Wisconsin Statutes
Wis. Stat. § 111.337 (2026)
Creed; exceptions and special cases
✓ current as of July 2026
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
WI-LEGdocs.legis.wisconsin.gov
JustiaChapter on Justia
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
111.337(1)(1) Employment discrimination because of creed includes, but is not limited to, refusing to reasonably accommodate an employee’s or prospective employee’s religious observance or practice unless the employer can demonstrate that the accommodation would pose an undue hardship on the employer’s program, enterprise or business.
111.337(2)(a)(a) For a religious association not organized for private profit or an organization or corporation which is primarily owned or controlled by such a religious association to give preference to an applicant or employee who is a member of the same or a similar religious denomination.
111.337(2)(am)(am) For a religious association not organized for private profit or an organization or corporation which is primarily owned or controlled by such a religious association to give preference to an applicant or employee who adheres to the religious association’s creed, if the job description demonstrates that the position is clearly related to the religious teachings and beliefs of the religious association.
111.337(2)(b)(b) For a fraternal as defined in s. 614.01 (1) (a) to give preference to an employee or applicant who is a member or is eligible for membership in the fraternal, with respect to hiring to or promotion to the position of officer, administrator or salesperson.
111.337(3)(3) No county, city, village or town may adopt any provision concerning employment discrimination because of creed that prohibits activity allowed under this section.
111.337 AnnotationSub. (2) does not allow religious organizations to engage in prohibited forms of discrimination. Sacred Heart School Board v. LIRC, 157 Wis. 2d 638, 460 N.W.2d 430 (Ct. App. 1990).
111.337 AnnotationShowing more than a de minimis cost, as that phrase is used in common parlance, does not suffice to establish undue hardship under Title VII of the federal Civil Rights Act. Undue hardship is shown when a burden is substantial in the overall context of an employer’s business. An employer must show that the burden of granting an accommodation would result in substantial increased costs in relation to the conduct of its particular business. Courts must apply the test in a manner that takes into account all relevant factors in the case at hand, including the particular accommodations at issue and their practical impact in light of the nature, size, and operating cost of an employer. Groff v. DeJoy, 600 U.S. 447, 143 S. Ct. 2279, 216 L. Ed. 2d 1041 (2023).
111.337 AnnotationA union violated Title VII of the federal Civil Rights Act by causing an employer to fire an employee because of the employee’s refusal, on religious grounds, to pay union dues. Nottelson v. Smith Steel Workers D.A.L.U. 19806, 643 F.2d 445 (1981).
111.337 AnnotationThe supreme court redefines employer’s role in religious accommodation. Soeka. WBB July 1987.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 5
cases, 1985–2006 · leading case: Hutchinson Tech., Inc. v. Labor & Indus. Review Comm'n, 2004 WI 90 (Wis. 2004).
Hutchinson Tech., Inc. v. Labor & Indus. Review Comm'n, 2004 WI 90 (Wis. 2004). “§ 111.337(1), the WFEA provision that addresses religious discrimination, continues to place a heavier burden on the employer to accommodate religious practices as it requires a reasonable accommodation unless the "employer can demonstrate that the accommodation would pose an…”
Dayton Christian Schs., Inc. v. Ohio Civil Rights Comm'n, 766 F.2d 932 (6th Cir. 1985). “§ 34-35-6 (2)(b) (1979); Wis.Stat.Ann. § 111.337(2)(a) (West 1983), a provision parallel to 42 U.”
Knight v. Labor & Indus. Review Comm'n, 582 N.W.2d 448 (Wis. Ct. App. 1998). “See §§ 111.337, 111.34, Stats. However, no language was included that required an accommodation of criminal convictions.”
Sacred Heart Sch. Bd. v. Labor & Indus. Review Comm'n, 460 N.W.2d 430 (Wis. Ct. App. 1990). “Sec. 111.337(2), Stats. However, the exemption does not permit religious employers to practice prohibited forms of discrimination.”
Ass'n of Faith-based Organizats. v. Bablitch, 454 F. Supp. 2d 812 (W.D. Wis. 2006). “Wis. Stat. § 111.337 (2)(a) & (am). Furthermore, Wisconsin law forbids a county, city or town from adopting a discrimination statute which precludes such hiring practices.”
— Wis. Stat. § 111.337(1) — 1 case
Hutchinson Tech., Inc. v. Labor & Indus. Review Comm'n, 2004 WI 90 (Wis. 2004). “§ 111.337(1), the WFEA provision that addresses religious discrimination, continues to place a heavier burden on the employer to accommodate religious practices as it requires a reasonable accommodation unless the "employer can demonstrate that the accommodation would pose an…”
— Wis. Stat. § 111.337(2) — 1 case
Sacred Heart Sch. Bd. v. Labor & Indus. Review Comm'n, 460 N.W.2d 430 (Wis. Ct. App. 1990). “Sec. 111.337(2), Stats. However, the exemption does not permit religious employers to practice prohibited forms of discrimination.”
— Wis. Stat. § 111.337(2)(a) — 1 case
Dayton Christian Schs., Inc. v. Ohio Civil Rights Comm'n, 766 F.2d 932 (6th Cir. 1985). “§ 34-35-6 (2)(b) (1979); Wis.Stat.Ann. § 111.337(2)(a) (West 1983), a provision parallel to 42 U.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.