SB229: Bill Text

2025 - 2026 LEGISLATURE

LRB-2823/2

MIM:emw

2025 SENATE BILL 229

April 29, 2025 - Introduced by Senators Testin, Wanggaard, Feyen and Wall, cosponsored by Representatives Sortwell, Armstrong, Dittrich, Moses, Murphy and Sinicki. Referred to Committee on Government Operations, Labor and Economic Development.

SB229,2,17 An Act to repeal 102.01 (2) (ad), 102.15 (1) (b), 102.18 (1) (b) 1t., 227.43 (1) (bm), 227.43 (2) (am), 227.43 (3) (bm) and 227.43 (4) (bm); to amend 40.65 (2) (b) 3., 40.65 (2) (b) 4., 102.01 (2) (dm), 102.04 (2r) (b), 102.07 (8) (c), 102.12, 102.13 (1) (c), 102.13 (1) (d) 2., 102.13 (1) (d) 3., 102.13 (1) (f), 102.13 (2) (a), 102.13 (3), 102.13 (4), 102.13 (5), 102.14 (title), 102.14 (1), 102.14 (2), 102.16 (1m) (a), 102.16 (1m) (b), 102.16 (1m) (c), 102.16 (2) (a), 102.16 (2) (b), 102.16 (2m) (a), 102.16 (2m) (b), 102.16 (4), 102.17 (1) (a) 1., 102.17 (1) (a) 2., 102.17 (1) (a) 3., 102.17 (1) (a) 4., 102.17 (1) (b), 102.17 (1) (c), 102.17 (1) (cg) 1., 102.17 (1) (cg) 2., 102.17 (1) (cg) 2m., 102.17 (1) (cg) 3., 102.17 (1) (cr), 102.17 (1) (ct), 102.17 (1) (d) 2. and 4., 102.17 (1) (e), 102.17 (1) (f) 1., 102.17 (1) (g), 102.17 (1) (h), 102.17 (2), 102.17 (2m), 102.17 (2s), 102.17 (4) (a), 102.17 (7) (b), 102.17 (7) (c), 102.17 (8), 102.175 (2), 102.175 (3) (c), 102.18 (1) (b) 1., 102.18 (1) (b) 1d., 102.18 (1) (b) 2., 102.18 (1) (b) 3., 102.18 (1) (bg) 1., 102.18 (1) (bg) 2., 102.18 (1) (bg) 3., 102.18 (1) (bw), 102.18 (1) (c), 102.18 (1) (e), 102.18 (3), 102.18 (4) (c) 3., 102.18 (4) (d), 102.18 (5), 102.18 (6), 102.195, 102.22 (1), 102.22 (2), 102.23 (2), 102.23 (3), 102.23 (5), 102.24 (2), 102.25 (1), 102.26 (2), 102.26 (3) (b) 1., 102.26 (3) (b) 3., 102.26 (4), 102.27 (2) (b), 102.28 (3) (c), 102.28 (4) (c), 102.29 (1) (b) (intro.), 102.29 (1) (c), 102.29 (1) (d), 102.30 (7) (a), 102.32 (1m) (intro.), 102.32 (1m) (a), 102.32 (1m) (c), 102.32 (1m) (d), 102.32 (5), 102.32 (6m) (a), 102.32 (7), 102.33 (1), 102.33 (2) (a), 102.33 (2) (b) (intro.), 102.33 (2) (b) 1., 102.33 (2) (b) 2., 102.33 (2) (b) 4., 102.33 (2) (c), 102.33 (2) (d) 2., 102.35 (3), 102.42 (1m), 102.42 (6), 102.42 (8), 102.425 (4m) (a), 102.425 (4m) (b), 102.43 (5) (b), 102.44 (2), 102.44 (6) (b), 102.475 (6), 102.48 (1), 102.48 (2), 102.48 (3), 102.49 (3), 102.49 (6), 102.51 (3), 102.51 (4), 102.51 (6), 102.55 (3), 102.555 (12) (a), 102.56 (1), 102.56 (2), 102.565 (1), 102.565 (2), 102.565 (3), 102.61 (1g) (c), 102.61 (2), 102.62, 102.64 (1), 102.64 (2), 102.65 (3), 102.66 (1) and 102.75 (1); to repeal and recreate 102.16 (1) and 102.18 (2) of the statutes; relating to: transferring adjudicatory functions for worker’s compensation from the Division of Hearings and Appeals in the Department of Administration to the Department of Workforce Development.

Analysis by the Legislative Reference Bureau

Under current law, the Department of Workforce Development performs various administrative and adjudicatory functions relating to worker’s compensation, except that the adjudicatory functions of DWD relating to disputed worker’s compensation claims are performed by the Division of Hearings and Appeals in the Department of Administration. This bill transfers the adjudicatory functions of DHA relating to disputed worker’s compensation claims to DWD.

For further information see the state fiscal estimate, which will be printed as an appendix to this bill.

The people of the state of Wisconsin, represented in senate and assembly, do enact as follows:

SB229,1 Section 1. 40.65 (2) (b) 3. of the statutes is amended to read:

SB229,3,6 40.65 (2) (b) 3. The department shall determine whether or not the applicant is eligible for benefits under this section on the basis of the evidence in subd. 2. An applicant may appeal a determination under this subdivision to the division of hearings and appeals in the department of administration department of workforce development.

SB229,2 Section 2. 40.65 (2) (b) 4. of the statutes is amended to read:

SB229,3,10 40.65 (2) (b) 4. In hearing an appeal under subd. 3., the division of hearings and appeals in the department of administration department of workforce development shall follow the procedures under ss. 102.16 to 102.26.

SB229,3 Section 3. 102.01 (2) (ad) of the statutes is repealed.

SB229,4 Section 4. 102.01 (2) (dm) of the statutes is amended to read:

SB229,3,15 102.01 (2) (dm) “Order” means any decision, rule, regulation, direction, requirement, or standard of the department or the division, or any other determination arrived at or decision made by the department or the division.

SB229,5 Section 5. 102.04 (2r) (b) of the statutes is amended to read:

SB229,3,20 102.04 (2r) (b) The franchisor has been found by the department or the division to have exercised a type or degree of control over the franchisee or the franchisee’s employees that is not customarily exercised by a franchisor for the purpose of protecting the franchisor’s trademarks and brand.

SB229,6 Section 6. 102.07 (8) (c) of the statutes is amended to read:

SB229,4,3 102.07 (8) (c) The division department may not admit in evidence any state or federal law, regulation, or document granting operating authority, or a license when determining whether an independent contractor meets the conditions specified in par. (b) 1. or 3.

SB229,7 Section 7. 102.12 of the statutes is amended to read:

SB229,4,23 102.12 Notice of injury, exception, laches. No claim for compensation may be maintained unless, within 30 days after the occurrence of the injury or within 30 days after the employee knew or ought to have known the nature of his or her disability and its relation to the employment, actual notice was received by the employer or by an officer, manager or designated representative of an employer. If no representative has been designated by posters placed in one or more conspicuous places where notices to employees are customarily posted, then notice received by any superior is sufficient. Absence of notice does not bar recovery if it is found that the employer was not misled by that absence. Regardless of whether notice was received, if no payment of compensation, other than medical treatment or burial expense, is made, and if no application is filed with the department within 2 years after the date of the injury or death or the date the employee or his or her dependent knew or ought to have known the nature of the disability and its relation to the employment, the right to compensation for the injury or death is barred, except that the right to compensation is not barred if the employer knew or should have known, within the 2-year period, that the employee had sustained the injury on which the claim is based. Issuance of notice of a hearing on the motion of the department or the division has the same effect for the purposes of this section as the filing of an application. This section does not affect any claim barred under s. 102.17 (4).

SB229,8 Section 8. 102.13 (1) (c) of the statutes is amended to read:

SB229,5,9 102.13 (1) (c) So long as the employee, after a written request of the employer or insurer that complies with par. (b), refuses to submit to or in any way obstructs the examination, the employee’s right to begin or maintain any proceeding for the collection of compensation is suspended, except as provided in sub. (4). If the employee refuses to submit to the examination after direction by the department, the division, or an examiner, or in any way obstructs the examination, the employee’s right to the weekly indemnity that accrues and becomes payable during the period of that refusal or obstruction, is barred, except as provided in sub. (4).

SB229,9 Section 9. 102.13 (1) (d) 2. of the statutes is amended to read:

SB229,5,15 102.13 (1) (d) 2. Any physician, chiropractor, psychologist, dentist, physician assistant, advanced practice registered nurse, or podiatrist who attended a worker’s compensation claimant for any condition or complaint reasonably related to the condition for which the claimant claims compensation may be required to testify before the division department when the division department so directs.

SB229,10 Section 10. 102.13 (1) (d) 3. of the statutes is amended to read:

SB229,5,23 102.13 (1) (d) 3. Notwithstanding any statutory provisions except par. (e), any physician, chiropractor, psychologist, dentist, physician assistant, advanced practice registered nurse, or podiatrist attending a worker’s compensation claimant for any condition or complaint reasonably related to the condition for which the claimant claims compensation may furnish to the employee, employer, worker’s compensation insurer, or department, or division information and reports relative related to a compensation claim.

SB229,11 Section 11. 102.13 (1) (f) of the statutes is amended to read:

SB229,6,3 102.13 (1) (f) If an employee claims compensation under s. 102.81 (1), the department or the division may require the employee to submit to physical or vocational examinations under this subsection.

SB229,12 Section 12. 102.13 (2) (a) of the statutes is amended to read:

SB229,6,21 102.13 (2) (a) An employee who reports an injury alleged to be work-related or files an application for hearing waives any physician-patient, psychologist-patient, or chiropractor-patient privilege with respect to any condition or complaint reasonably related to the condition for which the employee claims compensation. Notwithstanding ss. 51.30 and 146.82 and any other law, any physician, chiropractor, psychologist, dentist, podiatrist, physician assistant, advanced practice registered nurse, hospital, or health care provider shall, within a reasonable time after written request by the employee, employer, worker’s compensation insurer, or department, or division, or its representative, provide that person with any information or written material reasonably related to any injury for which the employee claims compensation. If the request is by a representative of a worker’s compensation insurer for a billing statement, the physician, chiropractor, psychologist, dentist, podiatrist, physician assistant, advanced practice registered nurse, hospital, or health care provider shall, within 30 days after receiving the request, provide that person with a complete copy of an itemized billing statement or a billing statement in a standard billing format recognized by the federal government.

SB229,13 Section 13. 102.13 (3) of the statutes is amended to read:

SB229,7,11 102.13 (3) If 2 or more physicians, chiropractors, psychologists, dentists, or podiatrists disagree as to the extent of an injured employee’s temporary disability, the end of an employee’s healing period, an employee’s ability to return to work at suitable available employment or the necessity for further treatment or for a particular type of treatment, the department or the division may appoint another physician, chiropractor, psychologist, dentist, or podiatrist to examine the employee and render an opinion as soon as possible. The department or the division shall promptly notify the parties of this appointment. If the employee has not returned to work, payment for temporary disability shall continue until the department or the division receives the opinion. The employer or its insurance carrier, or both, shall pay for the examination and opinion. The employer or insurance carrier, or both, shall receive appropriate credit for any overpayment to the employee determined by the department or the division after receipt of the opinion.

SB229,14 Section 14. 102.13 (4) of the statutes is amended to read:

SB229,8,4 102.13 (4) The right of an employee to begin or maintain proceedings for the collection of compensation and to receive weekly indemnities that accrue and become payable shall not be suspended or barred under sub. (1) when an employee refuses to submit to a physical examination, upon the request of the employer or worker’s compensation insurer or at the direction of the department, the division, or an examiner, that would require the employee to travel a distance of 100 miles or more from his or her place of residence, unless the employee has claimed compensation for treatment from a practitioner whose office is located 100 miles or more from the employee’s place of residence or the department, division, or examiner determines that any other circumstances warrant the examination. If the employee has claimed compensation for treatment from a practitioner whose office is located 100 miles or more from the employee’s place of residence, the employer or insurer may request, or the department, the division, or an examiner may direct, the employee to submit to a physical examination in the area where the employee’s treatment practitioner is located.

SB229,15 Section 15. 102.13 (5) of the statutes is amended to read:

SB229,8,14 102.13 (5) The department or the division may refuse to receive testimony as to conditions determined from an autopsy if it appears that the party offering the testimony had procured the autopsy and had failed to make reasonable effort to notify at least one party in adverse interest or the department or the division at least 12 hours before the autopsy of the time and place at which the autopsy would be performed, or that the autopsy was performed by or at the direction of the coroner or medical examiner or at the direction of the district attorney for purposes not authorized under ch. 979. The department or the division may withhold findings until an autopsy is held in accordance with its directions.

SB229,16 Section 16. 102.14 (title) of the statutes is amended to read:

SB229,8,17 102.14 (title) Jurisdiction of department and division; advisory committee council.

SB229,17 Section 17. 102.14 (1) of the statutes is amended to read:

SB229,8,20 102.14 (1) Except as otherwise provided, this chapter shall be administered by the department and the division.

SB229,18 Section 18. 102.14 (2) of the statutes is amended to read:

SB229,9,7 102.14 (2) The council on worker’s compensation shall advise the department and the division in carrying out the purposes of this chapter, shall submit its recommendations with respect to amendments to this chapter to each regular session of the legislature, and shall report its views upon any pending bill relating to this chapter to the proper legislative committee. At the request of the chairpersons of the senate and assembly committees on labor, the department shall schedule a meeting of the council with the members of the senate and assembly committees on labor to review and discuss matters of legislative concern arising under this chapter.

SB229,19 Section 19. 102.15 (1) (b) of the statutes is repealed.

SB229,20 Section 20. 102.16 (1) of the statutes is repealed and recreated to read:

SB229,9,22 102.16 (1) Any controversy concerning compensation or a violation of sub. (3), including a controversy in which the state may be a party, shall be submitted to the department in the manner and with the effect provided in this chapter. A compromise of any claim for compensation may be reviewed and set aside, modified, or confirmed by the department within one year after the date on which the compromise is filed with the department, the date on which an award has been entered based on the compromise, or the date on which an application for the department to take any of those actions is filed with the department. Unless the word “compromise” appears in a stipulation of settlement, the settlement shall not be considered a compromise, and further claim is not barred except as provided in s. 102.17 (4) regardless of whether an award is made. The employer, insurer, or dependent under s. 102.51 (5) shall have equal rights with the employee to have a compromise or any other stipulation of settlement reviewed under this subsection. Upon petition filed with the department under this subsection, the department may set aside the award or otherwise determine the rights of the parties.

SB229,21 Section 21. 102.16 (1m) (a) of the statutes is amended to read:

SB229,10,20 102.16 (1m) (a) If an insurer or self-insured employer concedes by compromise under sub. (1) or stipulation under s. 102.18 (1) (a) that the insurer or self-insured employer is liable under this chapter for any health services provided to an injured employee by a health service provider, but disputes the reasonableness of the fee charged by the health service provider, the department or the division may include in its order confirming the compromise or stipulation a determination made by the department under sub. (2) as to the reasonableness of the fee or, if such a determination has not yet been made, the department or the division may notify, or direct the insurer or self-insured employer to notify, the health service provider under sub. (2) (b) that the reasonableness of the fee is in dispute. The department or the division shall deny payment of a health service fee that the department determines under sub. (2) to be unreasonable. A health service provider and an insurer or self-insured employer that are parties to a fee dispute under this paragraph are bound by the department’s determination under sub. (2) on the reasonableness of the disputed fee, unless that determination is set aside, reversed, or modified by the department under sub. (2) (f) or is set aside on judicial review as provided in sub. (2) (f).

SB229,22 Section 22. 102.16 (1m) (b) of the statutes is amended to read:

SB229,11,22 102.16 (1m) (b) If an insurer or self-insured employer concedes by compromise under sub. (1) or stipulation under s. 102.18 (1) (a) that the insurer or self-insured employer is liable under this chapter for any treatment provided to an injured employee by a health service provider, but disputes the necessity of the treatment, the department or the division may include in its order confirming the compromise or stipulation a determination made by the department under sub. (2m) as to the necessity of the treatment or, if such a determination has not yet been made, the department or the division may notify, or direct the insurer or self-insured employer to notify, the health service provider under sub. (2m) (b) that the necessity of the treatment is in dispute. Before determining under sub. (2m) the necessity of treatment provided to an injured employee, the department may, but is not required to, obtain the opinion of an expert selected by the department who is qualified as provided in sub. (2m) (c). The standards promulgated under sub. (2m) (g) shall be applied by an expert and by the department in rendering an opinion as to, and in determining, necessity of treatment under this paragraph. In cases in which no standards promulgated under sub. (2m) (g) apply, the department shall find the facts regarding necessity of treatment. The department or the division shall deny payment for any treatment that the department determines under sub. (2m) to be unnecessary. A health service provider and an insurer or self-insured employer that are parties to a dispute under this paragraph over the necessity of treatment are bound by the department’s determination under sub. (2m) on the necessity of the disputed treatment, unless that determination is set aside, reversed, or modified by the department under sub. (2m) (e) or is set aside on judicial review as provided in sub. (2m) (e).

SB229,23 Section 23. 102.16 (1m) (c) of the statutes is amended to read:

SB229,12,20 102.16 (1m) (c) If an insurer or self-insured employer concedes by compromise under sub. (1) or stipulation under s. 102.18 (1) (a) that the insurer or self-insured employer is liable under this chapter for the cost of a prescription drug dispensed under s. 102.425 (2) for outpatient use by an injured employee, but disputes the reasonableness of the amount charged for the prescription drug, the department or the division may include in its order confirming the compromise or stipulation a determination made by the department under s. 102.425 (4m) as to the reasonableness of the prescription drug charge or, if such a determination has not yet been made, the department or the division may notify, or direct the insurer or self-insured employer to notify, the pharmacist or practitioner dispensing the prescription drug under s. 102.425 (4m) (b) that the reasonableness of the prescription drug charge is in dispute. The department or the division shall deny payment of a prescription drug charge that the department determines under s. 102.425 (4m) to be unreasonable. A pharmacist or practitioner and an insurer or self-insured employer that are parties to a dispute under this paragraph over the reasonableness of a prescription drug charge are bound by the department’s determination under s. 102.425 (4m) on the reasonableness of the disputed prescription drug charge, unless that determination is set aside, reversed, or modified by the department under s. 102.425 (4m) (e) or is set aside on judicial review as provided in s. 102.425 (4m) (e).

SB229,24 Section 24. 102.16 (2) (a) of the statutes is amended to read:

SB229,13,13 102.16 (2) (a) Except as provided in this paragraph, the department has jurisdiction under this subsection, the department and the division have jurisdiction under sub. (1m) (a), and the division has jurisdiction under s. 102.17 to resolve a dispute between a health service provider and an insurer or self-insured employer over the reasonableness of a fee charged by the health service provider for health services provided to an injured employee who claims benefits under this chapter. A health service provider may not submit a fee dispute to the department under this subsection before all treatment by the health service provider of the employee’s injury has ended if the amount in controversy, whether based on a single charge or a combination of charges for one or more days of service, is less than $25. After all treatment by a health service provider of an employee’s injury has ended, the health service provider may submit any fee dispute to the department, regardless of the amount in controversy. The department shall deny payment of a health service fee that the department determines under this subsection to be unreasonable.

SB229,25 Section 25. 102.16 (2) (b) of the statutes is amended to read:

SB229,13,23 102.16 (2) (b) An insurer or self-insured employer that disputes the reasonableness of a fee charged by a health service provider or the department or the division under sub. (1m) (a) or s. 102.18 (1) (bg) 1. shall provide reasonable written notice to the health service provider that the fee is being disputed. After receiving reasonable written notice under this paragraph or under sub. (1m) (a) or s. 102.18 (1) (bg) 1. that a health service fee is being disputed, a health service provider may not collect the disputed fee from, or bring an action for collection of the disputed fee against, the employee who received the services for which the fee was charged.

SB229,26 Section 26. 102.16 (2m) (a) of the statutes is amended to read:

SB229,14,16 102.16 (2m) (a) Except as provided in this paragraph, the department has jurisdiction under this subsection, the department and the division have jurisdiction under sub. (1m) (b), and the division has jurisdiction under s. 102.17 to resolve a dispute between a health service provider and an insurer or self-insured employer over the necessity of treatment provided for an injured employee who claims benefits under this chapter. A health service provider may not submit a dispute over necessity of treatment to the department under this subsection before all treatment by the health service provider of the employee’s injury has ended if the amount in controversy, whether based on a single charge or a combination of charges for one or more days of service, is less than $25. After all treatment by a health service provider of an employee’s injury has ended, the health service provider may submit any dispute over necessity of treatment to the department, regardless of the amount in controversy. The department shall deny payment for any treatment that the department determines under this subsection to be unnecessary.

SB229,27 Section 27. 102.16 (2m) (b) of the statutes is amended to read:

SB229,15,3 102.16 (2m) (b) An insurer or self-insured employer that disputes the necessity of treatment provided by a health service provider or the department or the division under sub. (1m) (b) or s. 102.18 (1) (bg) 2. shall provide reasonable written notice to the health service provider that the necessity of that treatment is being disputed. After receiving reasonable written notice under this paragraph or under sub. (1m) (b) or s. 102.18 (1) (bg) 2. that the necessity of treatment is being disputed, a health service provider may not collect a fee for that disputed treatment from, or bring an action for collection of the fee for that disputed treatment against, the employee who received the treatment.

SB229,28 Section 28. 102.16 (4) of the statutes is amended to read:

SB229,15,12 102.16 (4) The department and the division have has jurisdiction to pass on any question arising out of sub. (3) and to order the employer to reimburse an employee or other person for any sum deducted from wages or paid by him or her in violation of that subsection. In addition to the penalty provided in s. 102.85 (1), any employer violating sub. (3) shall be liable to an injured employee for the reasonable value of the necessary services rendered to that employee under any arrangement made in violation of sub. (3) without regard to that employee’s actual disbursements for those services.

SB229,29 Section 29. 102.17 (1) (a) 1. of the statutes is amended to read:

SB229,15,19 102.17 (1) (a) 1. Upon the filing with the department by any party in interest of any application in writing stating the general nature of any claim as to which any dispute or controversy may have arisen, the department shall mail a copy of the application to all other parties in interest, and the insurance carrier shall be considered a party in interest. The department or the division may bring in additional parties by service of a copy of the application.

SB229,30 Section 30. 102.17 (1) (a) 2. of the statutes is amended to read:

SB229,16,7 102.17 (1) (a) 2. Subject to subd. 3., the division department shall cause notice of hearing on the application to be given to each interested party by service of that notice on the interested party personally or by mailing a copy of that notice to the interested party’s last-known address at least 10 days before the hearing. If a party in interest is located without this state, and has no post-office address within this state, the copy of the application and copies of all notices shall be filed with the department of financial institutions and shall also be sent by registered or certified mail to the last-known post-office address of the party. Such filing and mailing shall constitute sufficient service, with the same effect as if served upon a party located within this state.

SB229,31 Section 31. 102.17 (1) (a) 3. of the statutes is amended to read:

SB229,16,13 102.17 (1) (a) 3. If a party in interest claims that the employer or insurer has acted with malice or bad faith as described in s. 102.18 (1) (b) 3. or (bp), that party shall provide written notice stating with reasonable specificity the basis for the claim to the employer, the insurer, and the department, and the division before the division department schedules a hearing on the claim of malice or bad faith.

SB229,32 Section 32. 102.17 (1) (a) 4. of the statutes is amended to read:

SB229,16,23 102.17 (1) (a) 4. The hearing may be adjourned in the discretion of the division department, and hearings may be held at such places as the division department designates, within or without the state. The division department may also arrange to have hearings held by the commission, officer, or tribunal having authority to hear cases arising under the worker’s compensation law of any other state, of the District of Columbia, or of any territory of the United States, with the testimony and proceedings at any such hearing to be reported to the division department and to be made part of the record in the case. Any evidence so taken shall be subject to rebuttal upon final hearing before the division department.

SB229,33 Section 33. 102.17 (1) (b) of the statutes is amended to read: