Plain language analysis
This proposed rule will create DWD 80.13 to allow a party to a worker's compensation case to audio record the proceedings of a formal hearing when the party has provided verbal notice to the administrative law judge and all involved parties prior to the start of the hearing and before recording begins. A party must audio record the proceedings in a non-disruptive and non-obstructive manner.
The right to audio record the proceedings of a formal hearing is limited to the parties in the case. The proposed rule allows a party to voluntarily record a hearing for the party's own purposes and is not considered the official transcript or record of the hearing. Witnesses, participants and other attendees at the hearing, who are not parties to the case, are not permitted to audio record the proceedings of a formal hearing under the proposed rule. The official transcript and record of the hearing are provided under s. 102.15 (3), Stats. Under this proposed rule, the administrative law judge can establish conditions for the audio recording of the proceedings of a formal hearing to avoid disruption or obstruction of the hearing.
Summary of, and comparison with, existing or proposed federal statutes and regulations
There are no proposed or existing federal statutes or regulations related to the proposed rule.
Comparison with rules in adjacent states
In Minnesota rule R 1420.2900, subpart 9, covers disruption of hearings. This rule states "…No television, video, digital, still, or other camera, and no electronic recording devices, other than those provided by the office may be operated in the hearing room during the course of the hearing unless permission is obtained from the judge. Permission is subject to conditions set by the judge to avoid disruption of the hearing…"
The proposed rule differs from the Minnesota rule by specifically permitting a party to audio record the proceedings of a formal hearing with notice to the administrative law judge. With the proposed rule a party is not required to obtain permission from the administrative law judge before audio recording the proceedings of a formal hearing. In both this proposed rule and the Minnesota rule, the presiding administrative law judge has the authority to establish conditions for the audio recording of the hearing to avoid disruptions and obstructions of the hearing.
There are no similar rules in Illinois, Iowa or Michigan.
Summary of factual data and analytical methodologies
Proposed rule changes were developed after consultation with the Worker's Compensation Advisory Council.
Analysis and supporting documents used to determine effect on small business or in preparation of the economic impact analysis
The proposed rule will have no effect on small business. The proposed hearing draft will be posted for 14-days to solicit public comment on any economic impact.
Effect on small business
The proposed rule is primarily procedural in nature and will have no effect on small businesses.
Agency contact person
James T. O'Malley, Director Bureau of Legal Services
Department of Workforce Development
Worker's Compensation Division
P. O. Box 7901
Madison, WI 53707-7901
Telephone: (608) 267-6704
Place where comments are to be submitted and deadline for submission
James T. O'Malley, Director Bureau of Legal Services
Department of Workforce Development
Worker's Compensation Division
P. O. Box 7901
Madison, WI 53707-7901
Telephone: (608) 267-6704
The department held a public hearing on this rule on April 28, 2015 and accepted written comments until May 1, 2015.
SECTION 1. DWD 80.13 is created to read:
DWD 80.13 Audio recording of formal hearings. (1) (a) A party to a claim may audio record the proceedings of a formal hearing in a non-disruptive and non-obstructive manner.
(b) Witnesses, participants and other attendees, who are not parties to the case, are not permitted to audio record the proceedings of a formal hearing.
(2) A party shall provide verbal notice of audio recording to the presiding administrative law judge and all other parties in attendance at the proceedings of a formal hearing before audio recording of the hearing begins.
(3) The presiding administrative law judge shall determine if a party's audio recording disrupts or obstructs the hearing.
(4) The presiding administrative law judge may set conditions for audio recording of a formal hearing to avoid disruption or obstruction of the hearing.
(5) A party's recording of the proceedings does not constitute the official record of the proceedings.
Section 2. Effective date. This rule takes effect on the first day of the month following publication in the Wisconsin administrative register, as provided under s. 227.22 (2) (intro.).
