees were prohibited from striking at any time because the requirements for a lawful strike pursuant to section 17(a) of the Act (5 ILCS 315/17(a) (West 2000)) were not satisfied.”
Chicago Transit Auth. v. Illinois Labor Relations Bd. (Ill. App. Ct. 2008). “” 5 ILCS 315/17(a) (West 2000). 14 1-07-2269 The CTA claims that the above statutory provision applies to all strikes and four of the five requirements were not satisfied at any relevant time prior to the Union engaging in activities in furtherance of a strike.”
— 5 ILCS 315/17(a)(3) — 3 cases
Chicago Transit Auth. v. Illinois Labor Relations Bd., 830 N.E.2d 630 (Ill. App. Ct. 2005). “5 ILCS 315/17 (West 2000). In its decision, the Board omitted any reference to the requirement under the Act that the parties must not have agreed “to submit their disputed issues to final and binding arbitration” in order to lawfully strike.”
Chicago Transit Auth.. v. Illinois Labor Relations Bd., 898 N.E.2d 176 (Ill. App. Ct. 2008). “•2 Next, the CTA contends that the employees were prohibited from striking at any time because the requirements for a lawful strike pursuant to section 17(a) of the Act (5 ILCS 315/17(a) (West 2000)) were not satisfied.”
Chicago Transit Auth. v. Labor Relations Bd. (Ill. App. Ct. 2005). “5 ILCS 315/17 (West 2000). In its decision, the Board omitted any reference to the requirement under the Act that the parties must not have agreed “to submit their disputed issues to final and binding arbitration” in order to lawfully strike.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.