1. For weeks of unemployment beginning on or after January 4, 2026, but before January 3, 2027, the wage cap is increased to $672.
2. For weeks of unemployment beginning on or after January 3, 2027, the wage cap is increased based upon the change in the consumer price index and is then increased on the same basis annually thereafter.
Substantial fault
Under current law, a claimant for UI benefits whose work is terminated by his or her employer for substantial fault by the claimant connected with the claimant’s work is ineligible to receive UI benefits until the claimant satisfies certain requalification criteria. With certain exceptions, current law defines “substantial fault” to include those acts or omissions of a claimant over which the claimant exercised reasonable control and that violate reasonable requirements of the claimant’s employer. The bill eliminates this provision on substantial fault.
Misconduct
Under current law, a claimant for UI benefits whose work is terminated by his or her employer for misconduct by the claimant connected with the claimant’s work is ineligible to receive UI benefits until the claimant satisfies certain requalification criteria, and the claimant’s wages paid by the employer that terminates the claimant for misconduct are excluded for purposes of calculating benefit entitlement. Current law defines “misconduct” using a general, common law standard derived from Boynton Cab Co. v. Neubeck, 237 Wis. 249 (1941), and enumerates several specific types of conduct that also constitute misconduct. Under one of these specific provisions, misconduct includes 1) absenteeism on more than two occasions within the 120-day period before the date of the claimant’s termination, unless otherwise specified by his or her employer in an employment manual of which the claimant has acknowledged receipt with his or her signature, or 2) excessive tardiness by a claimant in violation of a policy of the employer that has been communicated to the claimant. In Department of Workforce Development v. Labor and Industry Review Commission (Beres), 2018 WI 77, the supreme court held that an employer could, under the language described above, institute an attendance policy more restrictive than two occasions within the 120-day period.
Current law also provides that absenteeism or tardiness count as misconduct only if the claimant did not provide to his or her employer both notice and one or more valid reasons for the absenteeism or tardiness. In Bevco Precision Manufacturing v. Labor and Industry Review Commission, 2024 WI App. 54, the court of appeals held that under Beres, this qualifying language did not apply if an employer had adopted its own standard on absenteeism and tardiness, as described above.
The bill does all of the following:
1. Eliminates the language referencing “excessive tardiness.”
2. Reverses the holding in Bevco by providing that a claimant’s notice and reason for an occasion of absenteeism or tardiness are to be analyzed under the common law misconduct standard. Under the bill, therefore, an employer may not establish its own policy for determining the reasonableness of absenteeism or tardiness. The bill does not, however, affect the general ability of an employer to institute a standard for absenteeism and tardiness more restrictive than two occasions within the 120-day period before termination.
3. Clarifies, in another provision defining misconduct, that “tribal government” has the meaning given under state and federal law for what is considered an Indian tribe.
Drug testing
Current state law requires DWD to establish a program to test certain claimants who apply for UI benefits for the presence of controlled substances in a manner that is consistent with federal law. A claimant who tests positive for a controlled substance for which the claimant does not have a prescription is ineligible for UI benefits until certain requalification criteria are satisfied or unless he or she enrolls in a substance abuse treatment program and undergoes a job skills assessment, and a claimant who declines to submit to a test is simply ineligible for benefits until he or she requalifies. The bill eliminates the requirement to establish the drug testing program.
Also under current law, an employer may voluntarily submit to DWD the results of a preemployment test for the presence of controlled substances that was conducted on an individual as a condition of an offer of employment or notify DWD that an individual declined to submit to such a test. If DWD then verifies that submission, the employee may be ineligible for UI benefits until he or she requalifies. However, a claimant who tested positive may maintain eligibility by enrolling in a substance abuse treatment program and undergoing a job skills assessment. The bill eliminates these preemployment drug testing provisions.
Acceptance of suitable work
Under current law, if a claimant for UI benefits fails, without good cause, to accept suitable work when offered, the claimant is ineligible to receive benefits until he or she earns wages after the week in which the failure occurs equal to at least six times the claimant’s weekly UI benefit rate in covered employment. Current law specifies what is considered “suitable work” for purposes of these provisions, with different standards applying depending on whether six weeks have elapsed since the claimant became unemployed. Once six weeks have elapsed since the claimant became unemployed, the claimant is required to accept work that pays lower and involves a lower grade of skill.
The bill modifies these provisions described above so that the claimant is not required to accept less favorable work until 10 weeks have elapsed since the claimant became unemployed.
Quits due to nonsuitable work
Under current law, unless an exception applies, if a claimant for UI benefits quits his or her job, the claimant is generally ineligible to receive UI benefits until he or she qualifies through subsequent employment. Under one such exception, if a claimant quits his or her job and 1) the claimant accepted work that was not suitable work under the UI law or work that the claimant could have refused, and 2) the claimant terminated the work within 30 calendar days after starting the work, the claimant remains eligible to collect UI benefits. Under the bill, this exemption applies if the claimant terminated that work within 10 weeks after starting the work.
Waiting period
Currently, a claimant must wait one week after becoming eligible to receive UI benefits before the claimant may receive benefits for a week of unemployment, except for periods during which the waiting period is suspended. The waiting period does not affect the maximum number of weeks of a claimant’s benefit eligibility.
The bill deletes the one-week waiting period, thus permitting a claimant to receive UI benefits beginning with his or her first week of eligibility.
Work search and registration
Under current law, a claimant for UI benefits is generally required to register for work and to conduct a work search for each week in order to remain eligible. Current law requires DWD to waive these requirements under certain circumstances, for example, if a claimant who is laid off from work reasonably expects to be recalled to work within 12 weeks, will start a new job within four weeks, routinely obtains work through a labor union referral, or is participating in a training or work share program. Under current law, DWD may modify the statutory waivers or establish additional waivers by rule only if doing so is required or specifically allowed by federal law.
The bill removes the waiver requirements from statute and instead allows DWD to establish waivers for the registration for work and work search requirements by rule. DWD may establish a waiver by emergency rule if the secretary of workforce development determines that the waiver is needed only on a temporary basis or that permanent rules are not warranted, and the bill allows the secretary to extend the emergency rule for up to 60 days at a time. Also, the bill specifies that the work search requirement does not apply to a claimant who has been laid off but DWD determines that the claimant has a reasonable expectation to be recalled to work.
Social security disability insurance payments
Under current law, in any week in any month that a claimant is issued a benefit under the federal Social Security Disability Insurance program (SSDI payment), that claimant is ineligible for UI benefits. The bill eliminates that prohibition and instead requires DWD to reduce a claimant’s UI benefit payments by the amount of SSDI payments. The bill requires DWD to allocate a monthly SSDI payment by allocating to each week the fraction of the payment attributable to that week.
Quits due to relocations
Under current law, unless an exception applies, if an individual quits his or her job, the individual is generally ineligible to receive UI benefits until he or she qualifies through subsequent employment.
Under one such exception, if the employee’s spouse is a member of the U.S. armed forces on active duty and is relocated, and the employee quits his or her job in order to relocate with his or her spouse, the employee remains eligible to collect UI benefits. The bill expands this exception so that it applies to an employee who quits employment in order to relocate with a spouse who is required by any employer, not just the U.S. armed forces, to relocate.
Electronic communications
Currently, with certain exceptions, each employer that has employees who are engaged in employment covered by the UI law must file quarterly contribution (tax) and employment and wage reports and make quarterly contribution payments to DWD. An employer of 25 or more employees or an employer agent that files reports on behalf of any employer must file its reports electronically. Current law also requires each employer that makes contributions for any 12-month period ending on June 30 equal to a total of at least $10,000 to make all contribution payments electronically in the following year. Finally, current law allows DWD to provide a secure means of electronic interchange between itself and employing units, claimants, and other persons that, upon request to and with prior approval by DWD, may be used for transmission or receipt of any document specified by DWD that is related to the administration of the UI law in lieu of any other means of submission or receipt.
The bill makes use of these electronic methods mandatory in all cases unless the employer or other person demonstrates good cause for being unable to use the electronic method. The bill specifies what constitutes good cause for purposes of these provisions. The bill also makes various corresponding changes to penalty provisions that apply in the case of nonuse of these required electronic methods. The bill further provides that DWD may permit the use of electronic records and electronic signatures for any document specified by DWD that is related to the administration of the UI law.
Jobs and job training
Wisconsin Fast Forward grants
Under current law, DWD awards grants under what is commonly known as the Wisconsin Fast Forward program, for various workforce training purposes. The bill adds grants for education and training in the use of artificial intelligence to the allowed uses of funds under the program and requires DWD to collaborate with DHS and DPI in administering the program. The bill also requires DWD to allocate moneys under the Wisconsin Fast Forward program as follows:
1. A total of $2,000,000 in GPR funding in fiscal year 2025–26 for green jobs training.
2. A total of $200,000 in GPR funding in each year of the 2025–27 fiscal biennium for grants to help school districts to prepare students for a future that includes artificial intelligence.
3. A total of $1,000,000 in GPR funding in each year of the 2025–27 fiscal biennium to provide grants to support costs of sponsoring teacher apprentices.
4. A total of $500,000 in GPR funding in each year of the 2025–27 fiscal biennium to support training in the health care industry.
Youth to registered apprentice grant program
The bill requires DWD to develop and administer a grant program to award grants to local youth apprenticeship consortia to encourage individuals who are enrolled in youth apprenticeship programs to continue their careers in registered apprenticeship programs. The bill limits grants to no more than $350,000 in any fiscal year.
On-the-job learning grant program
The bill requires DWD to develop and administer a grant program to award grants to employers for costs related to apprenticeship programs, specifically wages for apprentices and costs for mentoring and instruction. Eligible employers are healthcare employers under a pilot program and small or new employers that have never had an apprenticeship program or have not had an apprenticeship program in the particular trade, craft, or business for which the employer seeks the grant in the five years before applying for the grant.
Workforce innovation grant program
The bill requires DWD to establish and operate a program to provide grants to regional organizations to design and implement programs to address their region’s workforce challenges. The bill also provides that in the 2025–26 fiscal year, DWD must allocate $15,000,000 for grants for workforce development in the area of artificial intelligence and $25,000,000 for grants for health care workforce development.
Teacher apprenticeships
DWD is currently operating a teacher apprenticeship pilot program, under which an individual serving as a teacher apprentice earns an associate degree and a bachelor’s degree that satisfy requirements for a license to teach issued by DPI while the individual earns money as a teacher apprentice. The bill requires DWD to, in consultation with DPI, prescribe the conditions under which an individual may serve as a teacher apprentice and to prescribe what an individual must do to demonstrate that the individual has successfully completed a teacher apprenticeship. See Education.
Wisconsin worker advancement program
The bill requires DWD to establish and maintain the Wisconsin worker advancement program to make grants to local organizations for the organizations to provide employment and workforce services.
Discrimination
Civil actions regarding employment discrimination, unfair honesty, and unfair genetic testing
Under current fair employment law, an individual who alleges that an employer has violated employment discrimination, unfair honesty testing, or unfair genetic testing laws may file a complaint with DWD seeking action that will effectuate the purpose of the fair employment law, including reinstating the individual, providing back pay, and paying costs and attorney fees.
The bill allows DWD or an individual who is alleged or was found to have been discriminated against or subjected to unfair honesty or genetic testing to bring an action in circuit court to recover compensatory and punitive damages caused by the act of discrimination, unfair honesty testing, or unfair genetic testing, in addition to or in lieu of filing an administrative complaint. The action in circuit court must be commenced within 300 days after the alleged discrimination, unfair honesty testing, or unfair genetic testing occurred. The bill does not allow such an action for damages to be brought against a local governmental unit or against an employer that employs fewer than 15 individuals.
Under the bill, if the circuit court finds that a defendant has committed employment discrimination, unfair honesty testing, or unfair genetic testing, the circuit court may award back pay and any other relief that could have been awarded in an administrative proceeding. In addition, the circuit court must order the defendant to pay to the individual found to have been discriminated against or found to have received unfair genetic testing or unfair honesty testing compensatory and punitive damages in the amount that the circuit court finds appropriate, except that the total amount of damage awarded for future economic losses and for pain and suffering, emotional distress, mental anguish, loss of enjoyment of life, and other noneconomic losses and punitive damages is subject to the following limitations:
1. If the defendant employs 100 or fewer employees, no more than $50,000.
2. If the defendant employs more than 100 but fewer than 201 employees, no more than $100,000.
3. If the defendant employs more than 200 but fewer than 501 employees, no more than $200,000.
4. If the defendant employs more than 500 employees, no more than $300,000.
The bill requires DWD to annually revise these amounts on the basis of the change in the consumer price index in the previous year, if any positive change has occurred.
Employment discrimination based on conviction record
The bill provides that it is employment discrimination for a prospective employer to request conviction information from a job applicant before the applicant has been selected for an interview.
The bill, however, does not prohibit an employer from notifying job applicants that an individual with a particular conviction record may be disqualified by law or the employer’s policies from employment in particular positions.
Employment discrimination based on gender expression and gender identity
Current law prohibits discrimination in employment on the basis of a person’s sex or sexual orientation. The bill prohibits employers from discriminating against an employee on the basis of the employee’s gender identity or gender expression. Gender expression is defined in the bill as an individual’s actual or perceived gender-related appearance, behavior, or expression, regardless of whether these traits are stereotypically associated with the individual’s assigned sex at birth. Gender identity is defined in the bill an individual’s internal understanding of the individual’s gender, or the individual’s perceived gender identity.
Administration and finance
Worker’s compensation; appropriations
Under current law, the costs of DWD’s administration of the worker’s compensation program is generally funded by a general worker’s compensation operations appropriation under the worker’s compensation operations fund. However, the worker’s compensation uninsured employers program and certain other worker’s compensation activities are instead funded by a separate appropriation from the worker’s compensation operations fund. The bill does the following:
1. Eliminates the separate appropriation and instead funds the worker’s compensation uninsured employers program and those other activities from the general appropriation.
2. Changes the general appropriation for worker’s compensation from a sum certain to a sum sufficient appropriation.
Elimination of automatic transfer
Under current law, administration of the worker’s compensation program is funded from a DWD appropriation from the worker’s compensation operations fund. The Labor Industry and Review Commission (LIRC) decides appeals of worker’s compensation decisions for DWD. Under current law, moneys are automatically transferred from the DWD appropriation to a LIRC appropriation account to pay for those hearing activities. The bill eliminates this automatic transfer of moneys to the LIRC appropriation account. The bill retains the LIRC appropriation, but funds it directly from the worker’s compensation operations fund, in an amount set in the appropriation schedule in ch. 20, stats. With this change, any money remaining in the LIRC appropriation at the end of a fiscal year will lapse to the worker’s compensation operations fund.
Wisconsin Fast forward training appropriation
The bill changes from an annual appropriation to a continuing appropriation an appropriation for training programs, grants, services, and contracts that are part of DWD’s Wisconsin Fast Forward program.
Youth apprenticeship appropriation change
Under current law, DWD may award grants to local partnerships for youth apprenticeship programs. The grant program is funded through a sum certain appropriation. The bill changes that appropriation to a sum sufficient appropriation.
Migrant labor camp facilities
The bill excludes from the definition of “migrant labor camp” bed and breakfasts, hotels, and rooming houses that are required to be licensed by DATCP.
Migrant labor contractors and migrant labor camps
Under current law, migrant labor contractors are required to have a certificate of registration from DWD, which the contractor must renew annually. To receive the certificate, the contractor must provide an application, which must be accompanied by a fee. Also under current law, a person that maintains a migrant labor camp is required to have a certificate from DWD to operate the camp, which the person must renew annually. To receive the certificate, the operator of the camp must provide an application, which must be accompanied by a fee. Current law requires that these fees be deposited in the state general fund and not credited to a specific appropriation. The bill instead requires that the fees be credited to the DWD auxiliary services appropriation and authorizes that appropriation to be used for administrative costs related to the migrant labor program administered by DWD.
ENVIRONMENT
PFAS
The bill contains several provisions relating to perfluoroalkyl and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS).
Spills law exemptions and requirements for PFAS
Under current law provisions known as the “spills law,” a person that possesses or controls a hazardous substance or that causes the discharge of a hazardous substance must notify DNR immediately, restore the environment to the extent practicable, and minimize the harmful effects from the discharge. If action is not being adequately taken, or the identity of the person responsible for the discharge is unknown, DNR may take emergency action to contain or remove the hazardous substance; the person that possessed or controlled the hazardous substance that was discharged or that caused the discharge of the hazardous substance must then reimburse DNR for expenses DNR incurred in taking such emergency actions. The spills law allows DNR to enter property to take emergency action if entry is necessary to prevent increased environmental damages, and to inspect any record relating to a hazardous substance for the purpose of determining compliance with the spills law. DNR may also require that preventive measures be taken by any person possessing or having control over a hazardous substance if existing control measures are inadequate to prevent discharges.
The bill exempts a person who possesses or controls property where a PFAS discharge occurred from all of the requirements, if all of the following apply:
1. The property is exclusively used for agricultural use or residential use.
2. The discharge was caused by land application of sludge according to a water pollutant discharge elimination system (WPDES) permit.
3. The person who possesses or controls the property allows DNR, any responsible party, and any consultant or contractor of a responsible party to enter the property to take action to respond to the discharge.
