Illinois Compiled Statutes

820 ILCS 130/9 (2026)

To effectuate the purpose and policy of this Act the Department of Labor shall, during the month of June of each calendar year, investigate and ascertain the prevailing rate of wages for each county in the State and shall publish the prevailing wage schedule ascertained on its official website no later than July 15 of each year

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section IL-ILGAilga.gov JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
(820 ILCS 130/9) (from Ch. 48, par. 39s-9)
    Sec. 9. To effectuate the purpose and policy of this Act the Department of Labor shall, during the month of June of each calendar year, investigate and ascertain the prevailing rate of wages for each county in the State and shall publish the prevailing wage schedule ascertained on its official website no later than July 15 of each year. If the prevailing rate of wages is based on a collective bargaining agreement, any increases directly ascertainable from such collective bargaining agreement shall also be published on the website. Further, if the prevailing rate of wages is based on a collective bargaining agreement, the explanation of classes on the prevailing wage schedule shall be consistent with the classifications established under the collective bargaining agreement.
    At any time within 30 days after the Department of Labor has published on its official web site a prevailing wage schedule, any person affected thereby may object in writing to the determination or such part thereof as they may deem objectionable by filing a written notice with the Department of Labor stating the specified grounds of the objection. A person filing an objection alleging that the actual percentage of laborers, workers, or mechanics that receive a collectively bargained rate of wage is below the required 30% shall have the burden of establishing such and shall support the allegation with competent evidence. During the pendency of any objection and until final determination thereof, the work in question shall proceed under the rate established by the Department. It shall be the duty of the Department of Labor to set a date for a hearing on the objection after giving written notice to the objectors at least 10 days before the date of the hearing and said notice shall state the time and place of such hearing. Such hearing by the Department of Labor shall be held within 45 days after the objection is filed, and shall not be postponed or reset for a later date except upon the consent, in writing, of all the objectors and the Department of Labor.
    The Department of Labor may hear each written objection filed separately or consolidate for hearing any one or more written objections filed. At such hearing, the Department of Labor shall introduce in evidence the investigation it instituted which formed the basis of its determination, and the Department of Labor, or any interested objectors may thereafter introduce such evidence as is material to the issue. Thereafter, the Department of Labor, must rule upon the written objection and make such final determination as it believes the evidence warrants and serve a copy by personal service, registered mail, or electronic mail on all parties to the proceedings. The final determination by the Department of Labor shall be rendered within 30 days after the conclusion of the hearing.
    If proceedings to review judicially the final determination of the Department of Labor are not instituted as hereafter provided, such determination shall be final and binding.
    The provisions of the Administrative Review Law, and all amendments and modifications thereof, and the rules adopted pursuant thereto, shall apply to and govern all proceedings for the judicial review of final administrative decisions of the Department of Labor. The term "administrative decision" is defined as in Section 3-101 of the Code of Civil Procedure.
    Appeals from all final orders and judgments entered by the court in review of the final administrative decision of the Department of Labor, may be taken by any party to the action.
    Any proceeding in any court affecting a determination of the Department of Labor shall have priority in hearing and determination over all other civil proceedings pending in said court, except election contests.
    In all reviews or appeals under this Act, it shall be the duty of the Attorney General to represent the Department of Labor, and defend its determination.
(Source: P.A. 100-2, eff. 6-16-17; 100-154, eff. 8-18-17; 100-863, eff. 8-14-18; 100-1177, eff. 6-1-19.)

    
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 11 cases, 2003–2019 · leading case: Brandt Constr. Co. v. Ludwig, 878 N.E.2d 116 (Ill. App. Ct. 2007).
Brandt Constr. Co. v. Ludwig, 878 N.E.2d 116 (Ill. App. Ct. 2007). · cites it 6× “" 820 ILCS 130/9 (West 2004). As to changes in the prevailing rate, the Act provides: "If the Department of Labor revises the prevailing rate of hourly wages to be paid by the public body, the revised rate shall apply to such contract, and the public body shall be responsible to…”
Illinois Landscape Contractors Ass'n v. Dep't of Labor, 866 N.E.2d 592 (Ill. App. Ct. 2007). · cites it 6× “ILCA’s petition requested a hearing pursuant to section 9 of the Prevailing Wage Act (820 ILCS 130/9 (West 2004)) to establish the new classifications and wage rates that reflect the actual prevailing wage for each type of work.”
Todd v. Chaviano, 2019 IL App (5th) 170081 (Ill. App. Ct. 2019). · cites it 8× “820 ILCS 130/9 (West 2012). On November 4, 2013, Director Costigan issued a decision denying the Contractors’ request for a hearing.”
Shempf v. Chaviano, 2019 IL App (1st) 173146 (Ill. App. Ct. 2019). · cites it 3× “820 ILCS 130/9 (West 2016). The Department must give objectors an administrative hearing at which both the objectors *507 *419 and the Department (or any relevant local public body) will put forth evidence supporting their respective positions.”
Shempf v. Chaviano, 2019 IL App (1st) 173146 (Ill. App. Ct. 2019). · cites it 3× “June 16, 2017) (amending 820 ILCS 130/9). When we wrote that passage, we were only discussing section 9’s operations in general terms; that is, the issue of a specific date for the Department’s posting of county-by-county wage rates had not been briefed, it was not before us as…”
People ex rel. Dep't of Labor v. Skoog Landscape & Design, 337 Ill. App. 3d 232 (Ill. App. Ct. 2003). · cites it 24× “820 ILCS 130/9 (West 1998). If a public body does not investigate and ascertain the prevailing rate during June, then the rate which the Department has set for the county in which the public body is located becomes the prevailing wage rate.”
Todd v. Chaviano, 2019 IL App (5th) 170081 (Ill. App. Ct. 2019). · cites it 10× “In June 2013, the Department, under the authority of Director Joseph Costigan, published, pursuant to section 9 of the Act (820 ILCS 130/9 (West 2012)), prevailing wage rates on its official website.”
Todd v. Chaviano, 2019 IL App (5th) 170081 (Ill. App. Ct. 2019). · cites it 11× “In June 2013, the Department, under the authority of Director Joseph Costigan, published, pursuant to section 9 of the Act ( 820 ILCS 130/9 (West 2012) ), prevailing wage rates on its official website.”
Shempf v. Chaviano, 2019 IL App (1st) 173146 (Ill. App. Ct. 2019). · cites it 2× “See 820 ILCS 130/9 (West 2016). The Administrative Review Law applies 12 No.”
Brandt Consturction Co. v. Ludwig (Ill. App. Ct. 2007). · cites it 3× “" 820 ILCS 130/9 (West 2004). As to changes in the prevailing rate, the Act provides: “If the Department of Labor revises the prevailing rate of hourly wages to be paid by the public body, the revised rate shall apply to such contract, and the public body shall be responsible to…”
Illinois Landscape Contractors Ass'n v. The Dep't of Labor (Ill. App. Ct. 2007). · cites it 3× “The ALJ's decision included the following findings of fact and conclusions of law: (1) DOL does not update classifications annually and relied upon its existing classes when it reviewed the 2004 wage schedule; (2) DOL properly held this hearing upon ILCA's formal objection; (3)…”
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.