Wisconsin — Hiring & Onboarding

Wisconsin prohibits employment discrimination based on arrest or conviction records under Wis. Stat. § 111.335. Employers generally may not request information about an applicant's arrest record (other than pending charges) except in limited circumstances, such as when bondability under a fidelity bond is required by law or business practice.

Employers may refuse to employ an individual subject to a pending criminal charge if the charge’s circumstances are substantially related to the job. For convictions, an employer may lawfully reject or terminate an applicant only if the nature and circumstances of the offense are substantially related to the particular job, or if the individual is not bondable where bondability is required by law or established practice.

The "substantially related" test in case law. The Wisconsin Supreme Court in County of Milwaukee v. LIRC, 139 Wis. 2d 805, 407 N.W.2d 908 (1987), established that the "substantially related" test examines the link between the circumstances of the offense and those that would be present in the job. The Court clarified that the focus is not on the details of the offense itself, but on whether the job environment would present similar opportunities for the same kind of criminal behavior. Specifically, the Court wrote: “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.” (139 Wis. 2d at 824–25). This means that employers must assess whether the workplace would present similar temptations or risks as those present during the prior crime, and not merely match crimes to job titles. Later LIRC decisions and _Cree, Inc. v. LIRC_, 2022 WI 15, reaffirm this contextual, risk-based analysis—grounded in the specifics of the offense and the employer's business environment.

Source: Wis. Stat. § 111.335 Source: County of Milwaukee v. LIRC, 139 Wis. 2d 805 (1987) Source: Cree, Inc. v. LIRC, 2022 WI 15

Wisconsin’s new-hire reporting law applies only to employees, not independent contractors.

Definition of employee. Under Wis. Admin. Code § DWD 142.02(2), an “employee” is any individual who is an employee under 26 U.S.C. § 3401(c)—that is, subject to federal income-tax withholding. This language makes clear that independent contractors, who are generally paid on IRS Form 1099 (rather than W-2) and not subject to withholding, are outside the scope of the new-hire reporting obligation.

Statutory reporting obligation. Wis. Stat. § 103.05 and Wis. Admin. Code ch. DWD 142 require every employer with a Federal Employer Identification Number (FEIN) to report each newly hired employee—defined as someone hired for federal withholding purposes—within 20 days of starting work in Wisconsin. Rehires returning after 60+ days of separation are also included, but independent contractors are not. The reporting methods and required fields are detailed in the Administrative Code, and contractors are absent from all enumerated categories.

Reiteration by agency guidance. The Wisconsin Department of Workforce Development’s official new hire reporting FAQ restates that only employees who fill out a Form W-4 must be reported. The FAQ expressly notes that independent contractors are not covered by the state requirement.

Summary. Wisconsin employers are not required to report independent contractors under the state new-hire reporting law. The rule tracks the definition of employee under both federal and state law—contractors fall outside reporting scope.

Source: Wis. Admin. Code § DWD 142.02(2) Source: Wis. Stat. § 103.05 Source: Wisconsin DWD — New Hire Reporting FAQ

In 2022, the Wisconsin Supreme Court clarified the "substantially related" test for employment decisions based on conviction records under Wis. Stat. § 111.335 in Cree, Inc. v. LIRC, 2022 WI 15. This case resolved how the test applies when an applicant’s conviction is for a crime of domestic violence—but the job itself is not domestic in nature.

No carveout for domestic violence. Before Cree, administrative practice sometimes gave special treatment to domestic violence convictions, treating them as unrelated to workplace risk unless the workplace itself replicated domestic circumstances. The Supreme Court expressly rejected this approach. The Court held that the standard articulated in County of Milwaukee v. LIRC, 139 Wis. 2d 805 (1987), applies equally: the inquiry is whether the "material circumstances" of the offense are substantially related to the circumstances of the job.

Material circumstances and recidivism risk. The Court underscored that the "material circumstances" go beyond merely the physical setting of the offense. For domestic violence convictions, these can include traits or behaviors that present workplace risks, such as willingness to use violence to exert control, ability to isolate a victim, disregard for authority, or aggression under stress. The recency, seriousness, and repetition of the conduct are all relevant to the employer's assessment of recidivism risk in the context of the particular job’s duties and environment.

Implications for employers. Employers may not categorically discount domestic violence convictions as irrelevant outside domestic workplaces. Instead, they must assess whether the circumstances giving rise to the offense (for example, patterns of coercion, ability to isolate others, history of aggression) could also foreseeably arise in the workplace. A proper analysis focuses on the risk factors evidenced by the conviction, matched against the job opportunities for the same conduct, not simply the setting.

Source: Cree, Inc. v. LIRC, 2022 WI 15 Source: Wis. Stat. § 111.335

Wisconsin law explicitly permits employers to ask applicants for their salary history and bars local governments from forbidding that inquiry. Under Wis. Stat. § 103.36 (enacted by 2017 Wis. Act 327), an employer “may solicit information regarding the salary history of prospective employees.” The statute calls this issue a “matter of statewide concern” and preempts any city, village, town, or county ordinance that attempts to prohibit salary‑history inquiries.

Statewide permission: Employers throughout Wisconsin are free to ask about an applicant’s compensation history during the hiring process. This legal rule applies regardless of where the job is located or where the applicant resides in the state.

Total preemption of local bans: No city (including Milwaukee or Madison), village, town, or county may enact or enforce any law, ordinance, or regulation that bars employers from seeking salary history information. Any local measures to this effect, including those in effect before April 18, 2018, are void and unenforceable, per Wis. Stat. § 103.36(3)(b), which states: "Any provision of a local ordinance in effect prior to, on, or after April 18, 2018, that prohibits an employer from soliciting information regarding the salary history of prospective employees is void and unenforceable."

As of June 2026, Wisconsin stands in contrast to the national trend: there are no state or local salary history inquiry bans. On the contrary, state law asserts employers’ right to make such inquiries, and explicitly blocks local governments from restricting that practice in the future.

Source: Wis. Stat. § 103.36

Wisconsin does not require most private-sector employers to provide new hires with a written notice of wage rate, pay period, or other wage and hour terms at the time of hire. Unlike some states (such as New York or California), Wisconsin law does not include a statute or regulation mandating that covered employers deliver a written wage notice at onboarding.

General employers (all hires):

• There is no requirement in Wis. Stat. chs. 103, 104, or 109, nor any Wisconsin Administrative Code provision, that obligates regular employers to disclose wage and hour terms in writing at hire. However, upon payment of wages, Wisconsin law does require that employers furnish each employee with a pay statement specifying hours worked, rate(s) of pay, total gross and net wages, and itemized deductions for each pay period (Wis. Stat. § 109.03(1)). This is an at-paystub-right, not a hiring/notice-at-hire right.

Exception — Migrant labor disclosures:

• There is a wage notice requirement for employers that hire “migrant workers” (defined at Wis. Stat. § 103.90(5)). Such employers must provide a written recruiting disclosure statement at time of offer or recruitment covering the wage rate, pay period, job duties, duration of employment, location, any deductions, bonuses, and housing/transportation provisions. The requirements are detailed in Wis. Stat. §§ 103.915(1)–(2) and Wis. Admin. Code § DWD 301.07, and exceed what is required for regular (non-migrant) employees.

Summary:

• Most Wisconsin employers are not required to deliver a written wage notice at hire. Migrant labor employers, however, must comply with detailed written recruit disclosure requirements set out under law.

Source: Wis. Stat. § 109.03 Source: Wis. Stat. § 103.915 Source: Wis. Admin. Code § DWD 301.07

Wisconsin courts and the Labor & Industry Review Commission (LIRC) have articulated a set of factors for the "substantial relationship" test under Wis. Stat. § 111.335, which governs when an employer may lawfully refuse to hire or may terminate an individual based on conviction record.

County of Milwaukee v. LIRC (1987) — foundational factors The Wisconsin Supreme Court established in County of Milwaukee v. LIRC, 139 Wis. 2d 805, 407 N.W.2d 908 (1987), that the test turns on whether the "circumstances which foster criminal activity" in the offense are substantially related to those present in the job. The Court specifically identified the following as relevant:

• The opportunity for criminal behavior in the job,
• The employee’s reaction to responsibility,
• Character traits evidenced by the offense (such as impulsivity, disregard for authority, or propensity for violence).

The test is not about precise matching of offense details and job duties, but whether traits or circumstances present in the offense are likely to arise in the job context. The job must present similar opportunities or temptations to those that led to the crime.

LIRC and subsequent Supreme Court confirmation — Cree, Inc. v. LIRC (2022) LIRC decisions and the Wisconsin Supreme Court's 2022 decision in Cree, Inc. v. LIRC, 2022 WI 15, reaffirm that the analysis is contextual and risk-focused. The “material circumstances” of both the offense and the job are at issue. In Cree, the Court clarified there is no automatic carveout for certain offenses (like domestic violence); instead, the focus remains on risk factors evidenced by the conviction and their possible recurrence in the job environment.

Objective, after-the-fact analysis The LIRC has made clear that the "substantial relationship" inquiry is an objective, legal question for decision-makers—not for the employer to apply subjectively at time of hire. This was established in cases like Jorgensen v. HMI, Ltd. (1991) and Black v. Warner Cable (1989), as well as summary digests from the LIRC Equal Rights Division (an official agency publication).

Summary of factors courts consider:

• Does the job present a significant opportunity for the same type of misconduct or recidivism?
• What “material circumstances” or character traits does the conviction demonstrate, and are they relevant to the job?
• Is the connection based on opportunity/risk rather than context identity? Precise matching is not required.

Source: County of Milwaukee v. LIRC, 139 Wis. 2d 805 (1987) Source: LIRC Equal Rights Division Legal Digest — Substantial Relationship Source: Cree, Inc. v. LIRC, 2022 WI 15

Wisconsin’s expungement statute, Wis. Stat. § 973.015, provides that when a conviction is expunged by court order, "the record shall be sealed and the defendant shall be deemed not to have been convicted for purposes of employment, licensing, or other civil rights and disabilities." The law further states that an individual "may lawfully omit all mention of the case in response to any inquiry regarding prior arrests or convictions."

Implications for employers:

• After expungement under § 973.015, employers are not permitted to consider the expunged conviction in making employment decisions and cannot treat the person as having a conviction record for the expunged offense.
• The applicant or employee is legally entitled to withhold (not disclose) any expunged conviction in response to questions about criminal history on employment applications or in interviews.

Limitations and exceptions:

• The statutory text itself does not expressly prohibit employers from making a general inquiry about prior convictions, but once a conviction is expunged, the individual is allowed to deny its existence lawfully.
• The expungement bar applies only to records actually expunged by court order and only to those offenses that are eligible for expungement under the statute’s criteria (e.g., most are misdemeanors, some lower-level felonies, and only under certain age and disposition conditions).
• The statutes reviewed do not explicitly address every possible exception, such as statutory bars for law enforcement, childcare, or other regulated professions. No regulatory carveout appears in the statutes themselves, but employers hiring for statutorily disqualified positions should check for specific disqualifying rules in those regulated sectors.

Summary: Wisconsin law treats expunged convictions as legally erased for employment purposes—employers may not use them to make employment decisions, and applicants may lawfully deny such convictions. The statutes do not expressly speak to employer inquiry beyond this omission right, and exceptions should be checked for licensed or statutorily regulated jobs.

Source: Wis. Stat. § 973.015 Source: Wis. Stat. § 111.335

Wisconsin does not have a statewide “ban-the-box” law for private employers: there is no statute or administrative rule that prohibits employers from asking about an applicant’s criminal history on a job application or otherwise delays when such questions may be asked. Employers in Wisconsin can ask about arrests and convictions at any stage of the hiring process, as long as those questions are not phrased or used to unlawfully discriminate in violation of Wis. Stat. § 111.322(2) and § 111.335. That means the timing of the inquiry—on an application, in an interview, or after a conditional offer—is not fixed by Wisconsin law.

Arrest/conviction inquiry limits. While Wisconsin does not control the timing, it does restrict use of the information: under Wis. Stat. §§ 111.335 and 111.322(2), an employer may consider a conviction record only if the circumstances of the offense are "substantially related" to the job. Inquiries about arrest records (as opposed to convictions) are more limited; employers generally may not rely on arrest records that did not result in conviction, subject to specific exceptions for pending charges relevant to job duties.

No delayed-inquiry mandate for private sector. Unlike some jurisdictions (like New York City, California, and several other states and cities), Wisconsin does not require private sector employers to delay inquiries about criminal history until later hiring stages. However, public sector (state government) hiring in Wisconsin does restrict criminal history questions on applications for most state jobs, but this provision does not apply to private employers (see Wis. Stat. § 230.16(1)(ap)).

Federal overlay. All employers are still governed by federal anti-discrimination law, including Title VII as interpreted by the EEOC (limiting consideration of arrest and conviction history under disparate impact analysis). But for timing, only federal contractors are impacted if they are subject to specific FAR requirements (see, e.g., 41 U.S.C. § 4714 for federal contracts), not Wisconsin law.

Summary:

• Private employers in Wisconsin can ask about criminal records at any point in hiring.
• The “substantial relationship” test controls how conviction information may be used.
• A state-level ban-the-box law applies only to public-sector hiring, with no private employer restriction as of 2026.

Source: Wis. Stat. § 111.335 Source: Wisconsin DWD – Arrest and Conviction Record Discrimination Source: Wis. Stat. § 230.16(1)(ap)

Employer’s burden — “substantial relationship” is an affirmative defense.

Under Wisconsin law, when an employer refuses to hire (or discharges) an applicant based on a conviction record, alleging that the conviction is "substantially related" to the job, the employer bears the burden of proof on this question. This is not just a practical evidentiary point — it is embedded in the structure of Wis. Stat. § 111.335(3)(a)1., which makes the “substantial relationship” exception an affirmative defense to a charge of arrest/conviction record discrimination. The Labor and Industry Review Commission (LIRC) digests and controlling case law, such as County of Milwaukee v. LIRC (1987) and Cree, Inc. v. LIRC (2022), consistently reiterate this structure: the employer (as respondent) must demonstrate by evidence that the circumstances of the offense and the job "substantially relate." If the employee or applicant challenges the employer’s determination, the burden does not shift — the employer must still carry the persuasive burden before the agency or a reviewing court.

No burden-shifting — factual disagreement is for the tribunal.

The substantial relationship test is objective, not simply the employer’s say-so. If an applicant disputes the employer’s claim that a past conviction is substantially related to the position, the issue is decided by the administrative tribunal (Equal Rights Division or LIRC) and, if appealed, by the courts. The employer presents evidence to support the link; the applicant may rebut, but does not bear the burden of proof at any stage. This burden structure is summarized in LIRC's official ER Digest (Digest 122.21 and 122.2), which states: “the burden is on the respondent to prove the circumstances of the offense are substantially related to the job.” Neither the statute nor case law contemplates any shift in burden to the applicant simply for disputing the employer’s determination.

Practical takeaway:

• The employer always bears the legal risk if a tribunal finds the connection insubstantial; defending the decision requires more than a conclusory assertion, and LIRC/courts scrutinize the employer’s evidence against an objective standard.

Source: Wis. Stat. § 111.335 Source: LIRC Equal Rights Division Legal Digest — Substantial Relationship 122.21, 122.2 Source: Cree, Inc. v. LIRC, 2022 WI 15

Child Care (DCF-regulated programs) Wis. Stat. § 48.686 requires child care providers, employees, household members age 10+, and contractors in licensed or certified child care programs to undergo a fingerprint-based background check upon initial hire, and each individual must also have a name-based check every year. A fingerprint-based check must be completed at least once every five years. Under Wis. Stat. § 48.686(2)(bm), an individual may begin work after receiving a preliminary eligibility determination and must remain under supervision until a final eligibility determination is made. Employers must notify individuals of any eligibility determination and their right to appeal. The statute specifies that prior background checks performed before October 1, 2018, do not fulfill current requirements. Source: Wis. Stat. § 48.686

Health Care / Caregiver (DHS-regulated entities) Wis. Stat. § 50.065 applies to caregivers—meaning individuals with direct, regular contact with clients in a broad range of health care settings (including hospitals, home health agencies, and assisted living facilities). Covered entities must request a criminal history search from the Wisconsin DOJ for each caregiver "at the time of the initial employment or contract," after receiving "notification of a conviction or substantiated finding," and "at least every 4 years after the date of the initial investigation." Documentation of all completed background checks must be kept on file as required by Wis. Stat. § 50.065(2)(bg). The statute itself does not impose a written notice requirement to the individual about the background check result, but employers are required to comply with federal notice rules if the check is used to deny employment. Source: Wis. Stat. § 50.065

Education (Public/Charter/Choice Schools) Public school boards and the governing bodies of charter and choice schools must conduct a background investigation for licensed instructional staff before employment, under Wis. Stat. § 118.19(10), by "requiring the applicant to provide, and obtaining, information regarding the conviction record of the applicant and, if the person has worked in another state, information about any findings of child abuse or neglect." The statute is silent on periodic recheck requirements or notice requirements for applicants who are not hired or whose checks raise issues. Rechecks or additional checks after initial employment are addressed only by individual school district policy, not by state statute. Source: Wis. Stat. § 118.19(10)

Wisconsin does not require most private-sector employers to provide written notice to new hires about wage rate, pay frequency, or other compensation terms at the time of hire. Unlike several other states (such as California, New York, or Illinois), Wisconsin law does not include a statute or regulation mandating that regular employers deliver a pay notice or wage sheet upon onboarding.

General rule — No written wage notice requirement at onboarding: There is no provision in Wis. Stat. chs. 103, 104, or 109, nor in the Wisconsin Administrative Code, that obligates private (non-migrant) employers to provide a written statement to new hires regarding wage or compensation terms. While employers must furnish each employee with a wage statement (paystub) at each pay period—specifying hours worked, rate(s) of pay, total gross and net wages, and itemized deductions (Wis. Stat. § 109.03(1))—this requirement applies at the time of payment, not at the time of hire, and does not require a separate notice or contract at onboarding.

Exception — Written wage disclosure for migrant workers: An important exception applies to migrant labor. Employers who recruit or hire any worker defined as a "migrant worker" under Wisconsin law (see Wis. Stat. § 103.90(5)), or who use a migrant labor contractor, must provide a detailed, written recruiting disclosure statement at the time of recruitment. The disclosure must specify, among other things, the wage rate, pay period, job duties, duration of employment, and any deductions beyond those required by law. Both employer and employee must sign this disclosure. These requirements are codified at Wis. Stat. §§ 103.915(1)–(2) and Wis. Admin. Code § DWD 301.06.

Federal context: Wisconsin does not impose additional or stricter wage-notice requirements beyond the federal minimum (which itself only obligates employers to display certain workplace posters and keep records; there is no federal pay notice law for private employers outside of limited federal contract contexts).

Summary:

• For most Wisconsin employers, there is no requirement to deliver a written wage notice or pay frequency statement at hire.
• Employers hiring migrant workers must comply with the specific written disclosure duties described above.

Source: Wis. Stat. § 109.03 Source: Wis. Stat. § 103.915 Source: Wis. Admin. Code § DWD 301.06

Wisconsin employment law does not impose restrictions on the use of credit history or credit reports in hiring that go beyond the federal Fair Credit Reporting Act (FCRA). There is no Wisconsin statute, regulation, or administrative code section that prohibits or limits an employer from requesting or considering credit reports or credit history when making employment decisions. Unlike some states (such as Illinois or California), Wisconsin law does not require a business-necessity showing or limit credit checks to certain job categories.

Written consent required. The one express overlay under both federal FCRA and the Wisconsin Consumer Act is that a prospective employer must have the individual's written authorization before obtaining a credit report for employment purposes. The Wisconsin Department of Financial Institutions notes plainly: "A consumer reporting agency may not release a credit report to a prospective employer without the written consent of the subject." This requirement is satisfied by the FCRA's similar written authorization protocol (15 U.S.C. § 1681b(b)(2)), which is fully incorporated into Wisconsin employment practice.

No separate Wisconsin restrictions. A review of Wisconsin statutes (Wis. Stat. ch. 111, ch. 422) and administrative rules reveals no state-level limitation on the positions for which employers may run credit checks, no statutory business-necessity or job-relatedness standard, and no procedural overlay beyond the FCRA protocol. The state does not prohibit consideration of credit history for any job class or require employers to demonstrate job-relatedness beyond the federal standard.

Federal context. Wisconsin employers conducting credit checks must still comply with the federal FCRA, which requires:

• Clear written disclosure and standalone written authorization from the applicant or employee;
• Pre-adverse-action notice (including a copy of the report and a summary of rights) before any adverse employment action is taken;
• A post-action notice if employment is denied, including contact details for the credit reporting agency.

See 15 U.S.C. §§ 1681b(b), 1681m.

Summary:

• Wisconsin imposes no state-law restrictions on credit reports in hiring, aside from written-consent mirroring the FCRA;
• Employers must follow FCRA notice and authorization requirements; and
• There are no categorical bans or business-necessity limitations under Wisconsin law as of June 2026.

Source: Wisconsin Department of Financial Institutions — Credit Report FAQ Source: 15 U.S.C. § 1681b (FCRA)

Wisconsin does not require most private-sector employers to provide new hires with a specific written notice or handout listing their wage rate, employer policies, or statutory rights at the time of hire. Unlike some states (notably New York and California), Wisconsin has no statute or administrative rule mandating a stand-alone “wage theft prevention” or onboarding notice that must be physically given or electronically delivered to employees at the start of employment (other than federally mandated I-9 and W-4 forms).

State new hire reporting: Employers must report each new hire to the Wisconsin Department of Workforce Development within 20 days, disclosing specific information (employee's name, address, Social Security number, employer details, date of hire, and date of birth). However, this is a reporting requirement to the state—not a notice or document to the employee. See Wis. Stat. § 103.05 and Wis. Admin. Code § DWD 142.03.

Required workplace posters: Employers must prominently display certain state-specific posters in the workplace accessible to all employees. These include (but are not limited to):

• The Wisconsin Fair Employment Law poster (required by Wis. Stat. ch. 111 and Wis. Admin. Code DWD 218)
• The Unemployment Insurance poster (UCB-7-P) for all employers covered by UI law
• Other posters as required by the size or type of business—for example, the Wisconsin Bone Marrow and Organ Donation Leave, Family and Medical Leave, and business closing/mass layoff notices

These are posting—not hand-delivery—obligations. The law requires making these rights visible in a conspicuous location where employees work, not providing physical copies to each new hire.

No onboarding packet required: Wisconsin law, as of June 2026, does not require private employers (other than those hiring migrant or certain agricultural workers) to provide new employees with a rights/responsibilities packet or wage-theft notice at onboarding.

Summary:

• Employers must report new hires to the state, and display required posters in the workplace.
• There is no “onboarding handout” or new-hire wage/rights notice duty in Wisconsin law for most employees.
• Required posters must be displayed, not physically delivered.

Source: Wis. Stat. § 103.05 Source: Wis. Admin. Code § DWD 142.03 Source: Wisconsin DWD — Required Workplace Posters