EAST ST. LOUIS - U.S. District Judge Stephen McGlynn temporarily blocked state managers from recovering $1,195.92 they paid to corrections officer Garrett Rose of Salem while they went about firing him for not wearing a mask.
McGlynn granted an injunction to Rose on Nov. 11, pending a hearing.
The amount represents health care deductions the state didn’t deduct.
“There can be no adequate remedy at law for the loss of his home if he cannot pay his mortgage, the loss of electricity if he cannot pay a utility bill, the loss of his car if he cannot pay his loan, or the lack of food on his family’s table,” McGlynn wrote.
State managers notified Rose in September that an underpayment occurred on his health and dental plans from March 16 to May 31.
They advised him to mail a check or a money order by Oct. 25, or the comptroller would withhold it from his wages as Central City police officer.
Rose’s counsel Darrell Dunham of Carbondale sued the state and central manager Anthony Pascente for relief on Oct. 31.
He stated Rose was 28 and married with two children.
He stated Rose was the primary income producer for his family and currently took home about $2,400 a month.
He claimed it was fully established that the state couldn’t seize wages without according notice and a hearing.
He stated Rose was appealing his termination.
McGlynn found Rose demonstrated a likelihood of success on the merits.
He found whatever harm the state would suffer from an injunction paled in comparison to the loss Rose would endure.
“Although Rose’s loss of wages could be compensated for later, if he prevails in his suit, he would be irreparably harmed because those wages are essential for the support and welfare of his family now,” he wrote.
He set the order to expire on Nov. 21.
As of Nov. 28, the docket didn’t show a hearing date.
Illinois civil service commission, which will hear Rose’s appeal of his termination, released a statement of correction department charges.
It stated Rose worked at Centralia correctional center.
It listed reprimands on March 1 and 5 and suspensions for a day on March 6, three days on March 7, and five days on March 8.
It stated on March 14, 15, 18, and 19, he “attempted to enter the facility without wearing a facial mask and was denied access.”
It stated those dates put his suspensions at seven, ten, 15 and 20 days, and the last date put him at discharge.
It stated the department held a hearing in April and suspended Rose pending discharge on May 20.
Discharge followed on June 9, effective June 10.
The department stated, “Due to correctional officer Rose’s blatant violations of this agency’s directives, including the seriousness and nature of the infraction, serious doubt is cast of the suitability of Garrett Rose to retain his position.”