Illinois taxpayers have won a partial victory in the first round of impasse proceedings between the state and the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees, as the administrative law judge’s ruling puts the state closer to implementing its last contract offer to state AFSCME workers.

An administrative law judge could issue a decision as early as Sept. 1 on whether Illinois state workers and the governor are at an impasse in contract negotiations. Here’s a rundown of the proceedings between Illinois’ largest government-worker union and the state, as well as their potential impact on residents and state employees.

Fair share payers cannot be penalized by a union for working during a strike. And the state has just made it easier for Illinois AFSCME members to become fair share payers.

A potential strike from the state’s largest government-worker union would be the first of its kind, and could cost its members the most.

The Illinois Nurses Association is lobbying for a bill that would force taxpayers to pay for Illinois Department of Corrections medical employees who are no longer needed and would impede the state’s ability to subcontract to improve medical services for inmates.

Despite prior agreements with the state, Illinois’ largest government-worker union is backtracking on its promises and distorting facts in order to reach its unreasonable demands.

AFSCME officials have indicated that the union is preparing to strike this fall.

The Illinois Labor Relations Board on July 7 denied Gov. Bruce Rauner’s request to expedite contract-negotiation impasse proceedings between the state and AFSCME. Thus, impasse proceedings continue to drag on, giving the union more time to prepare for a potential strike, costing state taxpayers an additional $35 million to $40 million per month in AFSCME worker health benefits, and impeding progress on reining in the state’s out-of-control spending.

AFSCME is demanding pay hikes, better health care coverage and pension benefits over a new, four-year contract, which would cost state taxpayers $3 billion more than what the state is offering.