Date: 201703
Local time of day: 1801-2400
Location: ZAU.ARTCC, IL
Light: Night
Aircraft: Large Transport; Low Wing; 2 Turbojet Eng
Operator: Air Carrier
Operating under: Part 121
Flight plan: IFR
Mission: Passenger
Flight phase: Climb
Airspace: Class E ZAU
ATC / advisory: Center ZAU
Reporter organization: Government
Reporter function: Enroute
Reporter qualification: Air Traffic Control Fully Certified
Human factors: Troubleshooting; Situational Awareness; Distraction; Confusion; Communication Breakdown; Workload
Anomaly: ATC Issue All Types; Deviation - Track / Heading All Types; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Clearance; Deviation / Discrepancy - Procedural Published Material / Policy; Inflight Event / Encounter Weather / Turbulence
Detector: Person Air Traffic Control; Person Flight Crew
When detected: In-flight
Result: Air Traffic Control Provided Assistance
Contributing factors: Human Factors; Weather; Procedure
Primary problem: Human Factors

Narrative: Aircraft X was on a westbound heading at 110 parallel to the south of a thunderstorm affecting C90 and ORD. Aircraft was traveling inbound to ORD and was attempting to find a gap in the storm to proceed north to get to the field. The sector I was working (43/44) works C90 southbound departures; that are delivered climbing to 15000. C90 arrival controller called me regarding Aircraft X who I had observed traveling just north of my boundary. They wanted to coordinate the aircraft on a 210 heading climbing to 10000 saying that he wasn't going to get through and would need to divert to an alternate airport. Also he said he needed to get him out of his airspace before he became a problem.I only own 11000 and above; so I agreed to coordinate with sector below me to try and help them out. I know there were a lot of diverts earlier in the evening; so I thought this was just another one of many. When the aircraft checked on I climbed him into my airspace and queried them as to what divert/alternate airport they selected. The flight crew advised they didn't want to divert; they had plenty of fuel and wanted to attempt to get in to ORD. At this point the aircraft was well established on a 210 heading and pointed away from ORD and the referenced weather. There was no longer any way for Aircraft X to see the weather on their onboard radar since it was well outside of their line of sight; and there was no practical way to point the aircraft back in that direction.The C90 controller was at best not forthcoming with the entire story; and at worst; dishonest. From my perspective and the information I have available; they chose not to discuss any of these options; their plan; or the reason for the vector with the pilots of Aircraft X. While the C90 controller made it sound like the aircraft was aware and working on a plan to divert; it was very clear when I asked the pilot that they hadn't yet thought about or been told about a plan to divert. Furthermore; I called back to C90 arrivals and advised them that Aircraft X did not want to divert; to which he responded that I 'make Bearz [sector 35] eat 'em'; who apparently was the controller that handed off Aircraft X to C90. After heading southwest bound for 50-60 miles with no way to safely make it to the backside of the storm; Aircraft X had to divert.Given the weather; it is very likely that the aircraft wasn't going to be able to make it in to ORD. However; it is unsafe and unprofessional for a controller to vector an aircraft out of their airspace while not advising the pilot of the intentions. They took away the aircrafts ability to safely observe and judge the weather to make an informed decision; and forced their hand the other way. The controller admitted on the line that they thought he was going to just be 'a problem'.As controllers; we should do all we can to help aircraft safely navigate convective activity. Sometimes; this may involve advising the pilot that we cannot safely let them continue further; and that we need to move them away from the weather; and possibly even clear them to an alternate airport. However; this all requires the controller to advise the aircraft of their intentions. Controllers should not arbitrarily divert an aircraft based on an unwillingness to be bothered. Additionally; communication needs to be clear an honest. I was told an aircraft was working on an alternate; when they were clearly not. Lying during controller to controller coordination is a major safety risk; but at least unprofessional. Both items should be briefed as to their severity in nature.




Synopsis: ZAU Center Controller reported that a C90 TRACON Controller advised the Center Controller that an aircraft wanted to divert. The pilot never wanted to divert and the reporting Controller advised that the TRACON Controller was not helpful nor honest.