Wisconsin Assembly Bill AB232

Wisconsin 2025-2026 Regular Session

• Introduced: 5/2/25
• Refer: 5/2/25
• Report Pass: 6/12/25
• Refer: 6/12/25
• Refer: 6/16/25
• Engrossed: 6/18/25
• Enrolled: 6/20/25

Caption

Transferring adjudicatory functions for worker’s compensation from the Division of Hearings and Appeals in the Department of Administration to the Department of Workforce Development. (FE)

Impact

The implications of AB232 on state laws primarily revolve around the adjustment of administrative structures within the worker's compensation framework. The bill modifies various sections of related statutes to facilitate this transfer, including changes to procedural rules and deadlines associated with worker's compensation claims. The DWD will gain broader jurisdiction to intervene in disputes over treatment necessity and fees charged by service providers, effectively centralizing authority and offering clearer guidelines for both employees seeking compensation and employers managing claims. This shift is anticipated to promote a more consistent approach to adjudicating worker's compensation cases across the state.

Summary

Assembly Bill 232 aims to streamline the management of worker's compensation claims by transferring certain adjudicatory functions from the Division of Hearings and Appeals (DHA) in the Department of Administration to the Department of Workforce Development (DWD). This bill seeks to enhance the efficiency of dispute resolution and to simplify the processes involved in handling contested claims related to worker's compensation. By consolidating these functions within a single department, the bill is expected to improve the overall effectiveness of adjudication, making it more accessible for employees and service providers alike.

Contention

While proponents argue that the bill will provide a streamlined and more coherent system for resolving disputes, there are concerns among opposition groups regarding the potential for decreased oversight in the adjudication process. Critics highlight the risks associated with consolidating power within a single entity, raising fears about possible bias or inefficiencies emerging from this centralization. Additionally, stakeholders are wary of the changes in procedural norms that could affect employees' rights when seeking compensation for injuries sustained in the workplace. These points of contention underscore the ongoing debate about balancing administrative efficiency against the protection of worker rights in the realm of worker's compensation.