An Act to create 230.35 (6) of the statutes; Relating to: requiring state employees to perform their work at the offices of their employer. (FE)
SB27 would require state agencies to direct employees to perform their assigned work duties in person at the agency’s offices during regularly scheduled work hours beginning July 1, 2025. The bill defines “state agency” broadly to include executive branch agencies as well as the University of Wisconsin Board of Regents, the legislature, the courts, and certain boards, commissions, committees, councils, departments, units, and authorities. It is framed as a workplace-location mandate for state government employees rather than a general public-sector labor measure.
The bill includes two explicit exceptions. It would not apply to telehealth services, and it would not apply to duties that were already being performed off site before March 1, 2020. Those carveouts appear intended to preserve certain remote-service functions and preexisting off-site work arrangements. The bill would take effect on July 1, 2025, if enacted.
If enacted, SB27 would add a new subsection to Wisconsin Statutes section 230.35 and would impose a statewide in-person work requirement on state agencies. It would affect employment practices across state government, including agencies, the legislature, the courts, and the University of Wisconsin System, while preserving limited remote-work exceptions for telehealth and certain pre-2020 off-site duties. The bill would likely require agencies to revise workplace policies, staffing arrangements, and any telework agreements to conform to the new statutory mandate.
The available record shows little direct committee or floor debate, but the bill’s introduction and broad sponsorship suggest support among its authors for returning state employees to in-person work. At the same time, the bill ultimately failed to pass pursuant to Senate Joint Resolution 1, indicating it did not secure enough support to become law. Because there are no recorded committee transcripts or votes in the provided materials, the overall sentiment can only be described as politically contested rather than clearly favorable or opposed in the public record provided.
The main point of contention is likely the balance between mandatory in-person work and flexibility for state employees and agencies. Supporters appear to favor requiring employees to work at their employer’s offices, while opponents would likely object to the loss of telework options, especially for positions that can be performed remotely. The bill’s broad definition of state agency, which reaches the legislature, courts, and the University of Wisconsin System, may also have raised institutional and administrative concerns. The exceptions for telehealth and pre-March 1, 2020 off-site duties suggest an attempt to limit disruption, but they also highlight the tension between restoring in-person operations and preserving established remote-work practices.