Outdated or Unsupported Browser Detected
DWD's website uses the latest technology. This makes our site faster and easier to use across all devices. Unfortunatley, your browser is out of date and is not supported. An update is not required, but it is strongly recommended to improve your browsing experience. To update Internet Explorer to Microsoft Edge visit their website.

Unemployment Insurance - Worker Classification

Part 1: Control or Direction - General Private Employers

Factor Two - Receive Training (Case Studies)

Whether the individual receives training from the employing unit with respect to the services performed.

Note: This factor in the new law is based upon employment status criteria found in older laws, as well as in the current law applicable to government units and nonprofit organizations. Therefore, cases decided under the new law are listed first, and the relevant cases decided under the other laws follow.

Case Studies relevant to Factor Two

LIRC Decisions

Training provided by the employing unit:

  • Thomas v. Renaissance Nutrition, Inc., UI Dec. Hearing No. 12401755AP (LIRC Oct. 30, 2012) – David Thomas performed services as a salesperson for Renaissance Nutrition, Inc., a manufacturer of vitamins and supplements for dairy livestock. He received a significant amount of training from Renaissance involving sales methods and computer software to be used in performing his services.

  • Cortez-Robles v. Pro-One Janitorial Inc., UI Dec. Hearing No. 11403642AP (LIRC May 3, 2012) – Samuel Cortez-Robles signed a franchise agreement with Pro-One Janitorial Inc., to perform janitorial services. He received 20 – 40 hours of general training when he started the franchise, and a representative from Pro-One walked him through each new assignment that he received.

  • Bentheimer v. Bankers Life & Casualty Company, UI Dec. Hearing No. 10006546JV (LIRC Aug. 16, 2011) – Kathleen Bentheimer performed services as an insurance salesperson for Bankers Life & Casualty Company, an insurance company. She received ongoing training by Bankers Life about the products being sold and about successful methods of selling the products. NOTE: This case includes analyses of employment status under both the old law and the new law.

Training not provided by the employing unit:

  • Martin v. Madison Newspapers, Inc., UI Dec. Hearing No. 13001922MD (LIRC Oct. 10, 2013) - Julie Martin performed services as a writer for Agri-View, a newspaper published by Madison Newspapers, Inc. She received no instructions from Madison Newspapers regarding how to write her articles.

  • Schumacher v. Spar Marketing Services, Inc., UI Dec. Hearing No. 11203182EC (LIRC Mar. 21, 2012) – Sherry Schumacher performed services as a merchandiser for Spar Marketing Services, Inc., a merchandising company. Other than a brief, online video about Spar's business when hired, she received no training by Spar with respect to her merchandising services. NOTE: This case includes analyses of employment status under both the old law and the new law.

LIRC cases decided under law applicable to government units and nonprofit organizations

  • County of Door, UI Dec. Hearing No. S0500025AP (LIRC Mar. 28, 2007) - In 1998, the Door County Department of Community Services hired two women to provide round the clock care for a cognitively disabled 63-year-old woman. Both caregivers signed separate Admission and Rate Agreements with the County governing the details of the relationship between the caregivers and Door County, and the nature of the care they were to provide to the 63-year-old woman. LIRC determined that the caregivers were not free from the County's direction and control. One of the factors that LIRC cited was a requirement applied to one of the caregivers that she participate in certain "care provider" training dictated by the County.

  • Ristau v. Fox Valley Symphony Orchestra Ass'n, UI Dec. Hearing No. 06401057AP (LIRC Aug. 23, 2006) - Paul Ristau worked under an annual contract for the Fox Valley Symphony Orchestra (FVSO) as principal tympanist. LIRC found that the FVSO did not provide training to Ristau. Ristau owned his own instrument, and he prepared independently for rehearsals and performances. Much of a performer's work is done outside rehearsals and performances. A musician must become familiar with a piece of music, learning to understand its proper interpretation, and practicing the piece. This work was done independently by Ristau.

Further Reading and Research

Read and research further LIRC, circuit court and court of appeals cases on Factor Two:

  • EE 450.01b - Employee - s. 108.02(12)(bm)1.b. – training for services.

Relevant cases under the law for government units and nonprofit organizations:

  • EE 412 - Employee - s.108.02 (12) (c) 1. - "direction and control"