MALONEY, C. J.: This is an action to review findings 
			and order of the Industrial Commission, dated April 6, 1966, which, 
			after reconsideration of a previous order finding probable cause, 
			reversed the order of December 3l, 1964, and dismissed the 
			complaint, which had alleged that the petitioner's employment with 
			Ace Foods, Inc. had been terminated because of his race or color.
			 
			 
			Upon the stipulation of the parties, by their attorneys, and upon 
			the agreement of the Industrial Commission to revise IND. 88.08(2) 
			(c) to provide that the quantum of proof required to support a 
			finding of probable cause is as defined in this opinion, this 
			controversy is remanded to the Commission for further proceedings 
			consistent with this opinion.  
			 
			[Probable Cause]  
			 
			Probable cause as used in Sec. 111.36(3), Stats., must be construed 
			to mean such a state of fact in the mind of the Commission, based 
			upon competent evidence as would lead a quasi-judicial officer to 
			believe within reasonable probabilities that the Respondent is 
			guilty of unlawful discrimination. Competent evidence is that which 
			is worthy of consideration in any aspect, but of course would have 
			to be such as would be admissible in some form at the hearing. 
			State ex rel Wojtycski v. Hanley (1945) 248 Wis. 108, 111; 
			State v. Whatley (1933) 210 Wis. 157, 160. Probable cause 
			does not mean proof to a reasonable certainty by a preponderance of 
			the evidence. It does mean proof within reasonable probabilities 
			that a full hearing will establish the fact to a reasonable 
			certainty by a preponderance of the evidence  
			 
			A review of the findings of fact  and of commission rule IND. 
			88.08(2)(c) leads this Court to the conclusion that it would be 
			speculative to determine what standard of evidence was required by 
			the Commission from the Petitioner to sustain a finding of probable 
			cause. This matter is remanded in order that the Commission may 
			reconsider all of the facts in the record before the Commission, 
			make its determination of probable cause or no probable cause, and 
			clarify the record as to the quantum of proof used. 
			 
			[Commission Procedure]  
			 
			Section 111.36(3), Stats., requires four procedural steps before a 
			finding of discrimination or no discrimination can be made. First, 
			there must be a complaint filed with the Commission. The Commission 
			must then determine if there is probable cause to believe that 
			unlawful discrimination has been or is being committed. If the 
			Commission determines that the evidence is not such as to show 
			probable cause, the Commission may dismiss the complaint. At this 
			point, the complainant may avail himself of his right of judicial 
			review under Chapter 227, Stats. The Commission may resort to formal 
			hearing as an aid in determining the existence of probable cause. 
			Sec. 111.33, Stat.s, 111.36(2), Stats. The sole question that can be 
			determined at a hearing at this stage is the question of probable 
			cause and the complainant is only required to introduce such 
			evidence as to show probable cause. The Commission is not to weigh 
			the testimony by balancing the credibility of the witnesses, but 
			rather merely determine whether complainant's evidence is 
			believable.  
			 
			If the Commission determines that there is probable cause, then it 
			must immediately endeavor to eliminate the practice by conference, 
			conciliation or persuasion. In case of failure so to eliminate the 
			discrimination suspected, the Commission shall issue and serve a 
			written notice of hearing. This hearing must be a hearing upon the 
			merits and both parties must be given an opportunity to introduce 
			any admissible evidence  favorable to their position.. After 
			such hearing, the Commission must then make a determination by a 
			preponderance of the evidence of whether there was discrimination, 
			and if there was a failure of proof dismiss the complaint. 
			 
			[Prior Hearing]  
			 
			In this case, the Commission held hearings October 9, 10, 11 and 
			November 18 through 22, 1963. An extensive record was made and 
			numerous exhibits were introduced into evidence. If upon remand the 
			Commission determines that there is probable cause, the Commission 
			then must require the Respondent to appear at a hearing as required 
			by Sec. 111.36(3), Stats.  The Commission, however, may make 
			the record and exhibits of the 1963 hearings a part of the record 
			and may limit the introduction of evidence and exhibits to new 
			evidence and exhibits pertinent to the issues before the Commission. 
			Sec. 227.10, Stats.  
			 
			The Attorney General has urged that the Petitioner has had an 
			extensive opportunity for hearing and that at such hearings he was 
			urged to introduce all the evidence favorable to his position. In 
			view of the fact that the Petitioner was legally required to 
			introduce only such evidence as would establish probable cause, this 
			Court cannot speculate that he introduced all the evidence which 
			might have probative value. If the evidence introduced by Petitioner 
			was sufficient to meet the requirement of probable cause, then 
			Petitioner would be denied a valuable right if he were not given an 
			opportunity at a hearing required by statute to present such 
			additional evidence as would prove unlawful discrimination if such 
			evidence does in fact exist. 
			 
			Counsel for the Petitioner may prepare the appropriate Order, 
			submitting same to opposing counsel 10 days before presenting it to 
			the Court for signature.  
  
			
  |