Tom Domer just published an article "A Comparison of Wisconsin and Minnesota Workers' Compensation Claims" in the William Mitchell Law Review.
The article was prompted by calls from Minnesota colleagues asking whether Wisconsin or Minnesota jurisdiction would be appropriate for work injuries. The article compared a hypothetical injury from Ole a 58 year old truck driver hired in Minnesota by a corporation registered in Minnesota and Wisconsin, who worked half time in Minnesota and half time in Wisconsin. In route to Milwaukee for a delivery, he tripped in a pot hole at a sex shop in Wisconsin after stopping for lunch and drinking six beers. He injured his neck, leaving a scar on his forehead, underwent neck fusion surgery with resulting permanent work restrictions.
The article compares Wisconsin and Minnesota on liability, the involvement of alcohol, whether the injury arose out of employment and was in the course of employment. It further compared benefits in Wisconsin and Minnesota including Temporary Total Disability, permanency benefits, vocational rehabilitation, Loss of Earning Capacity, disfigurement, Permanent Total Disability, and whether there was a Social Security offset for workers' compensation benefits.
While some benefits were better in Minnesota, overall the likelihood for recovery was better in Wisconsin.