Chapter 108

108.04(16)(a)1.b. b. The course is given by a school established under s. 38.02 or another training institution approved by the department;

108.04(16)(a)1.c. c. The individual is enrolled full time as determined by the training institution;

108.04(16)(a)1.d. d. The course does not grant substantial credit leading to a bachelor’s or higher degree; and

108.04(16)(a)1.e. e. The individual is attending regularly and making satisfactory progress in the course.

108.04(16)(a)2. 2. A program administered by the department for the training of unemployed workers, other than the youth apprenticeship program under s. 106.13;

108.04(16)(a)3. 3. The plan of any state for training under the federal trade act, 19 USC 2296; or

108.04(16)(a)4. 4. A plan for training approved under the federal Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act, 29 USC 3101 to 3361, or another federal law that enhances job skills.

108.04(16)(am) (am) The department shall not apply any benefit reduction or disqualification under sub. (1) (a), (2) (a), or (8), or s. 108.141 (3g) (a) or (c) to any otherwise eligible individual for any week as a result of the individual’s enrollment in approved training.

108.04(16)(b) (b) The department shall not apply any benefit reduction or disqualification under sub. (1) (b), (2) (a), or (7) (c) or (cg) or s. 108.141 (3g) (d) that is not the result of approved training while an individual is enrolled in approved training.

108.04(16)(d) (d) If an individual is enrolled in approved training specified in par. (a) 3. or 4.:

108.04(16)(d)1. 1. The department shall not deny benefits under sub. (7) as a result of the individual’s leaving unsuitable work to enter or continue such training, as a result of the individual’s leaving work that the individual engaged in on a temporary basis during a break in the training or a delay in the commencement of the training, or because the individual left on-the-job training not later than 30 days after commencing that training because the individual did not meet the requirements under 19 USC 2296 (c) (1) (B); and

108.04(16)(d)2. 2. The requalifying requirements under subs. (7) and (8) do not apply while the individual is enrolled in approved training specified in par. (a) 3. or 4.

108.04(16)(e) (e) The department shall charge to the fund’s balancing account the cost of benefits paid to an individual that are otherwise chargeable to the account of an employer that is subject to the contribution requirements of ss. 108.17 and 108.18 if the individual receives benefits based on the application of par. (am), (b), or (d).

108.04(16)(f) (f) As a condition to qualification of a course as approved training for an individual under this subsection, the department may require a certification from the training institution showing the individual’s attendance and progress in the course.

108.04(17) (17) Educational employees.

108.04(17)(a) (a) A school year employee of an educational institution who performs services in an instructional, research or principal administrative capacity is ineligible for benefits based on such services for any week of unemployment which occurs:

108.04(17)(a)1. 1. During the period between 2 successive academic years or terms, if the school year employee performed such services for any educational institution in the first such year or term and if there is reasonable assurance that he or she will perform such services for any educational institution in the 2nd such year or term; or

108.04(17)(a)2. 2. During the period between 2 regular but not successive academic terms, when an agreement between an employer and a school year employee provides for such a period, if the school year employee performed such services for any educational institution in the first such term and if there is reasonable assurance that he or she will perform such services for any educational institution in the 2nd such term.

108.04(17)(b) (b) A school year employee of a government unit, Indian tribe, or nonprofit organization which provides services to or on behalf of an educational institution who performs services in an instructional, research, or principal administrative capacity is ineligible for benefits based on such services for any week of unemployment which occurs:

108.04(17)(b)1. 1. During the period between 2 successive academic years or terms, if the school year employee performed such services for any such government unit, Indian tribe, or nonprofit organization in the first such year or term and if there is reasonable assurance that he or she will perform such services for any such government unit, Indian tribe, or nonprofit organization in the 2nd such year or term; or

108.04(17)(b)2. 2. During the period between 2 regular but not successive academic terms, when an agreement between an employer and a school year employee provides for such a period, if the school year employee performed such services for any such government unit, Indian tribe, or nonprofit organization in the first such term and if there is reasonable assurance that he or she will perform such services for any such government unit, Indian tribe, or nonprofit organization in the 2nd such term.

108.04(17)(c) (c) A school year employee of an educational service agency who performs services in an instructional, research or principal administrative capacity, and who provides such services in an educational institution or to or on behalf of an educational institution, is ineligible for benefits based on such services for any week of unemployment which occurs:

108.04(17)(c)1. 1. During the period between 2 successive academic years or terms, if the school year employee performed such services for any educational service agency in the first such year or term and if there is reasonable assurance that he or she will perform such services for any educational service agency in the 2nd such year or term; or

108.04(17)(c)2. 2. During the period between 2 regular but not successive academic terms, when an agreement between an employer and a school year employee provides for such a period, if the school year employee performed such services for any educational service agency in the first such term and if there is reasonable assurance that he or she will perform such services for any educational service agency in the 2nd such term.

108.04(17)(d) (d) A school year employee of an educational institution who performs services other than in an instructional, research or principal administrative capacity is ineligible for benefits based on such services for any week of unemployment which occurs during a period between 2 successive academic years or terms if the school year employee performed such services for any educational institution in the first such year or term and there is reasonable assurance that he or she will perform such services for any educational institution in the 2nd such year or term.

108.04(17)(e) (e) A school year employee of a government unit, Indian tribe, or nonprofit organization that provides services to or on behalf of any educational institution who performs services other than in an instructional, research, or principal administrative capacity is ineligible for benefits based on such services for any week of unemployment which occurs during a period between 2 successive academic years or terms if the school year employee performed such services for any such government unit, Indian tribe, or nonprofit organization in the first such year or term and there is reasonable assurance that he or she will perform such services for any such government unit, Indian tribe, or nonprofit organization in the 2nd such year or term.

108.04(17)(f) (f) A school year employee of an educational service agency who performs services other than in an instructional, research or principal administrative capacity, and who provides such services in an educational institution or to or on behalf of an educational institution, is ineligible for benefits based on such services for any week of unemployment which occurs during a period between 2 successive academic years or terms if the school year employee performed such services for any educational service agency in the first such year or term and there is reasonable assurance that he or she will perform such services for any educational service agency in the 2nd such year or term.

108.04(17)(g) (g) A school year employee of an educational institution who performs services as described in par. (a) or (d) is ineligible for benefits based on such services for any week of unemployment which occurs during an established and customary vacation period or holiday recess if the school year employee performed such services for any educational institution in the period immediately before the vacation period or holiday recess, and there is reasonable assurance that he or she will perform the services described in par. (a) or (d) for any educational institution in the period immediately following the vacation period or holiday recess.

108.04(17)(h) (h) A school year employee of a government unit, Indian tribe, or nonprofit organization which provides services to or on behalf of an educational institution who performs the services described in par. (b) or (e) is ineligible for benefits based on such services for any week of unemployment which occurs during an established and customary vacation period or holiday recess if the school year employee performed such services for any such government unit, Indian tribe, or nonprofit organization in the period immediately before the vacation period or holiday recess, and there is reasonable assurance that the school year employee will perform the services described in par. (b) or (e) for any such government unit, Indian tribe, or nonprofit organization in the period immediately following the vacation period or holiday recess.

108.04(17)(i) (i) A school year employee of an educational service agency who performs the services described in par. (c) or (f), and who provides such services in an educational institution or to or on behalf of an educational institution, is ineligible for benefits based on such services for any week of unemployment which occurs during an established and customary vacation period or holiday recess if the school year employee performed such services for any educational service agency in the period immediately before the vacation period or holiday recess, and there is reasonable assurance that the school year employee will perform the services described in par. (c) or (f) for any educational service agency in the period immediately following the vacation period or holiday recess.

108.04(17)(j) (j) A school year employee who did not establish a benefit year prior to becoming ineligible to receive benefits under pars. (a) to (i) may establish a benefit year on or after that date if the school year employee qualifies to establish a benefit year under s. 108.06 (2) (a), but the wages paid the school year employee for any week during which pars. (a) to (i) apply shall be excluded from the school year employee’s base period wages under sub. (4) (a) and ss. 108.05 (1) and 108.06 (1) for any week during which pars. (a) to (i) apply. A school year employee who established a benefit year prior to becoming ineligible to receive benefits under pars. (a) to (i) may receive benefits based on employment with other employers during the benefit year only if he or she has base period wages from such employment sufficient to qualify for benefits under sub. (4) (a) and ss. 108.05 (1) and 108.06 (1) for any week during which pars. (a) to (i) apply.

108.04(17)(k) (k) If benefits are reduced or denied to a school year employee who performed services other than in an instructional, research or principal administrative capacity under pars. (d) to (f), and the department later determines that the school year employee was not offered an opportunity to perform such services for an applicable employer under pars. (d) to (f) in the 2nd academic year or term, the department shall recompute the school year employee’s base period wages under sub. (4) (a) and ss. 108.05 (1) and 108.06 (1) and shall make retroactive payment of benefits for each week of such reduction or denial if the school year employee:

108.04(17)(k)1. 1. Establishes a benefit year for the period for which retroactive payment is to be made, in the manner prescribed by rule of the department, if the school year employee has not established such a benefit year;

108.04(17)(k)2. 2. Files a claim under s. 108.08 for each week of reduction or denial in the manner prescribed by rule of the department; and

108.04(17)(k)3. 3. Was otherwise eligible to receive benefits for those weeks.

108.04(18) (18) Illegal aliens.

108.04(18)(a) (a) The wages paid to an employee who performed services while the employee was an alien shall, if based on such services, be excluded from the employee’s base period wages for purposes of sub. (4) (a) and ss. 108.05 (1) and 108.06 (1) unless the employee is an alien who was lawfully admitted for permanent residence at the time such services were performed, was lawfully present for the purpose of performing such services, or was permanently residing in the United States under color of law at the time such services were performed, including an alien who was lawfully present in the United States as a result of the application of the provisions of 8 USC 1182 (d) (5). All claimants shall be uniformly required to provide information as to whether they are citizens and, if they are not, any determination denying benefits under this subsection shall not be made except upon a preponderance of the evidence.

108.04(18)(am) (am) Paragraph (a) does not preclude an employee from establishing a benefit year during a period in which the employee is ineligible to receive benefits under par. (a) if the employee qualifies to establish a benefit year under s. 108.06 (2) (a).

108.04(18)(b) (b) Any amendment of 26 USC 3304 (a) (14) specifying conditions other than as stated in par. (a) for denial of benefits based on services performed by aliens, or changing the effective date for required implementation of par. (a) or such other conditions, that is a condition of approval of this chapter for full tax credit against the tax imposed by the federal unemployment tax act, shall be applicable to this subsection.

108.04(19) (19) Professional athletes. An employee who performs services substantially all of which consist of participating in sports or athletic events, or training or preparing to so participate, shall be ineligible for benefits based on any employment for any week of unemployment which occurs during the period between 2 successive sport seasons or similar periods if the employee performed such services in the first such season or period and there is a reasonable assurance that the employee will perform such services in the 2nd such season or period.

108.04 History History: 1971 c. 40, 42, 53, 211; 1973 c. 247; 1975 c. 24, 343; 1977 c. 127, 133, 286, 418; 1979 c. 52, 176; 1981 c. 28, 36, 315, 391; 1983 a. 8, 27, 99, 168; 1983 a. 189 s. 329 (28); 1983 a. 337, 384, 468, 538; 1985 a. 17, 29, 40; 1987 a. 38 ss. 23 to 59, 107, 136; 1987 a. 255, 287, 403; 1989 a. 77; 1991 a. 89; 1993 a. 112, 122, 373, 492; 1995 a. 118, 417, 448; 1997 a. 35, 39; 1999 a. 9, 15, 83; 2001 a. 35; 2003 a. 197; 2005 a. 86; 2007 a. 59; 2009 a. 11, 287; 2011 a. 32, 123, 198, 236; 2013 a. 11, 20, 36; 2013 a. 173 ss. 13, 33; 2013 a. 276; 2015 a. 55, 86, 195; 2015 a. 197 s. 51; 2015 a. 334; 2017 a. 157; 2017 a. 364 s. 49; 2017 a. 366, 370; 2019 a. 185; 2021 a. 4, 231; s. 13.92 (2) (i); s. 35.17 correction in (2) (b) 5., (bb) 3., (11) (bm).

108.04 Cross-reference Cross-reference: See also chs. DWD 132 and 133, Wis. adm. code.

108.04 Annotation Employees at Wisconsin terminals of trucking companies who were laid off as a result of a strike at a Chicago terminal were eligible for unemployment compensation because the Chicago terminal was a separate establishment. Liberty Trucking Co. v. DILHR, 57 Wis. 2d 331, 204 N.W.2d 457 (1973).

108.04 Annotation “New work” in sub. (9) includes indefinitely laid off employees who are recalled, as well as new job applicants. The Department of Industry, Labor and Human Relations must determine whether a laid-off employee had good cause for refusing work on a different shift with a higher pay scale. Allen-Bradley Co. v. DILHR, 58 Wis. 2d 1, 205 N.W.2d 129 (1973).

108.04 Annotation When a union that had given a notice of contract termination withdrew it before a strike began, there was no labor dispute in progress when the employer later closed its plant. Kansas City Star Co. v. DILHR, 60 Wis. 2d 591, 211 N.W.2d 488 (1973).

108.04 Annotation Intent is a crucial question in determining misconduct under sub. (5), but it is not determinative. Carelessness or negligence that manifests equal culpability, wrongful intent, or evil design is misconduct. McGraw-Edison Co. v. DILHR, 64 Wis. 2d 703, 221 N.W.2d 677 (1974).

108.04 Annotation A self-employed claimant who was both the employee and the employer could not disassociate the claimant’s fault or misfortune as an employer so as to become eligible for unemployment benefits under sub. (7) (b). Fish v. White Equipment Sales & Service, Inc., 64 Wis. 2d 737, 221 N.W.2d 864 (1974).

108.04 Annotation Masons, unemployed because their employer locked out masons’ laborers, were ineligible under sub. (10) for benefits because the masons would have been working “but for” a bona fide labor dispute. De Leeuw v. DILHR, 71 Wis. 2d 446, 238 N.W.2d 706 (1976).

108.04 Annotation Refusal to comply with an employer’s grooming code that was not necessary for safety was not misconduct under sub. (5). If an employee’s grooming choices create an unreasonable safety hazard in violation of an employer’s reasonable safety rule, the rule may be justified notwithstanding the right of free expression. Consolidated Construction Co. v. Casey, 71 Wis. 2d 811, 238 N.W.2d 758 (1976).

108.04 Annotation Striking employees discharged during a strike are not ineligible for benefits because of sub. (10). Hiring permanent replacements is not an automatic discharge of the employees who are replaced. The employer must take some affirmative action to replace the employees, determined by the conduct of the employer and employees. Carley Ford, Lincoln, Mercury, Inc. v. Bosquette, 72 Wis. 2d 569, 241 N.W.2d 596 (1976).

108.04 Annotation “Fault” under sub. (1) (f), in the context of an employee’s failure to pass a licensing examination, means blameworthy or negligent conduct, not incompetence. Milwaukee County v. DILHR, 80 Wis. 2d 445, 259 N.W.2d 118 (1977).

108.04 Annotation Picketing in violation of a collective bargaining agreement was misconduct under former sub. (6) (a), 1977 stats. Universal Foundry Co. v. DILHR, 86 Wis. 2d 582, 273 N.W.2d 324 (1979).

108.04 Annotation Indefinite layoff severs an employment relationship. A.O. Smith Corp. v. DILHR, 88 Wis. 2d 262, 276 N.W.2d 279 (1979).

108.04 Annotation The decision of a company’s sole shareholders, who were also its sole employees, to file for voluntary bankruptcy disqualified them for unemployment benefits. Hanmer v. DILHR, 92 Wis. 2d 90, 284 N.W.2d 587 (1979).

108.04 Annotation An employee who refused on religious grounds to pay mandatory union dues did not voluntarily terminate employment under sub. (7) (a). Nottelson v. DILHR, 94 Wis. 2d 106, 287 N.W.2d 763 (1980).

108.04 Annotation An employee who voluntarily terminated part-time employment, which prior to termination had not affected eligibility, became ineligible under sub. (7) (a). Ellingson v. DILHR, 95 Wis. 2d 710, 291 N.W.2d 649 (Ct. App. 1980).

108.04 Annotation An employee who was transferred to a workplace 25 miles away and did not receive a pay increase to cover the increased commuting costs had good cause to quit. Farmers Mill of Athens, Inc. v. DILHR, 97 Wis. 2d 576, 294 N.W.2d 39 (Ct. App. 1980).

108.04 Annotation Falsification of an employment application with respect to a criminal record constitutes “misconduct” under sub. (5), regardless of materiality to the employee’s particular job. Miller Brewing Co. v. DILHR, 103 Wis. 2d 496, 308 N.W.2d 922 (Ct. App. 1981).

108.04 Annotation Whether leaving work without permission as the result of an alleged safety violation was misconduct is determined based on whether a reasonable person would reasonably believe that the given working conditions presented a hazard to health or safety. Wehr Steel Co. v. DILHR, 106 Wis. 2d 111, 315 N.W.2d 357 (1982).

108.04 Annotation Sub. (10) does not deny equal protection to nonstriking workers laid off because of a strike. Jenks v. DILHR, 107 Wis. 2d 714, 321 N.W.2d 347 (Ct. App. 1982).

108.04 Annotation Under sub. (1) or (7), a pregnant employee who could not perform her specific job but could do other work was eligible for benefits. Rhinelander Paper Co. v. DILHR, 120 Wis. 2d 162, 352 N.W.2d 679 (Ct. App. 1984).

108.04 Annotation A teacher who forgot to accept an employment offer under s. 118.22 (2) and who was consequently terminated did not voluntarily terminate employment under sub. (7). Nelson v. LIRC, 123 Wis. 2d 221, 365 N.W.2d 629 (Ct. App. 1985).

108.04 Annotation A claimant who was physically able to perform less than 15 percent of the jobs in the job market was ineligible under sub. (2) (a). Brooks v. LIRC, 138 Wis. 2d 106, 405 N.W.2d 705 (Ct. App. 1987).

108.04 Annotation “Reasonable assurance” under sub. (17) (b) is a written, implied, or verbal agreement pursuant to which the employee will perform similar services during the following academic term. Farrell v. LIRC, 147 Wis. 2d 476, 433 N.W.2d 269 (Ct. App. 1988).

108.04 Annotation Under sub. (10) (d), “lockout” requires that the employer physically bar employees’ entrance into the workplace; there is no inquiry into the cause for the work stoppage. Trinwith v. LIRC, 149 Wis. 2d 634, 439 N.W.2d 581 (Ct. App. 1989).

108.04 Annotation The federal immigration act did not retroactively confer permanent resident status on an alien for compensation purposes under sub. (18). Pickering v. LIRC, 156 Wis. 2d 361, 456 N.W.2d 874 (Ct. App. 1990).

108.04 Annotation A teacher was entitled to unemployment benefits during the summer break between academic years when the teacher was permanently employed for all of the first academic year but was offered employment as a long-term substitute for the first semester of the second academic year. DILHR v. LIRC, 161 Wis. 2d 231, 467 N.W.2d 545 (1991).

108.04 Annotation Sub. (17) (c) [now sub. (17) (g)] was not applicable to a teacher who qualified for benefits although working periodically as a substitute. Wanish v. LIRC, 163 Wis. 2d 901, 472 N.W.2d 596 (Ct. App. 1991).

108.04 Annotation Employment offers by a temporary employment agency at rates substantially lower than the prevailing rates for similar work was “good cause” under sub. (7) (b); sub. (7) (f) does not preclude a finding of “good cause” when the offered wage is more than two-thirds of the prior wage. Cornwell Personnel Associates v. LIRC, 175 Wis. 2d 537, 499 N.W.2d 705 (Ct. App. 1993).

108.04 Annotation Discussing the intent of sub. (16) (b). Murphy v. LIRC, 183 Wis. 2d 205, 515 N.W.2d 487 (Ct. App. 1994).

108.04 Annotation The Labor and Industry Review Commission’s interpretation of ‘‘suitable work” in sub. (8) (a) as being work that is reasonable considering the claimant’s training, experience, and length of unemployment and of ‘‘became unemployed” in sub. (8) (d) as being when the person is no longer performing services for the employer are reasonable and consistent with the scheme of this chapter. Hubert v. LIRC, 186 Wis. 2d 590, 522 N.W.2d 512 (Ct. App. 1994).

108.04 Annotation Sub. (8) (d) describes a situation when “good cause” under sub. (8) (a) must be found. It does not mean there is no “good cause” if its conditions are not met. DILHR v. LIRC, 193 Wis. 2d 391, 535 N.W.2d 6 (Ct. App. 1995).

108.04 Annotation Excessive tardiness, which disrupted an office work schedule, rose to the level of misconduct under sub. (5). Charette v. LIRC, 196 Wis. 2d 956, 540 N.W.2d 239 (Ct. App. 1995), 94-3238.

108.04 Annotation A “reasonable assurance” of employment under sub. (17) (a) 1. requires an offer of employment under similar terms and circumstances, including location. Jobs 180 miles apart are not similar; the offer of such a job does not terminate benefits. Bunker v. LIRC, 197 Wis. 2d 606, 541 N.W.2d 168 (Ct. App. 1995), 95-0174.

108.04 Annotation Misconduct under sub. (5) is the intentional and substantial disregard of an employer’s interests. The crucial question is the employee’s intent or attitude that attends the conduct alleged to be misconduct. Bernhardt v. LIRC, 207 Wis. 2d 292, 558 N.W.2d 874 (Ct. App. 1996), 95-3549.

108.04 Annotation To be entitled to benefits under sub. (7) (am), there must be an identifiable, threatened suspension or termination of another employee’s work and not just a response to separation incentives offered by the employer as a cost-cutting measure. Berry v. LIRC, 213 Wis. 2d 397, 570 N.W.2d 610 (Ct. App. 1997), 97-0260.

108.04 Annotation The definition of “employer” under sub. (10) (d) does not include an employer joined or associated with another for the purpose of collective bargaining who is not subject to a strike against the other employer. Brauneis v. LIRC, 2000 WI 69, 236 Wis. 2d 27, 612 N.W.2d 635, 98-2212.

108.04 Annotation Sub. (6) makes no distinction between suspensions with pay or without pay. City of Kenosha v. LIRC, 2000 WI App 131, 237 Wis. 2d 304, 614 N.W.2d 508, 99-1456.

108.04 Annotation The Labor and Industry Review Commission could reasonably decide that an employee’s physical assault of another employee in reaction to discriminatory, harassing comments of a non-physical nature was misconduct under sub. (5) even though the employer may have failed to properly respond to the employee’s past complaints. Lopez v. LIRC, 2002 WI App 63, 252 Wis. 2d 476, 642 N.W.2d 561, 01-0165.

108.04 Annotation To demonstrate voluntary termination of employment for good cause under sub. (7) (b), the employee must show that the termination involved real and substantial fault on the part of the employer. Moving in violation of residency requirements of a collective bargaining agreement was inconsistent with continuation of an employer-employee relationship and constituted voluntarily termination of employment. That both the employee and the employee’s new spouse were subject to residency requirements that, if honored, would have prevented their living together was not “good cause” for termination. Klatt v. LIRC, 2003 WI App 197, 266 Wis. 2d 1038, 669 N.W.2d 752, 02-3218.

108.04 Annotation The appropriateness of establishing an off-duty work rule is determined at the time of the creation of the rule and not at the time of the violation of the rule. In this case, the employer and the union established a last chance agreement process to assist employees with drug and alcohol problems while providing a safe work environment for all employees. It was not relevant that the precipitating fact of the employee’s discharge was violating the employee’s last chance agreement without causing a safety-related incident. Patrick Cudahy Inc. v. LIRC, 2006 WI App 211, 296 Wis. 2d 751, 723 N.W.2d 756, 05-2074.

108.04 Annotation Although the petitioner stated the petitioner was not quitting, the petitioner nonetheless refused to sign a document, knowing it would cause the petitioner’s termination. These circumstances are the epitome of conduct inconsistent with continuation of the employment relationship, and it must be held that the employee intended and did leave employment voluntarily under sub. (7) (a). It was reasonable for the Labor and Industry Review Commission to determine that a failure to sign an employee disciplinary form is never an automatic quit without good cause when signing would not constitute an admission of conduct, and that this situation always requires a good cause inquiry into whether the employee knew signing would not be an admission. Kierstead v. LIRC, 2012 WI App 57, 341 Wis. 2d 343, 817 N.W.2d 878, 11-0938.

108.04 Annotation Nothing in sub. (6) suggests that suspensions that are the result of conduct connected with the employee’s work are excluded from the requirements of sub. (6) while awaiting the conclusion of pending investigations or hearings. Although “good cause” is not defined in the statute, the term has a commonly understood meaning, which is “a legally sufficient reason.” Under sub. (6), an employer’s reasons for suspending an employee must involve specific conduct by the employee that is directly connected to the employee’s work. Milwaukee County v. LIRC, 2014 WI App 55, 354 Wis. 2d 162, 847 N.W.2d 874, 13-1613.

108.04 Annotation Under sub. (5g), an employee who has not committed misconduct may nevertheless be ineligible for unemployment compensation. When an employee’s conduct does not rise to the level of misconduct, the employee may be denied unemployment benefits if the employee is terminated for substantial fault. The burden is on the employer to show that the termination is due to the employee’s substantial fault. Operton v. LIRC, 2017 WI 46, 375 Wis. 2d 1, 894 N.W.2d 426, 15-1055.

108.04 Annotation Sub. (5g) (a) 1. provides that one or more minor infractions do not constitute substantial fault unless an infraction is repeated and the employer has previously warned the employee about the infraction. Under sub. (5g) (a) 2., an employee’s termination is not for substantial fault if the termination results from one or more inadvertent errors. Inadvertence is defined as “an accidental oversight; the result of carelessness.” An employer’s warning is not dispositive of whether errors are inadvertent, and multiple inadvertent errors, even if the employee has been warned, do not necessarily constitute substantial fault. Operton v. LIRC, 2017 WI 46, 375 Wis. 2d 1, 894 N.W.2d 426, 15-1055.

108.04 Annotation The plain language of sub. (5) (e) allows an employer to adopt its own absenteeism policy that differs from the policy set forth in sub. (5) (e). Termination of an employee for a violation of the employer’s absenteeism policy will result in disqualification from receiving unemployment compensation benefits even if the employer’s policy is more restrictive than the absenteeism policy set forth in sub. (5) (e). DWD v. LIRC, 2018 WI 77, 382 Wis. 2d 611, 914 N.W.2d 625, 16-1365.

108.04 Annotation The denial of unemployment compensation to a Jehovah’s Witness who quit a job due to religious beliefs was a violation of the right to free exercise of religion. Thomas v. Review Board, 450 U.S. 707, 101 S. Ct. 1425, 67 L. Ed. 2d 624 (1981).

108.04 Annotation Voluntary Termination Not Found Where There Is Meritorious Excuse for Refusal to Pay Union Dues Based on Religious Grounds. Gray. 64 MLR 203 (1980).

108.04 Annotation Unemployment Compensation—An Examination of Wisconsin’s “Active Progress” Labor Dispute Disqualification Provision. McCormick. 1982 WLR 907.