The city of Chicago has agreed to a $100,000 settlement with whistleblowers dismissed by City Treasurer Melissa Conyears-Ervin. The settlement, reported by the Chicago Tribune, comes with an exceptional gag order preventing the whistleblowers from publicly discussing any negative incidents in Conyears-Ervin's office. This is an unprecedented condition within such settlements with city workers in the past five years.
A significant finding from the Tribune investigation was that the settlement involving the treasurer's former employees was one-of-a-kind, among more than three dozen others. In some instances, ex-employees were forbidden to discuss the terms of their settlements, they still retained the ability to talk about their tenure in the city government.
According to a report by CBS News, the allegations against Conyears-Ervin were voiced by two of her former employees in December 2020. They voiced their concerns regarding unethical conduct and potential misconduct, including directing employees on personal errands and using city resources for private purposes. Consequently, the Chicago Inspector General seized computing devices from Conyears-Ervin's office to investigate these claims.
Despite this, the non-disparagement clause in the agreement is so restrictive, it includes a prohibition on whistleblowers making any "false and disparaging" remarks to the media. The fact that the Lightfoot administration insisted on this term raises further questions about its purpose, potentially to stop public discussion of allegations against Conyears-Ervin.
Neither Mayor Brandon Johnson's Office nor the Law Department have addressed specific queries about the settlement or associates with Conyears-Ervin directly. Instead, their responses have remained focused on stating that the settlement was fully negotiated between all involved parties.
Chicago governmental ethics expert and retired University of Illinois at Chicago professor Dick Simpson argued the distinctive nature of this single settlement out of 37 total suggests favoritism towards Conyears-Ervin. It raises further doubts behind the rationale and intention of the gag order. Although non-disparagement agreements aren't unusual in private sector employment lawsuits, they've been criticized for their potential in silencing accusations in misconduct cases.
It's worthy to the note that a recently enacted Illinois law in October 2021 prohibited employers, with some notable exceptions, from signing settlement agreements that silence ex-employees from making "truthful statements" or publicly discussing "unlawful employment practices".
The exact nature of allegations against Conyears-Ervin remains under Inspector General's investigation. The public, meanwhile, questions the motives behind the gag order and overall handling of this situation by city offices. As more information potentially emerges, the non-disparagement clause in the settlement requires close examination, balancing the potential silencing of whistleblowers with the demand for transparency from public officials.
