Skip to content

Bills · 2013-2014 Regular Session

AB 604

Died at session end Official bill text Atom feed

Relating to: authorizing the circuit court to order a person who engages in discrimination in employment on the basis of military service to pay compensatory and punitive damages. (FE)

Circuit court Damage _personal injury_ Discrimination in employment Military personnel Workforce development, department of

  1. Introduced, stopped here
  2. Passes Assembly, not reached
  3. Passes Senate, not reached
  4. Governor signs, not reached
  5. Law, not reached

Unfamiliar terms? Glossary

What this bill does

Plain-language analysis by the nonpartisan Legislative Reference Bureau

Current law prohibits employment discrimination on the basis of military

service, which is defined as service in the U.S. armed forces, the state defense force,

the national guard of any state, or any other reserve component of the U.S. armed

forces. Also, current law specifies that employment discrimination on the basis of

military service includes discriminating against an individual because the

individual is or applies to be a member of the U.S. armed forces, the state defense

force, the national guard of any state, or any reserve component of the U.S. armed

forces or because the individual performs, has performed, applies to perform, or has

an obligation to perform military service. Current law provides, however, that it is

not employment discrimination on the basis of military service to refuse to hire,

employ, or license an individual or to bar or terminate an individual from

employment or licensure because the individual has been less than honorably

discharged from military service and the circumstances of the discharge

substantially relate to the circumstances of the particular job or licensed activity.

Under current law, a person alleging discrimination in employment on the basis

of military service may file a complaint with the Department of Workforce

Development (DWD) seeking action that will effectuate the purpose of the

employment discrimination law, including reinstating the complainant, providing

back pay, and paying costs and attorney fees. Current law, however, does not

authorize DWD to award compensatory or punitive damages to a complainant.

This bill permits DWD or a person who has been discriminated against on the

basis of military service to bring an action in circuit court to recover compensatory

and punitive damages caused by the act of discrimination, plus reasonable costs and

attorney fees incurred in the action, after the completion of all administrative

proceedings before DWD and the Labor and Industry Review Commission

concerning the violation. Those damages are in addition to any back pay or other

amounts awarded in the administrative proceeding. The bill, however, does not

permit an action for damages to be brought against any local governmental unit or

against any employer employing fewer than 15 individuals.

Under the bill, if the circuit court finds that a defendant has discriminated on

the basis of military service, the circuit court must order the defendant to pay to the

person discriminated against compensatory and punitive damages in an amount

that the circuit court finds appropriate, subject to the limitations, as follows:

1. If the defendant employs 100 or fewer employees, $50,000.

2. If the defendant employs more than 100 but fewer than 201 employees,

$100,000.

3. If the defendant employs more than 200 but fewer than 501 employees,

$200,000.

4. If the defendant employs more than 500 employees, $300,000.

What it would cost

Fiscal estimates filed by state agencies, as official PDFs

Sponsors

Introduced by: Barca (D) , Berceau (D) , Bernard Schaber (D) , Bewley (D) , Billings (D) , C. Taylor (D) , Doyle (D) , Genrich (D) , Goyke (D) , Hebl (D) , Hintz (D) , Jorgensen (D) , Kahl (D) , Mason (D) , Milroy (D) , Ohnstad (D) , Pasch (D) , Ringhand (D) , Sargent (D) , Sinicki (D) , Smith (D) , Vruwink (D) , Wachs (D) , Wright (D) , Young (D) , Zamarripa (D) , Zepnick (D)

2 cosponsors

Lassa (D) , Lehman (D)

Votes

Suspending the rules (to take a vote immediately) needs a two-thirds majority — a higher bar than passing the bill, which needs a simple majority. That's why a suspension motion can show more Ayes than the passage vote that follows it. Glossary

Assembly: Refused to suspend rules to withdraw from committee on Labor and take up, Ayes 36, Noes 57

Failed 36–57 Feb 20, 2014 official source full page

No individual roll call was recorded for this vote. Committee votes and some older sessions record totals only.

Full history

  1. Jan 7, 2014 · Assembly

    Introduced by Representatives Smith, Milroy, Sinicki, C. Taylor, Mason, Berceau, Hebl, Ohnstad, Goyke, Wachs, Wright, Bewley, Ringhand, Hintz, Zepnick, Young, Pasch, Barca, Jorgensen, Zamarripa, Vruwink, Doyle, Bernard Schaber, Genrich, Sargent, Billings and Kahl; cosponsored by Senators Lehman and Lassa

  2. Jan 7, 2014 · Assembly

    Read first time and referred to Committee on Labor

  3. Jan 29, 2014 · Assembly

    Fiscal estimate received

  4. Feb 5, 2014 · Assembly

    Fiscal estimate received

  5. Feb 20, 2014 · Assembly

    Refused to suspend rules to withdraw from committee on Labor and take up, Ayes 36, Noes 57

  6. Apr 8, 2014 · Assembly

    Failed to pass pursuant to Senate Joint Resolution 1