About | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline Law Journal Library | HeinOnline
LOG IN
LOG IN

44 N. Ill. U. L. Rev. i (2023)

handle is hein.journals/niulr44 and id is 1 raw text is: NORTHERN ILLINOIS UNIVERSITY LAW REVIEW VOLUME 44 FALL 2023 ISSUE 1 CONTENTS ARTICLES The Future of Employee Job Security in Illinois Daniel S. Alcorn................................................................................................................1 The at-will employment doctrine is more than a century and a half old. Illinois has long subscribed to the at-will employment doctrine, but the doctrine is dying a slow death. The doctrine has positive and negative aspects, but the lack of employee job security will prove to be a fatal flaw. The doctrine is not so well founded in reason or legal history to save it. Employee job security is becoming increasingly desirable and important. The legislatures and courts are making significant inroads on the doctrine to protect employee job security. A bill to abrogate the doctrine and require cause for discharge has surfaced in Illinois, and while unsuccessful this legislative effort will undoubtedly be revisited. Illinois will need to prepare for the aftermath of the doctrine's demise. Legislation is the best bet for a quick and durable fix. A simple approach to legislation in this area has the best chances of political viability. A good fix would consist of a concise statute abrogating the at-will doctrine, requiring that any employer have just cause for terminating any non-probationary employee, and affording an aggrieved employee a private right of action for wrongful discharge (with the employee having the burden of establishing a lack ofjust cause) to be pursued in the Illinois Circuit Courts. Rights Without Remedies: How the Illinois Post-Conviction Hearing Act's Standing Requirement Has Failed Defendants Nate Nieman ...................................................................................................................21 The Illinois Post-Conviction Act is a procedural mechanism that allows a criminal defendant to assert that his federal or state constitutional rights were substantially violated during trial or at sentencing. The passage of the Act expanded a defendant's ability to challenge his conviction and sentences collaterally, where before the Act, he had only been able to raise these challenges on direct appeal. However, the Act's strict standing requirement precludes defendants from relief once they have completed their sentence, ignoring the fact that many important, life-altering civil consequences resulting from criminal convictions occur after a sentence has concluded. This Article argues that the Act's standing requirement inadequately contemplates later collateral consequences flowing from a defendant's conviction that are just as if not more important to a defendant than the conviction that triggered the collateral consequences in the first place. These collateral consequences place a defendant's liberty in jeopardy, yet many defendants currently are unable to use the Act to challenge the convictions that triggered these collateral consequences. I argue that the Act's standing requirement could be modified i

What Is HeinOnline?

HeinOnline is a subscription-based resource containing thousands of academic and legal journals from inception; complete coverage of government documents such as U.S. Statutes at Large, U.S. Code, Federal Register, Code of Federal Regulations, U.S. Reports, and much more. Documents are image-based, fully searchable PDFs with the authority of print combined with the accessibility of a user-friendly and powerful database. For more information, request a quote or trial for your organization below.



Short-term subscription options include 24 hours, 48 hours, or 1 week to HeinOnline.

Purchase Access

Contact us for annual subscription options:

Contact Us

Already a HeinOnline Subscriber?

Log In

profiles profiles most