remedy ordered by the supreme court and the problem with the court's order as it relates to remedy is that it reason confusion exactly what the department is supposed to do and what is supposed to happen going forward because we're there appears to abate when i call my brief the two thousand and fourteen administrative proceedings and we believe that this sort of court was mistaken ue their conclusion but also and importantly we're asking them would i were the court orders here the court provide clear direction for the real action that should be taken going forward and how it relates to the underlying administrative proceedings given that there are a lot of moving parts here there's multiple cars with competing interests there who are geisha into forums which we tried to have in one forum who were  it's not helpful here to telling us what should happen going forward and they also say well it was proper who are the circuit court to to bring in street to say that these two thousand and thirteen believe there's a dispute about the fact that we met the so that because we live within a month of the underlying proceedings initiation the second thing that must be met for purposes of intervention is representation by the existing problems you is inadequate several levels of the record that have been left out are not necessarily addressed as thoroughly as they should be but in this case for example my clients do not agree that the director of the only department of labor's determination as an abuse of discretion should be not adequately represent the interests of the with those intervening in this case there's not a potential conflict of interest they are in opposing party and so clearly they're not representing our interests in fact the prevailing region germination that did not include a survey and in that case what they did was they reached a consensus decree with each other and with i guess the rest by the department waiver in the ministry of water that's origin my name is ellen shields will haskins and i represent the midwest laborers which is a labor organization that includes ninety three counties in illinois and that's seven central and portions of  and that is a once you really perceive and that's important because your right to a section nine hearing comes about once a year and that's when the posting of the prevailing wage rates for the whole said not in effect so at that point since this was laborers work little risk classification we had to do something with a section nine through the department of labor in order to exhaust  that twenty thirteen consumer decrees and prevailing wage classification that had been entered on behalf of the laborers was correct and appropriate transcripts from all the proceedings of twenty four team were abandoned and were not going to be will be used be used because we had to go back to the department and we had to go through an informal process which allowed us basically getting the classification through the twenty fourteen proceedings we didn't ask the department for an appeal and we were did not we had no choice at that point we is that the a case was filed in chicago before ours and i know that you know from the record that the judge in chicago in that case has ruled that these are not the same cases not the same denied that and then the coalition writ to the could county judge and ask that we'd be enjoying from going forward and saying they are counting the could with no due process with norway history review and go through that again we had spent six days a hearing in in this case to try to get a resolution in th that you don't get to just weigh in and support some and particularly in this case where the attorney general represents the department of labor and they did it during the period adequate job in fa accepting that that is the case here is what the correct remedy should be that the two thousand and fourteen proceeding should continue that roger cohen it's consistent it is narrowing our arguments