Bills · 2013-2014 Regular Session
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
- Introduced, stopped here
- Passes Assembly, not reached
- Passes Senate, not reached
- Governor signs, not reached
- 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)
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 pageNo individual roll call was recorded for this vote. Committee votes and some older sessions record totals only.
Full history
- 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
- Jan 7, 2014 · Assembly
Read first time and referred to Committee on Labor
- Jan 29, 2014 · Assembly
Fiscal estimate received
- Feb 5, 2014 · Assembly
Fiscal estimate received
- Feb 20, 2014 · Assembly
Refused to suspend rules to withdraw from committee on Labor and take up, Ayes 36, Noes 57
- Apr 8, 2014 · Assembly
Failed to pass pursuant to Senate Joint Resolution 1