Skip to content
Bills from the 2023–24 session

Assembly Bill 147

Various changes to the unemployment insurance law and requiring approval by the Joint Committee on Finance of certain federally authorized unemployment benefits. (FE)

Vetoed by the governor

Both chambers passed it, and the governor vetoed it on Aug 4, 2023. Lawmakers did not ⁠, so it stands.

  1. Introduced, passed

    Apr 7, 2023

  2. Committee, passed

    Approved

  3. Assembly vote, passed

    Passed 60 to 35

  4. Senate vote, passed

    Passed 22 to 11

  5. Governor, stopped here

    Vetoed Aug 4, 2023.

  6. Law, not reached

Latest entry in the official record, May 15, 2024: “Failed to pass notwithstanding the objections of the Governor pursuant to Joint Rule 82”

Read the governor's veto message · All vetoes this session

Read the bill

Following saves it on this device. New actions show on your Following page. You can also get updates in a feed reader.

Embed this on your site

Paste this code into your page. The card shows the latest record each time it loads. Preview the card

What it would have done

Summary by the , the Legislature's nonpartisan drafting office. It's their wording, not ours.

Unemployment insurance This bill makes various changes in the unemployment insurance (UI) law, which is administered by the Department of Workforce Development. Significant changes include all of the following:

Misconduct Currently, if an employee is discharged for misconduct connected with his or her employment, the employee is ineligible to receive UI benefits until certain requalification criteria are satisfied. In addition, all wages earned with the employer that discharges the employee are excluded in determining the amount of any future benefits to which the employee is entitled. Current law provides a general definition of misconduct and also specifies a number of specific actions that constitute misconduct. The bill does all of the following with respect to what is considered misconduct:

Read the full summary

1. Current law specifically provides that misconduct includes theft of an employer's property or services with intent to deprive the employer of the property or services permanently, theft of currency of any value, felonious conduct connected with an employee's employment with his or her employer, or intentional or negligent conduct by an employee that causes substantial damage to his or her employer's property. The bill does the following:

a. Eliminates the requirement that the employee have intent to deprive the employer of the property or services permanently.

b. Provides that intentional or negligent conduct by an employee that causes the destruction of an employer's records is also considered misconduct.

c. Adds unauthorized possession of an employer's property, theft or unauthorized distribution of an employer's confidential or proprietary information, and use of an employer's credit card or other financial instrument for an unauthorized or nonbusiness purpose without prior approval from the employer to the list of what is considered misconduct.

2. Current law specifically provides that misconduct includes absenteeism by an employee on more than two occasions within the 120-day period before the date of the employee's termination, unless otherwise specified by his or her employer in an employment manual of which the employee has acknowledged receipt with his or her signature, or excessive tardiness by an employee in violation of a policy of the employer that has been communicated to the employee, if the employee does not provide to his or her employer both notice and one or more valid reasons for the absenteeism or tardiness.

The bill instead provides that misconduct includes both of the following: 1) a violation of an employer's reasonable policy that covers employee absenteeism, tardiness, or both and that results in an employee's termination, if that termination is in accordance with that policy and the policy is specified by the employer in an employment manual of which the employee has acknowledged receipt with his or her signature; and 2) if an employer does not have a policy covering absenteeism that meets the criteria just described, absenteeism on more than two occasions within the 120-day period preceding an employee's termination, if the employee does not provide to the employer both notice and one or more valid reasons for the absenteeism.

3. The bill specifically provides that misconduct includes a violation by an employee of an employer's reasonable employment policy that covers the use of social media specified by the employer in an employment manual of which the employee has acknowledged receipt with his or her signature.

General qualifying requirements Under current law, a claimant for UI benefits is generally required to 1) register for work, 2) be able to work and available for work, and 3) conduct a work search for each week in order to remain eligible. A claimant is required to conduct at least four work search actions each week, and DWD may require, by rule, that an individual conduct more than four work search actions per week. Finally, if a claimant is claiming benefits for a week other than an initial week, the claimant must provide information or job application materials that are requested by DWD and participate in a public employment office workshop or training program or in similar reemployment services required by DWD.

The bill does the following:

1. Requires a claimant who resides outside this state and who is claiming benefits for a week other than an initial week to register with his or her local job center website or labor market exchange and requires DWD to verify that each such claimant has complied with that requirement.

2. Requires DWD to conduct random audits for at least 50 percent of all work search actions reported to have been performed by claimants. Current law requires random audits of work search actions, but does not require a specific number or level of audits.

Other changes UI benefit augmentations subject to review by Joint Committee on Finance The bill provides that whenever any UI benefit augmentation is provided for through an act of Congress or by executive action of the president of the United States, the cochairpersons of the Joint Committee on Finance must be notified, in writing, of the proposed benefit augmentation. The bill defines “benefit augmentation” to mean any action whereby the governor or any other state official or agency would encumber or expend moneys received from, or accept reimbursement from, the federal government or whereby the governor or any other state agency or official would enter into any contract or agreement with the federal government or any federal agency to 1) increase the weekly UI benefit rate payable to claimants above what is provided under state law, or 2) increase the total amount of UI benefits to which a claimant is entitled above what is provided under state law.

Under the bill, such a benefit augmentation is subject to a 14-day passive review by the Joint Committee on Finance.

In addition, the bill provides that no benefit augmentation may be effectuated unless it is subject to termination or cancellation by the Joint Committee on Finance.

Worker's compensation; misconduct Currently, under the worker's compensation law, an employer is not liable for temporary disability benefits during an employee's healing period if the employee is suspended or terminated from employment due to misconduct, as defined under the UI law. Under the bill, the changes to the UI law's definition of misconduct described above apply under the worker's compensation law as well.

Who's behind it

21 representatives are its ⁠. All 21 are Republicans.

6 more lawmakers ⁠.

See all 27 names

Authors (21)

Signed on in support (6)

What it would cost

State agencies filed a . Each opens as a PDF from the Legislature.

How lawmakers voted

There were 5 votes on this bill.

Assembly Committee on Workforce Development and Economic Opportunities vote to recommend it

Passed, 10 to 5 · Apr 18, 2023

No member-by-member record exists for this vote. Committee votes and some older sessions record totals only.

Official motion: “Report passage recommended by Committee on Workforce Development and Economic Opportunities, Ayes 10, Noes 5”. Official record · This vote on its own page

Assembly vote to pass it

Passed, 60 to 35 · Apr 25, 2023 · 4 didn't vote

See how each of the 99 representatives voted

D: Democrat, R: Republican

Yes (60)

Didn't vote (4)

Official motion: “PASSAGE”. Official record · This vote on its own page

Senate Committee on Economic Development and Technical Colleges vote to recommend it

Passed, 4 to 2 · May 26, 2023

No member-by-member record exists for this vote. Committee votes and some older sessions record totals only.

Official motion: “Report concurrence recommended by Committee on Economic Development and Technical Colleges, Ayes 4, Noes 2”. Official record · This vote on its own page

Senate vote

Passed, 3 to 2 · Jun 5, 2023

No member-by-member record exists for this vote. Committee votes and some older sessions record totals only.

Official motion: “Public hearing requirement waived by committee on Senate Organization, pursuant to Senate Rule 18 (1m), Ayes 3, Noes 2”. Official record · This vote on its own page

Senate vote to pass it

Passed, 22 to 11 · Jun 7, 2023

See how each of the 33 senators voted

D: Democrat, R: Republican

Official motion: “CONCURRENCE”. Official record · This vote on its own page

What happened

  1. May 15, 2024

    The veto stood. Lawmakers didn't override it.

  2. Mar 13, 2024

    Sent to the Assembly Committee on Rules.

  3. Dec 8, 2023

    1 more representative signed on in support.

  4. Aug 4, 2023

    The governor vetoed it.

  5. Aug 2, 2023

    Sent to the governor.

  6. Jun 7, 2023

    The Senate passed it too, 22 to 11.

  7. Jun 5, 2023

    “Public hearing requirement waived by committee on Senate Organization, pursuant to Senate Rule 18 (1m), Ayes 3, Noes 2” (the official wording)

  8. May 26, 2023

    The committee voted to recommend passing it, 4 to 2.

  9. May 2, 2023

    Sent to the Senate Committee on Economic Development and Technical Colleges.

  10. Apr 26, 2023

    The Senate received it.

  11. Apr 25, 2023

    The Assembly passed it, 60 to 35.

  12. Apr 24, 2023

    1 more representative signed on in support.

  13. Apr 18, 2023

    Sent to the Assembly Committee on Rules.

  14. Apr 18, 2023

    The committee voted to recommend passing it, 10 to 5.

  15. Apr 17, 2023

    A state agency sent in its estimate of the cost.

  16. Apr 12, 2023

    The committee held a public hearing.

  17. Apr 7, 2023

    Sent to the Assembly Committee on Workforce Development and Economic Opportunities.

  18. Apr 7, 2023

    Introduced in the Assembly.

See the official record, word for word
  1. Apr 7, 2023 · Assembly

    Introduced by Representatives Armstrong, Behnke, Brooks, Edming, Green, Gundrum, Knodl, Macco, Moses, Murphy, Nedweski, O'Connor, Penterman, Petersen, Petryk, Plumer, Rettinger, Rozar, Schmidt, Sortwell and Wichgers; cosponsored by Senators Wimberger, Felzkowski, Nass and Stroebel

  2. Apr 7, 2023 · Assembly

    Read first time and referred to Committee on Workforce Development and Economic Opportunities

  3. Apr 12, 2023 · Assembly

    Public hearing held

  4. Apr 17, 2023 · Assembly

    Fiscal estimate received

  5. Apr 18, 2023 · Assembly

    Executive action taken

  6. Apr 18, 2023 · Assembly

    Report passage recommended by Committee on Workforce Development and Economic Opportunities, Ayes 10, Noes 5

  7. Apr 18, 2023 · Assembly

    Referred to committee on Rules

  8. Apr 20, 2023 · Assembly

    Placed on calendar 4-25-2023 by Committee on Rules

  9. Apr 24, 2023 · Assembly

    Representative Kitchens added as a coauthor

  10. Apr 25, 2023 · Assembly

    Read a second time

  11. Apr 25, 2023 · Assembly

    Ordered to a third reading

  12. Apr 25, 2023 · Assembly

    Rules suspended

  13. Apr 25, 2023 · Assembly

    Read a third time and passed, Ayes 60, Noes 35

  14. Apr 25, 2023 · Assembly

    Ordered immediately messaged

  15. Apr 26, 2023 · Senate

    Received from Assembly

  16. May 2, 2023 · Senate

    Read first time and referred to committee on Economic Development and Technical Colleges

  17. May 24, 2023 · Senate

    Executive action taken

  18. May 26, 2023 · Senate

    Report concurrence recommended by Committee on Economic Development and Technical Colleges, Ayes 4, Noes 2

  19. May 26, 2023 · Senate

    Available for scheduling

  20. Jun 5, 2023 · Senate

    Public hearing requirement waived by committee on Senate Organization, pursuant to Senate Rule 18 (1m), Ayes 3, Noes 2

  21. Jun 5, 2023 · Senate

    Placed on calendar 6-7-2023 pursuant to Senate Rule 18(1)

  22. Jun 7, 2023 · Senate

    Read a second time

  23. Jun 7, 2023 · Senate

    Ordered to a third reading

  24. Jun 7, 2023 · Senate

    Rules suspended to give bill its third reading

  25. Jun 7, 2023 · Senate

    Read a third time and concurred in, Ayes 22, Noes 11

  26. Jun 7, 2023 · Senate

    Ordered immediately messaged

  27. Jun 7, 2023 · Assembly

    Received from Senate concurred in

  28. Jun 9, 2023 · Assembly

    Report correctly enrolled on 6-9-2023

  29. Aug 2, 2023 · Assembly

    Presented to the Governor on 8-2-2023

  30. Aug 4, 2023 · Assembly

    Report vetoed by the Governor on 8-4-2023

  31. Dec 8, 2023 · Assembly

    Representative Gustafson added as a coauthor

  32. Mar 13, 2024 · Assembly

    Referred to committee on Rules

  33. May 14, 2024 · Assembly

    Placed on calendar 5-14-2024 pursuant to Joint Rule 82 (2)(a)

  34. May 15, 2024 · Assembly

    Failed to pass notwithstanding the objections of the Governor pursuant to Joint Rule 82

Terms on this page

Veto override

Lawmakers can still pass a bill the governor vetoed, but it takes two-thirds of each chamber.

More in the glossary

Legislative Reference Bureau

The Legislature's nonpartisan office that drafts bills and writes the summary at the top of each one.

Official term: LRB analysis. More in the glossary

Author

A lawmaker who formally puts a bill forward. The text itself is drafted by the Legislative Reference Bureau.

Official term: Author, coauthor. More in the glossary

Signed on in support

Lawmakers who back a bill without being one of its authors, often from the other chamber.

Official term: Cosponsor. More in the glossary

Cost estimate

A state agency's estimate of what a bill would cost or save.

Official term: Fiscal estimate. More in the glossary

Roll call

A vote where each lawmaker's yes or no is recorded by name.

Official term: Roll call vote. More in the glossary

From the Wisconsin Legislature's official record, checked Sep 15, 2026. See the source

Veto override

Lawmakers can still pass a bill the governor vetoed, but it takes two-thirds of each chamber.

Legislative Reference Bureau

The Legislature's nonpartisan office that drafts bills and writes the summary at the top of each one.

Official term: LRB analysis

Author

A lawmaker who formally puts a bill forward. The text itself is drafted by the Legislative Reference Bureau.

Official term: Author, coauthor

Signed on in support

Lawmakers who back a bill without being one of its authors, often from the other chamber.

Official term: Cosponsor

Cost estimate

A state agency's estimate of what a bill would cost or save.

Official term: Fiscal estimate

Roll call

A vote where each lawmaker's yes or no is recorded by name.

Official term: Roll call vote