RICK JACKSON, Complainant

SCHNEIDER TRANSPORT INC, Respondent

An administrative law judge (ALJ) for the Equal Rights Division of the Department of Workforce Development issued a decision in this matter. A timely petition for review was filed.

The commission has considered the petition and the positions of the parties, and it has reviewed the evidence submitted to the ALJ. Based on its review, the commission agrees with the decision of the ALJ, and it adopts the findings and conclusion in that decision as its own.

The decision of the administrative law judge (copy attached) is affirmed.

Dated and mailed September 25, 2001
jacksri . rsd : 125 : 9

/s/ David B. Falstad, Chairman

/s/ James A. Rutkowski, Commissioner

In his petition for review Rick Jackson apparently contends that he was denied due process because he could not afford "expensive legal representation" like the respondent could. However, legal representation is not required at hearings before the Equal Rights Division, nor is there any statutory provision that requires the division to provide legal representation for a party. The record indicates that the ALJ conducted a fair hearing. There is no evidence that Jackson was denied due process.

Jackson next argues that under current case law, all felons can be excluded from protection under the law based on the substantially related argument. This argument is erroneous. See for example, Milwaukee Bd. of School Directors v. LIRC, (Milw. Co. Cir. Ct., 06/14/00), aff'd (Ct. App., Dist. I, 06/12/01)(Conviction for injury by conduct regardless of life was not substantially related to complainant's job as Boiler Attendant Trainee in a public school); Thorson v. Rockwell Int'l (LIRC, 08/13/98)(Complainant's conviction for second degree sexual assault of a child not substantially related to the position of machine operator). It is the circumstances which foster criminal activity that are important, e.g., the opportunity for criminal behavior, the reaction to responsibility, or the character traits of the person. County of Milwaukee v. LIRC, 139 Wis. 2d 805, 824, 407 N.W.2d 908 (1987).

Jackson argues that he was not applying for a driving job that sent him to Canada, he was applying for a simple short-haul job that does not involve Canadian entry. Canada has restrictions on allowing individuals with felony conviction records to enter unless they have a "minister's permit" issued by the Canadian government. However, the respondent can not guarantee that a driver will not be required to deliver a shipment to Canada. Loads are assigned to the closest driver in the vicinity. Also, customers can easily change where they want their freight shipped, including to Canada.

Jackson argues that the respondent lied about having theft problems. Jackson presented no evidence to prove that the respondent lied about having theft problems, however. Because the respondent is the largest truck carrier in the country, Jackson argues that the respondent could give him "no-sensitive loads." Even assuming this to be the case, drivers are entrusted with expensive truck cabs and trailers, and the respondent has previously had drivers steal truck cabs and trailers.

Finally, Jackson argues that he has recently been released from his mandatory 3-year parole obligations with a good work history, which the Parole and Probation Department can attest to. However, the Wisconsin Supreme Court has held that whether an individual may be able to perform a job up to the employer's standards is not the relevant question when determining whether there is a substantial relationship between the offense for which the individual was convicted and the circumstances of the particular job. County of Milwaukee, 139 Wis. 2d at 827.

cc: Attorney Ronald T. Pfeifer

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

uploaded 2001/09/26