Wisconsin Labor and Industry Review Commission --
Summary of Wisconsin Court Decision relating to Unemployment Insurance


Subject: Department of Workforce Development v. Labor and Industry Review Commission and Jeffery D. Voisin, Case 05-CV-2277 (Wis. Cir. Ct., Milwaukee Co., September 6, 2005)

Digest Codes: AA 126.2

The employee held full-time employment pursuant to a Department of Workforce Development apprenticeship program that required the employee to take occasional training courses during his 6,000 hour apprenticeship. The department considers those training courses to be approved training under Wis. Stat. § 108.04(16). The employee also held concurrent part-time evening employment as a loading dock worker. For one four-week training session 180 miles from his home, the employee requested and was granted a leave of absence from the part-time employment, and the issue was whether that leave was a voluntary leave of absence under Wis. Stat. § 108.04(1)(b)2. The initial determination and appeal tribunal decision both held that it was. The commission reversed and held that the leave was not voluntary. The employee’s participation in the training was required for the apprenticeship, and the apprenticeship itself was governed by a contract among the employee, the full-time employer, and the department itself. That contract required the employee to fulfill all the conditions of the apprenticeship, and one of its conditions was the completion of the training connected with it. The commission thus reasoned that the employee’s leave request did not meet American Heritage College Dictionary (2nd edition) definitions of voluntary: “acting or performed without external persuasion or compulsion” and “without legal obligation, payment, or valuable consideration.”

Held: Affirmed. First, the court held that the commission’s interpretation of the statute was entitled to great weight deference, since it has specialized knowledge and expertise on the subject and has had numerous occasions to administer the statute since its enactment in 1981. Second, since the term “voluntary” is not defined in the statutes, it was proper for the commission to use the American Heritage College Dictionary to define voluntary as “acting or performed without external persuasion or compulsion.” This interpretation of the term voluntary as used in Wis. Stat. § 108.04(1)(b)2 was reasonable. Third, the court expressly rejected the department’s argument that the commission’s interpretation of voluntary in this case was inconsistent with its interpretation of voluntary in the quit context (Wis. Stat. § 108.04(7)(a)). The court reasoned that the employee did not quit his job, so argument based upon the separate statutory section of Wis. Stat. § 108.04(7)(a) “is irrelevant and does not render the Commission’s decision unreasonable.”


Please note that this is a summary prepared by staff of the commission, not a verbatim reproduction of the court decision.

[ Search UC Decisions ] - [ UC Digest - Main Index ] - [ UC Legal Resources ] - [ LIRC Home Page ]