Erdman v. Jovoco, Inc.
Court of Appeals of Wisconsin
1DissentMyse, J.
I dissent from the majority's conclusion that the term "wages" as used in sec. 103.455, Stats., does not encompass compensation received in the form of commissions. While the majority properly notes that this is a remedial statute that should be interpreted broadly, they do not give it such an interpretation. I am unpersuaded by the majority's reasons for concluding that the legislature did not intend to include commissions in its proscription against unilateral deductions by the employer from wages for faulty workmanship, loss, theft or damage. I reach the opposite conclusion for a variety…
2Cases cited4 opinions
- Wood v. American Family Mutual InsuranceWisconsin Supreme Court · 1989
- Donovan Ex Rel. State, Department of Industry, Labor & Human Relations v. SchlesnerWisconsin Supreme Court · 1976
- Estate of FredericksenWisconsin Supreme Court · 1956
- Cordova v. GutierrezWisconsin Supreme Court · 1964