Opinion ID: 6321818
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: Palmer's Discrimination Complaint

Text: ¶7 Palmer filed a complaint with the Wisconsin Department of Workforce Development's Equal Rights Division (ERD) alleging that Cree discriminated against him on the basis of his conviction record in violation of the Wisconsin Fair Employment Act.7 The ERD found probable cause to hold a hearing on the merits before an 6 Palmer was forthcoming to Cree about the existence of a conviction record prior to the background check. He responded yes to questions on an employment questionnaire asking whether he had been convicted of a felony or misdemeanor and stated the convictions were domestic-related. Palmer also disclosed his 2013 convictions when told there would be a background check. 7 Wisconsin Stat. § 111.321 prohibits all employers from engaging in any act of employment discrimination . . . against any individual on the basis of, among other things, a person's conviction record, subject to a few exceptions. 5 No. 2019AP1671 administrative law judge (ALJ). The ALJ heard testimony from Palmer, Melissa Garrett (Cree's general counsel), and Lee Motley (a recruiter at Cree). ¶8 The ALJ also considered the testimony of Dr. Darald Hanusa, Cree's expert on domestic violence and domestic violence perpetrators. Dr. Hanusa testified as to the relationship between domestic violence, generalized violence and workplace violence, noting that there is a direct relationship between a willingness to use violence in your intimate relationship and your willingness to use violence in other settings. Additionally, Dr. Hanusa spoke about the power principle——the concept that people who struggle with power and control issues tend to overuse their power when they do not get what they want. He testified that the underpinning, underlying issues for men who are violent is their struggle with power and control. And it doesn't just end when they leave their house, it enters the workplace as well. Dr. Hanusa noted that the best predictor of future violence is what's happened historically. He also emphasized that a charge of strangulation/suffocation is especially concerning given that in the research on femicide, that is the homicide of women, suffocation ranks up as very high on every indice . . . for homicide. Based on all the testimony, the ALJ determined that Palmer's convictions did substantially relate to the Applications 6 No. 2019AP1671 Specialist position and thus, under Wis. Stat. § 111.335(3)(a)1.,8 Cree did not discriminate against Palmer when it rescinded its job offer. Palmer appealed the ALJ's findings to the Labor and Industry Review Commission (LIRC). ¶9 LIRC reversed. LIRC reviewed the ALJ hearing record and conferred with the ALJ regarding his impressions of the testifying witnesses, but the ALJ did not impart any specific impressions regarding demeanor. Palmer v. Cree, Inc., ERD Case No. CR201502651, at 19 (LIRC, Dec. 3, 2018). Regardless, LIRC deemed Dr. Hanusa's testimony on the connection between domestic violence and workplace violence unhelpful and proffered its own, opposite conclusion regarding crimes of domestic violence: where assault or battery convictions stem from personal relationships and the crimes are committed at home, it cannot necessarily be assumed that the individual is likely to engage in the same conduct with co-workers or customers at the work place. Id. at 13 & n.6. Based on that view of the domestic crimes at issue, LIRC concluded that they did not substantially relate to the Applications Specialist job because of:  The high degree of speculation and conjecture necessary to envision a scenario in which Palmer would become Wisconsin Stat. § 111.335(3)(a)1. makes it not employment 8 discrimination because of conviction record to refuse to employ . . . any individual if, among other reasons, the individual has been convicted of any felony, misdemeanor, or other offense the circumstances of which substantially relate to the circumstances of the particular job. 7 No. 2019AP1671 involved in a personal relationship with a female employee that might end badly;  The fact that the ability to meet female employees and form personal relationships with them is not unique to the job at issue;  The lack of evidence that Palmer would have significant personal interactions with female employees;  The lack of evidence that Palmer would have the opportunity to develop personal relationships with clients; and  The lack of evidence to suggest that Palmer would act violently with coworkers or members of the public. Id. at 11-13. With this view of the record, LIRC determined that the finding of a substantial relationship would require a conclusion that unsupervised contact with other people is in and of itself a circumstance that might lead the complainant to engage in violent conduct. Id. at 13. And such a conclusion, LIRC continued, would run contrary to its prior decisions rejecting the proposition that the mere presence of other human beings is a circumstance that creates a substantial relationship. Id. ¶10 The circuit court reversed LIRC's decision,9 concluding that it was not supported by substantial evidence. The circuit court relied on Dr. Hanusa's uncontroverted expert testimony in deciding that a substantial relationship existed between Palmer's convictions and Cree's Applications Specialist position. 9The Honorable Michael J. Piontek of the Racine County Circuit Court presided. 8 No. 2019AP1671 ¶11 The court of appeals then reversed again, upholding LIRC's decision that Cree failed to meet its burden to show a substantial relationship between Palmer's convictions and the job at hand. Cree, Inc. v. LIRC, 2021 WI App 4, 395 Wis. 2d 642, 953 N.W.2d 883. The court of appeals felt constrained by LIRC's disregard for Dr. Hanusa's testimony. Id. ¶7 n.4 ([T]he weight and credibility of the evidence are for the agency, not the reviewing court, to determine. (quoting Milwaukee Symphony Orchestra, Inc. v. DOR, 2010 WI 33, ¶31, 324 Wis. 2d 68, 781 N.W.2d 674) (alteration in original))). Like LIRC, the court of appeals relied heavily on the domestic nature of Palmer's convictions, saying his tendenc[y] and inclination[] was to be physically abusive toward women in a live-in boyfriend/girlfriend relationship. Id., ¶14 (alterations in original). Although the court of appeals surmised that Palmer was likely to recidivate against a future girlfriend, it concluded that such likelihood does not substantially relate to the job Cree offered him. Id. ¶12 We granted Cree's petition for review and again reverse.