793 Decisions appealable to court

Appeals from decisions of ERD administrative law judges in whistleblower cases are not reviewed by the commission but instead go directly to circuit court. Further, the timeline for commencing a proceeding for judicial review does not begin to run until the ERD provides the parties with proper notice of their appeal rights. Woolever v. Univ. of Wis.–Whitewater (LIRC, 08/31/21).

A “newly discovered evidence”-based request for rehearing under Wis. Stat. § 227.49, and a motion to set aside, modify or change a decision under Wis. Stat. § 111.39(5)(c), both apply only to requests made after the final decision of the agency (LIRC) has been issued. They do not apply to asking LIRC to order further hearing in the course of its review. Once a petition for LIRC review is filed, an administrative law judge loses power to act in a case and cannot act on a motion for rehearing. However, LIRC’s general review authority includes authority to order further hearing on grounds of newly discovered evidence - but in this case, evidence about an employment action occurring three years after the employment action was complained of, did not involve sufficient parallels to allow the conclusion that it would change the result in the case. Hafeman v. County of Sauk (LIRC, 04/04/14).

Violations of Sections 103.10(11)(a) or (b) of the Family and Medical Leave Act are expressly made subject to the remedial procedures of the Act itself. The Labor and Industry Review Commission has no jurisdiction in these cases. These cases are subject to review in circuit court. Kayler v. Stoughton Trailers (LIRC, 10/27/97).