Idaho Code
Idaho Code

Idaho Code § 45-613 (2026)

Discharging or retaliating against employees asserting rights under this chapter. 

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section IClegislature.idaho.gov Justiaon Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

Discharging or retaliating against employees asserting rights under this chapter. 

No employer shall discharge or in any other manner retaliate against any employee because that employee has made a complaint to the employer, or to the department, or filed suit alleging that the employee has not been paid in accordance with the provisions of this chapter, or because the employee has testified or may be about to testify in an investigation or hearing undertaken by the department. The provisions of this section shall not be construed to otherwise restrict the discipline or termination of an employee.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 12 cases (4 in the last 5 years), 1977–2025 · leading case: Paolini v. Albertson's Inc., 149 P.3d 822 (Idaho 2006).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Paolini v. Albertson's Inc., 149 P.3d 822 (Idaho 2006). · cites it 32× “" The Ninth Circuit also asks whether stock options can constitute wages under Idaho Code § 45-613 . That statute provides: No employer shall discharge or in any other manner retaliate against any employee because that employee has made a complaint to the employer, or to the…”
Lawless v. Davis, 560 P.2d 497 (Idaho 1977). · cites it 4× “In Rules and Regulations promulgated by the Department of Labor and Industrial Services under the authority of I.C. § 45-613(1), Chapter 2 thereof, § 07-80-204, reads as follows: "XX-XX-XXX.”
Bruce P. Paolini v. Albertson's Inc. Plan Adm'r, of Albertson's Amended & Restated Stock-Based Incentive Plan, 418 F.3d 1023 (9th Cir. 2005). “Idaho Code § 45-613 . The statute reads: No employer shall discharge or in any other manner retaliate against any employee because that employee has made a complaint to the employer, or to the department, or filed suit alleging that the employee has not been paid in accordance…”
Bruce P. Paolini v. Albertson's Inc. Plan Adm'r, of Albertson's Amended & Restated Stock-Based Incentive Plan, 482 F.3d 1149 (9th Cir. 2007). “Since the Idaho Supreme Court held that stock options are not wages, we must affirm the district court’s dismissal of Paolini’s claim that he was terminated for pursuing a wage complaint, in violation of Idaho Code § 45-613 . Cf. Reinkemeyer v. SAFECO Ins.”
State Ex Rel. Dept. of Labor & Indus. Serv. v. Hill, 796 P.2d 155 (Idaho Ct. App. 1990). · cites it 2× “The Department proceeded with the wage claim determination on the statutory authority clearly vested in it by I.C. § 45-613. In order to proceed with a wage collection, the Department must determine whether wages are due and owing to the claimant.”
State ex rel. Dep't of Labor & Indus. Servs. v. Hill, 796 P.2d 155 (Idaho Ct. App. 1990). · cites it 2× “The Department proceeded with the wage claim determination on the statutory authority clearly vested in it by I.C. § 45-613. In order to proceed with a wage collection, the Department must determine whether wages are due and owing to the claimant.”
Kreb v. Life Flight Network, LLC (D. Idaho 2021). · cites it 4× “Plaintiff relies upon Idaho Code § 45-613 , which states in relevant part: No employer shall discharge or in any other manner retaliate against any employee because that employee has made a complaint to the employer, or to the department, or filed suit alleging that the employee…”
Venti v. Xerox Corp. (D. Idaho 2023). · cites it 4× “) On March 1, 2021, Plaintiff filed the instant action against Defendant in Idaho state court, alleging claims for unpaid wages, pursuant to Idaho Code Sections 45-606 and 45- 615; wage retaliation pursuant to Idaho Code Section 45-613; breach of contract and violation of public…”
Kreb v. Life Flight Network, LLC (D. Idaho 2021). · cites it 2× “I.C. § 45-613; see also id. at § 45-615 (addressing attorney’s fees for pursuing wage claim).”
Howes v. Phoenix Fire Prot., LLC (D. Idaho 2025). · cites it 2× “Both IWCA and the FLSA make it unlawful for an employer to discharge or retaliate against an employee for making a complaint to their employer about their failure to be paid in accordance with the FLSA or IWCA.”
Paolini v. Albertson's Inc. (9th Cir. 2005). “Idaho Code § 45-613 . The statute reads: No employer shall discharge or in any other manner retaliate against any employee because that employee has made a complaint to the employer, or to the department, or filed suit alleging that the employee has not been paid in accordance…”
Paolini v. Albertson's Inc. (9th Cir. 2007). “complaint, in violation of Idaho Code § 45-613 . Cf. Reinkemeyer v. SAFECO Ins.”
— Idaho Code § 45-613(1) — 1 case
Lawless v. Davis, 560 P.2d 497 (Idaho 1977). “In Rules and Regulations promulgated by the Department of Labor and Industrial Services under the authority of I.C. § 45-613(1), Chapter 2 thereof, § 07-80-204, reads as follows: "XX-XX-XXX.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.