Transportation
Subject
Objective of the rule. This proposed rule making will amend ch. Trans 112 by modifying the type of driver record and criminal offenses that makes a person ineligible to obtain a school bus endorsement or to transport pupils. The rule extends the disqualification period to more than 5 years for specific crimes and creates a lifetime disqualification for some crimes. The proposed rule defines procedures for requesting and processing out-of-state criminal background checks for drivers that have lived in Wisconsin for less than 2 years and establishes a fee for the background check. The proposed rule will also define standards for employment of school bus drivers and others that transport pupils. Additional proposed amendments will clarify for the driver, the board physicians, employers and the Department of Justice (DOJ) issues that have proved to be problematic when sanctions are reviewed in a judicial review proceeding.
Policy alternatives to the proposed rule
Currently, ch. Trans 112 defines certain driver record and criminal offenses that make a person ineligible to obtain a school bus endorsement or transport pupils, but there are many serious crimes, which are not included. DMV is the source for the driver record information and DOJ is the source for the criminal background information. If the driver has resided in Wisconsin for less than 2 years, there is no background check conducted with the former state of residency. There are no checks done against other Wisconsin state agency Registry files that contain reported or criminal activity.
The proposed rule changes are required under 2003 Wis. Act 280. The rule will define a procedure for conducting an out-of-state criminal background check and establish fees only to cover the cost of the process. The changes to the ineligibility periods will be defined by the severity of the crime and the likelihood that the person could rehabilitate and become safe to drive pupils. For example, an individual convicted of serious sexual crimes against children may never be eligible to obtain a school bus endorsement or to transport pupils. The proposed amendments are intended to protect pupils during transportation to, from and during school activities.
The proposed amendments to ss. Trans 112.04, 112.18 and 112.20 will clarify for the driver, the board physicians, employers and DOJ issues that have proved to be problematic when sanctions are reviewed in a judicial review proceeding.
Comparison to federal regulations
None.
Statutory authority
Sections 343.12 (4) (b) and 343.12 (8) (a) to (c), Stats., as created by 2003 Wis. Act 280, section 30; and s. 343.16 (5), Stats.
Staff time required
Approximately 200 hours.
Workforce Development
Subject
Ch. DWD 12, grievance procedure for resolving complaints of employment displacement under the Wisconsin Works program.
Policy analysis
Section 49.141 (5) (am), Stats., as renumbered by 2003 Wisconsin Act 173, and s. DWD 12.05 (9) prohibit the filling of a vacancy created by an employer terminating a regular employee for the purpose of filling the position with a W-2 participant or a position of a person on layoff, strike, or other labor dispute from the same or a substantially equivalent job within the same organizational unit by a W-2 participant.
The department has an existing grievance procedure that sets forth the steps for resolving complaints of alleged violations of this prohibition. Section 49.141 (5) (bm), Stats., as created by 2003 Wisconsin Act 173, requires the department to promulgate a rule specifying the grievance procedure. The procedure provides the steps a complainant must take to file a complaint, the program agency responsibilities for initial review and investigation of a complaint, the procedures and time limits for hearing complaints and issuing decisions, and provisions for appealing program agency action on a complaint.
Comparison to federal regulations
Federal law prohibits an adult in a family receiving assistance under a state program funded by a federal Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) block grant from being employed or assigned when any other individual is on layoff from the same or any substantially equivalent job or if the employer has terminated the employment of any regular employee to fill the vacancy with a participant in a TANF-funded program. States are required to establish and maintain a grievance procedure for resolving complaints of alleged violations of this prohibition.
Statutory authority
Sections 49.141 (5) (bm), as affected by 2003 Wisconsin Act 173, and 227.11, Stats.
Staff time required
100 hours.
Workforce Development
Subject
Ch. DWD 290, prevailing wage rates on state or local public works projects.
Policy analysis
Sections 66.0903 (1) (g) and 103.49 (1) (d), Stats., provide a two-tiered definition of “prevailing wage rate" under which the rate in any area is the hourly basic rate of pay, plus the hourly contribution for health insurance benefits, vacation benefits, pension benefits and any other bona fide economic benefit, for a majority of hours worked in the trade or occupation on projects in the area. If there is no rate at which a majority of the hours worked is paid, a weighted average methodology applies based on the pay of the highest-paid 51% of hours worked in that trade or occupation on projects in that area.
The department has had an informal policy of looking at the hourly basic rate of pay and fringe equivalent as separate figures and requiring an exact match of both the hourly rate of pay and the fringe equivalent in determining whether there is a majority at a particular rate. The department has now determined that it is more appropriate to determine whether there is a majority of hours reported that receive a certain total economic benefit that is the combined value of the hourly rate of pay and fringe equivalent. If there is a majority of reported hours paid at a certain total economic benefit, the department will issue a prevailing wage determination that is the most commonly reported hourly rate of pay and fringe equivalent that receive that total economic benefit.
Comparison to federal regulations
There are no federal prevailing wage rate regulations that apply to state or local public works projects. The federal prevailing wage regulations that apply to federally-funded public works projects determine the prevailing hourly rate of pay and the prevailing fringe equivalent as completely separate inquiries. Under the federal system, the resulting combination of the hourly rate of pay and fringe equivalent issued by the U.S. Department of Labor may result in a combination of hourly pay and fringe equivalent that is not the most commonly paid total economic benefit on private projects.
Statutory authority
Sections 66.0903, 103.005 (1), 103.49, and 227.11, Stats.
Staff time required
100 hours.
Loading...
Loading...
Links to Admin. Code and Statutes in this Register are to current versions, which may not be the version that was referred to in the original published document.