STATE OF WISCONSIN
LABOR AND INDUSTRY REVIEW COMMISSION
P O BOX 8126, MADISON, WI 53708-8126 (608/266-9850)

JOYCE ANN COOK, Complainant

THERAPY & SUPPORT SERVCES, Respondent

FAIR EMPLOYMENT DECISION
ERD Case No. 8852048, EEOC Case No. 26G881585

An Administrative Law Judge for the Equal Rights Division of the Department of Industry, Labor and Human Relations issued a decision in the above-captioned matter on July 31, 1990. Complainant filed a timely petition for review by the Commission.

Based upon a review of the record in its entirety, the Labor and Industry Review Commission issues the following:

ORDER

The decision of the Administrative Law Judge (copy attached) is affirmed and shall stand as the FINAL ORDER herein.

Dated and mailed at Madison, Wisconsin  November 8, 1991

/s/ Pamela I. Anderson, Chairman

/s/ Richard T. Kreul, Commissioner

MEMORANDUM OPINION

The Commission affirms the decision of the Administrative Law Judge in this matter because it agrees with his conclusion that what the Complainant was alleging and trying to prove was not "ancestry discrimination" within the meaning of the Wisconsin Fair Employment Act.

Notwithstanding that she signed a complaint to that effect, this Complainant does not in fact claim, and she did not prove, that she was discriminated against because her ancestry is French, English, German and Czechoslovakian. She has made it quite clear that she believes she has been discriminated against simply because she was not a member of any of three specific families ("family constellations" is the term Complainant uses) who have members in various positions of employment with Respondent. Complainant is in effect alleging discrimination based on her particular family lineage.

Such "discrimination" is not covered by the Wisconsin Fair Employment Act's prohibition against discrimination because of "ancestry." As the ALJ explains in his decision, "ancestry" is generally understood in the area of civil rights as referring to ethnic groups;  to put it another way, it refers to the country, nation, tribe or other identifiable population from which one's forebears came or to which they belonged. Administrative rulings in Wisconsin have held that "ancestry" is not a matter of membership in a particular family or of having a particular person as a family member. Kawczynski v. Dept. of Transportation (Wisconsin Personnel Commission, November 4, 1980), Volm v. H.C. Prange Co. (Equal Rights Division, Ruling of Legal Services Bureau Director, February 28, 1984). In the one state that has considered the issue, it has been consistently held that membership or lack of membership in a particular family is not a matter of "ancestry" under civil rights statutes. Sloboda v. United Parcel Services, 193 N.J. Super. 586, 592 (App. Div. 1984); Thomson v. Sanborn's Motor Express, 154 N.J. Super. 555, 560-61 (App. Div. 1977); Whateley v. Leonia Board of Education, 141 N.J. Super. 476, 478-480 (Ch. Div. 1976).

Even if everything the Complainant alleged was true, as a matter of fact, it would not as a matter of law constitute a violation of the Wisconsin Fair Employment Act.

110

[ Search ER Decisions ] - [ ER Decision Digest ] - [ ER Legal Resources ] - [ LIRC Home Page ]