Wisconsin Senate Bill SB1131

Wisconsin 2025-2026 Regular Session

• Introduced: 3/19/26
• Refer: 3/19/26
• Failed: 3/23/26

Caption

An Act to amend 111.322 (2m) (a) and 111.322 (2m) (b); to create 103.09, 106.54 (11) and 111.91 (2) (gp) of the statutes; Relating to: requiring an employer to provide reasonable break time and accommodations for an employee who is breastfeeding the employee’s child to express breast milk for the child. (FE)

Summary

SB1131 would create a new state-law requirement that employers in Wisconsin provide reasonable break time and suitable accommodations for employees who are breastfeeding a child under one year of age so they can express breast milk. The bill requires a private, non-bathroom space shielded from view and free from intrusion, and it also requires access to an electrical outlet, running water, and a refrigerator for milk storage. Break time generally would not have to be paid, but it must be treated as paid work time if the employee is not fully relieved from duty during the break, and unpaid break time must still count as hours worked when determining eligibility for an employer contribution toward health coverage.

Impact

The bill would codify and expand lactation accommodation requirements in Wisconsin law by creating s. 103.09 and related enforcement provisions, and by adding protections against retaliation and discrimination tied to the exercise of these rights. It would apply to all employers with at least one employee, including state and local government employers, while allowing an undue-hardship exemption for employers with fewer than 50 employees. The bill also directs the Department of Workforce Development to process complaints in the same manner as employment discrimination complaints and authorizes remedies such as reinstatement, back pay, and attorney fees. It further amends Wisconsin’s employment discrimination and public employee relations statutes to protect employees who assert these rights, and it delays application to conflicting collective bargaining agreements until expiration or renewal.

Sentiment

The available context suggests generally favorable treatment of the bill’s policy goal, as it was introduced with multiple bipartisan-style cosponsors and framed as a workplace accommodation measure aligned with existing federal law. However, the bill ultimately failed to pass pursuant to Senate Joint Resolution 1, and there are no recorded committee transcripts or votes in the provided materials to show active floor support or opposition. As a result, the overall sentiment can be described as supportive in concept but not successful in enactment.

Contention

The main points of contention likely concern the scope of the mandate and its effect on employers, especially small businesses. Although the bill includes an undue-hardship exemption for employers with fewer than 50 employees, it still imposes statewide requirements on all employers with at least one worker, including obligations to provide a dedicated space, electrical access, running water, and refrigeration. Another possible issue is the bill’s treatment of unpaid break time as paid time for health coverage eligibility calculations, which could affect employer costs and benefit administration. The delayed applicability for conflicting collective bargaining agreements also suggests potential labor-relations concerns, though no specific objections are documented in the provided record.