ILCS » Chapter 50 · Act 742
Illinois Compiled Statutes

50 ILCS 742/10 (2026)

Applicability

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section IL-ILGAilga.gov JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
(50 ILCS 742/10)
    Sec. 10. Applicability.
    (a) This Act shall apply to all positions in an affected department, except those specifically excluded in items (i), (ii), (iii), (iv), and (v) of the definition of "promotion" in Section 5 unless such positions are covered by a collective bargaining agreement in force on the effective date of this Act. Existing promotion lists shall continue to be valid until their expiration dates, or up to a maximum of 3 years after the effective date of this Act.
    (b) Notwithstanding any statute, ordinance, rule, or other laws to the contrary, all promotions in an affected department to which this Act applies shall be administered in the manner provided for in this Act. Provisions of the Illinois Municipal Code, the Fire Protection District Act, municipal ordinances, or rules adopted pursuant to such authority and other laws relating to promotions in affected departments shall continue to apply to the extent they are compatible with this Act, but in the event of conflict between this Act and any other law, this Act shall control.
    (c) A home rule or non-home rule municipality may not administer its fire department promotion process in a manner that is inconsistent with this Act. This Section is a limitation under subsection (i) of Section 6 of Article VII of the Illinois Constitution on the concurrent exercise by home rule units of the powers and functions exercised by the State.
    (d) This Act is intended to serve as a minimum standard and shall be construed to authorize and not to limit:
        (1) An appointing authority from establishing
    
different or supplemental promotional criteria or components, provided that the criteria are job-related and applied uniformly.
        (2) The right of an exclusive bargaining
    
representative to require an employer to negotiate clauses within a collective bargaining agreement relating to conditions, criteria, or procedures for the promotion of employees to ranks, as defined in Section 5, covered by this Act.
        (3) The negotiation by an employer and an exclusive
    
bargaining representative of provisions within a collective bargaining agreement to achieve affirmative action objectives, provided that such clauses are consistent with applicable law.
    (e) Local authorities and exclusive bargaining agents affected by this Act may agree to waive one or more of its provisions and bargain on the contents of those provisions, provided that any such waivers shall be considered permissive subjects of bargaining.
(Source: P.A. 93-411, eff. 8-4-03; 94-809, eff. 5-26-06.)

    
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 3 cases, 2007–2016 · leading case: City of Bloomington v. Illinois Labor Relations Bd., 871 N.E.2d 752 (Ill. App. Ct. 2007).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
City of Bloomington v. Illinois Labor Relations Bd., 871 N.E.2d 752 (Ill. App. Ct. 2007). · cites it 14× “In November 2005, the executive director of the Board issued a complaint for hearing alleging the City violated sections 10(a)(4) and (1) of the Illinois Public Labor Relations Act (5 ILCS 315/10(a)(1), (4) (West 2004)) when it failed and refused to bargain in good faith over…”
Skokie Firefighters Union v. The Illinois Labor Relations Bd., 2016 IL App (1st) 152478 (Ill. App. Ct. 2016). · cites it 3× “50 ILCS 742/10(d)-(e) (West 2012). And the Promotion Act expressly cements the bargaining status of deviations from the Promotion Act’s promotion standards, providing that “any such waivers shall be considered permissive subjects of bargaining.”
City of Bloomington v. Illinois Labor Relations Bd. (Ill. App. Ct. 2007). · cites it 5× “In November 2005, the executive direc- tor of the Board issued a complaint for hearing alleging the City violated sections 10(a)(4) and (1) of the Illinois Public Labor Relations Act (5 ILCS 315/10(a)(1), (4) (West 2004)) when it failed and refused to bargain in good faith over…”
— 50 ILCS 742/10(a) — 2 cases
City of Bloomington v. Illinois Labor Relations Bd., 871 N.E.2d 752 (Ill. App. Ct. 2007). “In November 2005, the executive director of the Board issued a complaint for hearing alleging the City violated sections 10(a)(4) and (1) of the Illinois Public Labor Relations Act (5 ILCS 315/10(a)(1), (4) (West 2004)) when it failed and refused to bargain in good faith over…”
City of Bloomington v. Illinois Labor Relations Bd. (Ill. App. Ct. 2007). “In November 2005, the executive direc- tor of the Board issued a complaint for hearing alleging the City violated sections 10(a)(4) and (1) of the Illinois Public Labor Relations Act (5 ILCS 315/10(a)(1), (4) (West 2004)) when it failed and refused to bargain in good faith over…”
— 50 ILCS 742/10(b) — 2 cases
City of Bloomington v. Illinois Labor Relations Bd., 871 N.E.2d 752 (Ill. App. Ct. 2007). “In November 2005, the executive director of the Board issued a complaint for hearing alleging the City violated sections 10(a)(4) and (1) of the Illinois Public Labor Relations Act (5 ILCS 315/10(a)(1), (4) (West 2004)) when it failed and refused to bargain in good faith over…”
City of Bloomington v. Illinois Labor Relations Bd. (Ill. App. Ct. 2007). “In November 2005, the executive direc- tor of the Board issued a complaint for hearing alleging the City violated sections 10(a)(4) and (1) of the Illinois Public Labor Relations Act (5 ILCS 315/10(a)(1), (4) (West 2004)) when it failed and refused to bargain in good faith over…”
— 50 ILCS 742/10(d) — 3 cases
Skokie Firefighters Union v. The Illinois Labor Relations Bd., 2016 IL App (1st) 152478 (Ill. App. Ct. 2016). “50 ILCS 742/10(d)-(e) (West 2012). And the Promotion Act expressly cements the bargaining status of deviations from the Promotion Act’s promotion standards, providing that “any such waivers shall be considered permissive subjects of bargaining.”
City of Bloomington v. Illinois Labor Relations Bd., 871 N.E.2d 752 (Ill. App. Ct. 2007). “In November 2005, the executive director of the Board issued a complaint for hearing alleging the City violated sections 10(a)(4) and (1) of the Illinois Public Labor Relations Act (5 ILCS 315/10(a)(1), (4) (West 2004)) when it failed and refused to bargain in good faith over…”
City of Bloomington v. Illinois Labor Relations Bd. (Ill. App. Ct. 2007). “In November 2005, the executive direc- tor of the Board issued a complaint for hearing alleging the City violated sections 10(a)(4) and (1) of the Illinois Public Labor Relations Act (5 ILCS 315/10(a)(1), (4) (West 2004)) when it failed and refused to bargain in good faith over…”
— 50 ILCS 742/10(d)(2) — 2 cases
City of Bloomington v. Illinois Labor Relations Bd., 871 N.E.2d 752 (Ill. App. Ct. 2007). “In November 2005, the executive director of the Board issued a complaint for hearing alleging the City violated sections 10(a)(4) and (1) of the Illinois Public Labor Relations Act (5 ILCS 315/10(a)(1), (4) (West 2004)) when it failed and refused to bargain in good faith over…”
City of Bloomington v. Illinois Labor Relations Bd. (Ill. App. Ct. 2007). “In November 2005, the executive direc- tor of the Board issued a complaint for hearing alleging the City violated sections 10(a)(4) and (1) of the Illinois Public Labor Relations Act (5 ILCS 315/10(a)(1), (4) (West 2004)) when it failed and refused to bargain in good faith over…”
— 50 ILCS 742/10(e) — 1 case
Skokie Firefighters Union v. The Illinois Labor Relations Bd., 2016 IL App (1st) 152478 (Ill. App. Ct. 2016). “50 ILCS 742/10(d)-(e) (West 2012). And the Promotion Act expressly cements the bargaining status of deviations from the Promotion Act’s promotion standards, providing that “any such waivers shall be considered permissive subjects of bargaining.”
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.