1

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS

EASTERN DIVISION

EREK SLATER, )

)

PLAINTIFF, )

) 1:20-cv-3356

v. ) 

) 

CHICAGO TRANSIT AUTHORITY, )

a Municipal Corporation, )

) 

DEFENDANT. )

COMPLAINT

1. Plaintiff Erek Slater (“Plaintiff Slater”), is a bus operator employed by the 

Defendant Chicago Transit Authority (“Defendant CTA”), and Executive Board Member of the 

Amalgamated Transit Union Local 241 (“ATU Local 241”), the certified labor organization

representing bus operators for the Defendant CTA. Plaintiff Slater brings this Complaint pursuant 

to 42 U.S.C. § 1983 to enforce his rights to freedom of speech and freedom of association under 

the First Amendment of the United States Constitution as those rights are incorporated by the 

Fourteenth Amendment. Plaintiff Slater alleges that the Defendant CTA is violating his First 

Amendment rights under color of state law by prohibiting him from discussing the safety, political 

and moral concerns held by himself and other bus operators related to the dangerous duties of 

transporting police to protests and transporting arrested demonstrators away from communities 

where many of these drivers live and discussing whether bus operators have the right to refuse said 

duties. Plaintiff Slater seeks preliminary and permanent injunctive relief against Defendant CTA’s

prohibition of said discussions and Defendant CTA’s retaliation against him for participating in 

said discussions.

Case: 1:20-cv-03356 Document #: 1 Filed: 06/08/20 Page 1 of 13 PageID #:1
2

PARTIES

2. Plaintiff Slater is a resident of the City of Chicago, Illinois, and is employed as a 

bus operator by the Defendant CTA and is an Executive Board Member of ATU Local 241, the 

certified Illinois labor organization representing the bus operators employed by the Defendant 

CTA. 

3. The Chicago Transit Authority is a body politic and municipal corporation with its 

principal office in the City of Chicago. See 70 ILCS 3605/3 & 5.

JURISDICTION AND VENUE

4. This Court has jurisdiction over this action pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1331 because it

arises under the Constitution and laws of the United States, namely the First Amendment, 

Fourteenth Amendment, and 42 U.S.C. § 1983. 

5. Venue is proper in the Northern District of Illinois under 28 U.S.C. § 1391 because 

the Defendant is located in this district and all the events and omissions giving rise to the claims 

occurred in this district. 

FACTS

6. This is an unprecedented time for the bus operators of the Defendant CTA. Bus 

operators employed by the Defendant CTA are being ordered to transport packed buses of law 

enforcement, where social distancing is impossible, during a world-wide pandemic and are

potentially exposing themselves, their families and their loved ones to deadly disease. 

7. Not only are these bus operators being asked to endanger themselves and their 

families from COVID-19 exposure, they are also being asked to place themselves in the middle of 

conflict zones with potentially violent protestors, law enforcement and military personnel. 

Case: 1:20-cv-03356 Document #: 1 Filed: 06/08/20 Page 2 of 13 PageID #:2
3

8. Many bus operators, like millions of citizens across the country, also hold sincere 

political and moral convictions regarding the use of police force against demonstrating civilians.

9. Many bus operators have legitimate political and moral concerns regarding the 

heavily armed law enforcement and military response to the recent demonstrations against police 

brutality in Chicago and about being ordered to participate in these law enforcement actions

through transporting law enforcement and military personnel to and from demonstrations. Bus 

operators sought and obtained civilian employment with the Defendant CTA, not conscription into 

military service to quell domestic demonstrations against police brutality. 

10. Across the country, public bus operators affiliated with ATU locals have expressed 

disagreement with orders to transport demonstrators against police brutality who are arrested under 

questionable color of law and orders to transport law enforcement who may be effectuating said 

arrests. 

11. In addition to those with political and secular concerns with becoming part of the 

law enforcement response to police brutality demonstrations, some bus operators are opposed to 

conscription into law enforcement and military operations in the City of Chicago on firmly held 

and sincere religious beliefs and moral pacifism. 

12. Bus operators recognize the obvious – that being ordered to intervene in areas of

conflict between law enforcement and police brutality demonstrators through transporting law 

enforcement and arrested demonstrators during a global pandemic, poses a danger to themselves 

and their families, and these bus operators, including Plaintiff Slater, are reasonably discussing 

exactly what risks are posed by these orders and what their rights are relative to these risks. 

13. Plaintiff Slater wishes to participate in off-duty discussions with his fellow bus 

operators regarding their safety, political and moral concerns related to orders to transport law 

Case: 1:20-cv-03356 Document #: 1 Filed: 06/08/20 Page 3 of 13 PageID #:3
4

enforcement and military personnel to protests and potential orders to transport arrested 

demonstrators away from communities where many of these drivers live and whether bus operators 

have the legal right to refuse said duties. 

14. Plaintiff Slater wishes to hold these discussions during non-working time, in 

customary non-work areas at the Defendant’s North Park Bus Garage located at 3112 W Foster 

Ave, Chicago, IL 60625, such as the Transportation Building breakroom and outdoor area with 

picnic tables between the parking lot and the Transportation Building. 

15. Plaintiff Slater especially wants to discuss these concerns with fellow bus operators 

at the Defendant CTA’s North Park Bus Garage because that is where the bus operators are already 

speaking to each other about their safety concerns, rights and working conditions and because the 

Mass Membership Meetings of ATU Local 241 and access to ATU Local 241 facilities have been 

restricted due to the COVID-19 pandemic. 

16. Defendant CTA regularly permits its bus operators, including Plaintiff Slater, to 

engage in discussions and distribute material related to union and non-union matters when offduty in non-work areas that do not disrupt the service of Defendant CTA, such as the 

Transportation Building breakroom and outdoor area with picnic tables between the parking lot 

and Transportation Building at the Defendant CTA’s North Park Bus Garage.

17. Defendant CTA also permits the elected union officials of ATU Local 241, 

including Plaintiff Slater, to be on the premises of the Defendant CTA’s North Park Bus Garage

outside of their hours of duty as bus operators for discussion of union business with fellow ATU 

Local 241 represented bus operators.

Case: 1:20-cv-03356 Document #: 1 Filed: 06/08/20 Page 4 of 13 PageID #:4
5

On May 31, 2020 Defendant CTA Disrupted and Prohibited Disfavored Discussions of 

Concerns Regarding Orders to Transport Law Enforcement to Demonstrations by Bus 

Operators at Defendant CTA’s North Park Bus Garage

18. On May 31, 2020, at approximately 10:00 a.m,, Plaintiff Slater attempted to hold a

off-duty discussion with approximately 20-25 off-duty bus operators at the outdoor picnic table 

area between the parking lot and the Transportation Building at the Defendant CTA’s North Park 

Bus Garage. The off-duty bus operators were to discuss their concerns and rights relative to orders 

to transport law enforcement to conflict areas with police brutality demonstrators and potential 

orders to transport arrested demonstrators.

19. At said time and place, Plaintiff Slater and his fellow bus operators were 

approached by Defendant CTA’s Senior Manager for the North Park Bus Garage, Jeffery Smith 

(“Sr. Manager Smith”). 

20. At said time and place, Sr. Manager Smith called Plaintiff Slater an “idiot”, 

declared that the meeting was “illegal” and in violation of Defendant CTA’s work rule prohibiting 

“wildcat strikes” and ordered the meeting dispersed. 

21. Sr. Manager Smith then ordered Plaintiff Slater off the property of the Defendant 

CTA’s North Park Bus Garage, threatened Plaintiff Slater to discharge Plaintiff Slater for violating 

the prohibition on “wildcat strikes” and threatened to call the Chicago Police Department to 

forcibly remove Plaintiff Slater from the property of the Defendant CTA’s North Park Bus Garage. 

22. Plaintiff Slater complied with the order and left the property and the informal 

gathering of off-duty bus operators dispersed. 

Case: 1:20-cv-03356 Document #: 1 Filed: 06/08/20 Page 5 of 13 PageID #:5
6

On June 1, 2020 Defendant CTA Again Disrupted and Prohibited Disfavored Discussions

of Concerns Regarding Orders to Transport Law Enforcement to Demonstrations by Bus 

Operators at Defendant CTA’s North Park Bus Garage

23. On June 1, 2020, at approximately 1:00 p.m., Plaintiff Slater attempted to hold 

another informal discussion with approximately 8 off-duty bus operators in the breakroom of the 

Transportation Building of the Defendant CTA’s North Park Bus Garage regarding the concerns 

and rights of bus operators relative to orders to transport law enforcement to conflict areas with 

police brutality demonstrators and the transportation of arrested demonstrators.

24. At said time and place, Sr. Manager Smith confronted Plaintiff Slater, and ordered 

him to end the discussion on the basis it was a prohibited “wildcat strike”. Sr. Manager Smith then 

left the area.

25. A few minutes later, Plaintiff Slater attempted to restart the conversation with 

approximately 5 off-duty bus operators in the same breakroom area inside the Transportation 

Building of the Defendant CTA’s North Park Bus Garage.

26. At said time and place, Sr. Manager Smith again confronted Plaintiff Slater and 

again ordered him to end the attempted discussion on the basis that it was a prohibited “wildcat 

strike” and threatened Plaintiff Slater again with forcible removal from the property if he 

continued. Plaintiff Slater complied. 

27. Defendant CTA prohibits “wildcat strikes” through Rule 14(b) of the General Rule

Book, applicable to all employees of Defendant CTA, including Plaintiff Slater, which states as 

follows:

Rule 14. Personal Conduct – The following acts are not permissible

(b) Leading fellow employees into a wildcat strike, work slowdowns, or other 

impermissible job action, attempting to cause such a job action, or participating in such a 

job action. 

Case: 1:20-cv-03356 Document #: 1 Filed: 06/08/20 Page 6 of 13 PageID #:6
7

Exhibit 1, CTA General Rule Book.

On June 5, 2020, Defendant CTA Issued a Behavioral Violation to Plaintiff Slater for the 

May 31, 2020 Discussion and Called the Chicago Police Department to Remove Plaintiff 

Slater from the Defendant CTA’s North Park Bus Garage in Retaliation for Plaintiff

Slater’s First Amendment Activity and to Chill the First Amendment Activity of his Fellow 

Bus Operators

28. On June 5, 2020, at approximately 5:45 a.m., Plaintiff Slater reported to the 

Transportation Building at the Defendant CTA’s North Park Bus Garage to drive his scheduled 

bus route.

29. When Plaintiff Slater attempted to scan in to begin his shift operating a bus for 

Defendant CTA, the computer informed him to see the manager.

30. Plaintiff Slater then went to the management office in the Transportation Building 

at the Defendant CTA’s North Park Bus Garage and met with the manager on-duty, Defendant

CTA’s Transportation Manager, Tony Wojewocki (“Transportation Manager Wojewocki”), who

formerly worked as a police officer.

31. Transportation Manager Wojewocki verbally informed Plaintiff Slater he was taken 

out of service due to promoting a “work stoppage” and issued an “interview record” (Exhibit 2, 

June 5, 2020 “Interview Record” regarding May 31, 2020 behavioral violation) to Plaintiff Slater,

alleging a behavioral violation for May 31, 2020, with citations to the following rule violations:

a. General System Rule 14(d): “Insubordination” (Exhibit 1, CTA General Rule 

Book);

b. General System Rule 14(e): “Conducting unbecoming of an employee” (Exhibit 1);

c. General System Rule 14(x): “Disrespect to supervisory personnel, co-workers, or 

the public” (Exhibit 1);

Case: 1:20-cv-03356 Document #: 1 Filed: 06/08/20 Page 7 of 13 PageID #:7
8

d. System Rule B1: “General Information” (Exhibit 3, “CTA Bus System Rule 

Book”); and

e. System Rule B2.6: “Prohibited Activities” (Exhibit 3).

32. Plaintiff Slater reviewed the “interview record” and asked Transportation 

Wojewocki to clarify the conduct that violated the rules cited by the “interview record” and 

incorporate this clarification in the written “interview record”.

33. Transportation Manager Wojewocki refused, informed Plaintiff Slater that a

hearing on the alleged behavioral violation was scheduled for Thursday, June 11, 2020, at 9:00 

a.m. and ordered Plaintiff Slater to sign the “interview record.”

34. Plaintiff Slater signed the “interview record” under protest, obtained a copy and 

proceeded to the breakroom at the Defendant CTA’s North Park Bus Garage.

35. Plaintiff Slater in his capacity of an elected Executive Board Member of ATU Local 

241 then began in the Transportation Building breakroom discussing with bus operators his being 

taken out of service and disciplined for exercising his First Amendment rights and regarding the 

Defendant CTA’s disruption of discussions regarding bus operator concerns with orders to 

transport police to demonstrations on the pretext that these discussions constituted “wildcat strike”

activity.

36. Transportation Manager Wojewocki then entered the breakroom and ordered the 

discussion ended and ordered Plaintiff Slater to leave the premises of Defendant CTA’s North Park 

Bus Garage.

37. Shortly after, Chicago Police Department officers arrived, and Plaintiff Slater

complied with the order to leave the premises.

Defendant CTA’s Actions Follow Established Pattern of Illegal Suppression of Disfavored 

Speech on the Pretext of “Wildcat Strike” Activity

Case: 1:20-cv-03356 Document #: 1 Filed: 06/08/20 Page 8 of 13 PageID #:8
9

38. Defendant CTA’s actions at issue are part of a consistent pattern and practice of 

abuse and infringement of Plaintiff Slater’s freedom of speech by Defendant CTA. 

39. On June 10, 2015, Defendant CTA’s then Senior Manager Jairo Naranjo (“Sr. 

Manager Naranjo”) illegally disrupted Plaintiff Slater’s attempt to hold discussions of a similar 

nature with off-duty bus operatorsin the same Transportation Building breakroom at the Defendant

CTA’s North Park Bus Garage regarding solidarity with the Chicago Teachers Union. Exhibit 4, 

Erek Slater v. CTA, 34 PERI ¶ 160 (IL LRB-LP 2018) (RDO at pp. 33, 44). Using an identical 

unlawful pretext, Sr. Manager Naranjo called Plaintiff Slater’s speech “wildcat strike” activity in 

violation of Rule 14(b) and prohibited him from discussing the anticipated Chicago Teachers 

Union strike on the property of Defendant CTA’s North Park Bus Garage. Id. This prohibition

was held by the Illinois Labor Relations Board – Local Panel to violate Plaintiff Slater’s rights 

pursuant to Section 10(a)(1) of the Illinois Public Labor Relations Act, 5 ILCS 315/10(a)(1). Id.

at 44. 

40. Following this illegal disruption of Plaintiff Slater’s speech, Defendant CTA then 

violated its collective bargaining agreement and terminated Plaintiff Slater for his protected union 

activity. Exhibit 5, Slater/ATU Local 241 v. CTA (Proposed Arbitration Award, 2017) at pg. 32.

Plaintiff Slater was subsequently reinstated with backpay following successful arbitration of his 

termination. Id.

Future Demonstrations and Future First Amendment Infringements by the Defendant 

CTA Are Foreseeable as the Concurrent Crises Facing Our County Will Continue After 

the Immediate Demonstrations Conclude

41. The unprecedented economic recession, the COVID-19 pandemic and decades of 

accumulated social frustration at disparities in the criminal justice system, in economic 

Case: 1:20-cv-03356 Document #: 1 Filed: 06/08/20 Page 9 of 13 PageID #:9
10

opportunity, in housing, in education, in access to healthcare etc., will outlast the current round of 

demonstrations.

42. As the underlying conditions will persist for future demonstrations, there remains

an on-going, foreseeable risk that the Defendant CTA will continue to order bus operators to 

transport police to demonstrations and will continue to infringe on disfavor speech by bus 

operators discussing concerns about these orders.

43. Therefore, even after the current round of demonstrations end, the Defendant 

CTA’s prohibition of bus operator speech, justified on the conflation of protected discussion of

legitimate concerns and rights about dangerous orders with prohibited “wildcat strike” activity will 

not be rendered moot, but will remain an active point of contention and a fundamental question of 

the application of the First Amendment rights of bus operators like Plaintiff Slater, and the actions 

of the Defendant CTA ripe for redress by this Court. 

COUNT I

42 U.S.C. § 1983

Violation of First and Fourteenth Amendments

44. Plaintiff Slater re-alleges and incorporates by reference all preceding Paragraphs of 

this Complaint herein this Paragraph.

45. Defendant CTA has previously opened the breakroom inside the Transportation 

Building at Defendant CTA’s North Park Bus Garage and the outdoor picnic table area between 

the parking lot and Transportation Building as forums for speech, including the distribution of 

materials, by Plaintiffs’ members regarding union business and politics, their mutual benefit, and 

the terms and conditions of their employment by CTA. 

Case: 1:20-cv-03356 Document #: 1 Filed: 06/08/20 Page 10 of 13 PageID #:10
11

46. Defendant CTA has previously permitted elected union representatives, including

Plaintiff Slater, on the premises of Defendant CTA’s North Park Bus Garage when not in service 

as bus operators to conduct union business, including discussion with fellow bus operators.

47. By prohibiting Plaintiff Slater from discussing bus operator concerns and rights 

related to the transportation of law enforcement and arrested demonstrators, even during nonworking time in non-work areas and in a manner that does not interfere with CTA’s work or 

passengers, the CTA has imposed an unreasonable content-based restriction on Plaintiff Slater’s

speech, in violation of Plaintiff Slater’s rights under the First Amendment as it is incorporated by 

the Fourteenth Amendment to apply to the State of Illinois and its instrumentalities. 

48. Defendant CTA has explicitly imposed this prohibition as a matter of policy 

through its Sr. Manager Jeffery Smith, through the Transportation Manager Wojewocki’s 

conversation with Plaintiff Slater, and through the behavioral violation issued to Plaintiff Slater 

for the May 31, 2020 discussion. 

49. On June 5, 2020, Defendant CTA directly retaliated against Plaintiff Slater by 

removing him from service, issuing the behavioral violation detailed in the “interview record” to 

be heard on June 11, 2020, at 9:00 a.m. and by have the Chicago Police Department remove him 

from the premises.

50. CTA has done so under color of state law.

51. Defendant CTA’s prohibition on the rights of bus operators to discuss their safety, 

moral and political concerns regarding orders to transport police demonstrations while off-duty in 

non-work areas of the Defendant CTA’s North Park Bus Garage and discipline of Plaintiff Slater

Case: 1:20-cv-03356 Document #: 1 Filed: 06/08/20 Page 11 of 13 PageID #:11
12

for engaging in said conduct on May 31, 2020, are the types and kinds of actions that would chill 

and discourage First Amendment expression of reasonable bus operators.

52. By singling out and prohibited disfavored bus operator speech raising concerns 

about assignments to transport law enforcement personnel and arrested demonstrators during 

demonstrations, and by disciplining and calling the police on Plaintiff Slater to further this 

prohibition, the Defendant CTA has engaged in an unreasonable and unconstitutional viewpointbased restriction on Plaintiff Slater’s First Amendment speech and infringes on the First

Amendment rights of all bus operators.

WHEREFORE, Plaintiff Erek Slater respectfully prays that the Court: 

A. Enter judgment in favor of Plaintiff Erek Slater and against Defendant CTA; 

B. Preliminary and permanently order Defendant CTA to immediately rescind the behavioral 

violation issued to Plaintiff Slater for the May 31, 2020 discussion and order Defendant 

CTA to immediately reinstate Plaintiff Erek Slater into active service;

C. Preliminarily and permanently enjoin Defendant CTA from disciplining or otherwise 

retaliating against Plaintiff Erek Slater for off-duty discussions with other off-duty bus 

operators regarding their concerns and rights related to the transportation of law 

enforcement and military personnel and arrested demonstrators in the breakroom of the 

Transportation Building, the outdoor picnic table area between the Transportation Building

and the parking lot, and other non-work areas at Defendant CTA’s North Park Bus Garage 

that do not cause disruption to Defendant CTA service;

D. Declare that Plaintiff Erek Slater and his fellow bus operators may have off-duty 

discussions regarding their concerns and rights related to the transportation of law 

Case: 1:20-cv-03356 Document #: 1 Filed: 06/08/20 Page 12 of 13 PageID #:12
13

enforcement and military personnel and arrested demonstrators in the breakroom of the 

Transportation Building, the outdoor picnic table area between the Transportation Building 

and the parking lot, and other non-work areas at Defendant CTA’s North Park Bus Garage 

that do not cause disruption to Defendant CTA service

E. Preliminarily and permanently enjoin Defendant CTA from prohibiting Plaintiff Erek 

Slater and his fellow bus operators from holding off-duty discussions regarding their

concerns and rights related to the transportation of law enforcement and military personnel

and arrested demonstrators in the breakroom of the Transportation Building, the outdoor 

picnic table area between the Transportation Building and the parking lot, and other nonwork areas at Defendant CTA’s North Park Bus Garage that do not cause disruption to 

Defendant CTA service;

F. Grant Plaintiff Erek Slater’s attorney’s fees and costs; and

G. Whatever other relief this Court deems necessary and just.

Respectfully submitted,

By: __/s/ Nicholas Kreitman, Esq.

Nicholas Kreitman, Esq.

Plaintiff’s Attorney

Nicholas Kreitman, Esq.

#6313283

TEMPORARY COVID-19 MAILING ADDRESS:

1350 North Wells Street, D204

Chicago, Illinois 60610

(847) 970-0575

njk@kreitmanlaw.com 

Case: 1:20-cv-03356 Document #: 1 Filed: 06/08/20 Page 13 of 13 PageID #:13