Request By:
S. Rayburn Watkins
President, Associated
Industries of Kentucky
200 West Chestnut Street
Louisville, Kentucky 40202
Opinion
Opinion By: Robert F. Stephens, Attorney General; Martin Glazer, Assistant Attorney General
You seek an interpretation of this Office of an apparent conflict between KRS 337.020 and KRS 337.055. You state that KRS 337.020 contains language which suggests that an employer must pay an employee within three days of dismissal or leaving but that KRS 337.055 indicates that the employer must pay an employee after discharge at the next normal pay date, but, in any event, within 14 days.
Ordinarily, this Office renders opinions only to public officials dealing with the discharge of their duties. However, we do make certain exceptions where the matter involves taxes, voting rights, or the question is of such general interest that an opinion should be issued. Your request appears to be one of those exceptions.
First of all, it appears that you are looking at an older version of KRS 337.020. The Legislature in 1978 amended KRS 337.020 which now provides:
"Every employer doing business in this state shall, as often as semi-monthly, pay to each of its employes all wages or salary earned to a day not more than eighteen (18) days prior to the date of that payment. Any employe who is absent at the time fixed for payment, or who, for any other reason, is not paid at that time, shall be paid thereafter at any time upon six (6) days' demand. No employer subject to this section shall, by any means, secure exemption from it. Every such employe shall have a right of action against any such employer for the full amount of his wages due on each regular pay day."
Previously, that section contained the following sentence:
"Any employe who leaves or is discharged from his employment shall be paid in full following his dismissal or voluntary leaving at any time upon three (3) days' demand.
That sentence was deleted from the 1978 amendment.
Thus, KRS 337.020 does not deal with the effect of an employee who leaves or is discharged from his employment any more. That subject is covered under KRS 337.055 which provides as follows:
"Any employe who leaves or is discharged from his employment shall be paid in full all wages or salary earned by him; not later than the next normal pay period following the date of dismissal or voluntary leaving or fourteen days following such date of dismissal or voluntary leaving whichever last occurs. Any employe who is absent at the time fixed for payment by an employer, or who, for any other reason, is not paid at the time, shall be paid thereafter at any time or upon fourteen days' demand. No employer shall, by any means, secure exemption from this section."
Therefore, reading these two sections in paramateria (in layman's language -- together), an employer can withhold an employee's wages up to 18 days after he has earned the money. 1 Under KRS 337.020, after the 18-day period expires, and the employee is not paid, if the employee demands payment, the employer must pay within six days of that demand, assuming that he is still on the payroll or has not been discharged or voluntarily leaves.
Under KRS 337.055, after the employee leaves or is discharged, he must be paid not later than the next normal pay period or 14 days after said pay period, whichever last occurs. If he is not paid at that time, he must be paid within 14 days after he demands payment. The courts in construing both these statutes would need to give both statutes equal effect. KRS 337.020 would only apply to a situation where the employee is still on the payroll and KRS 337.055 would apply where the converse is true. That would be the only logical way in which we could correlate these two statutes on any rational basis.
Footnotes
Footnotes
1 As an example, the state government pays semi-monthly in most cases and withholds the one-half month's salary for approximately two weeks.