Idaho Code

Idaho Code § 67-5315 (2026)

Establishment and adoption of employee problem solving and due process procedures.

✓ current as of May 2026

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section IClegislature.idaho.gov Justiaon Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

Establishment and adoption of employee problem solving and due process procedures.

(1) Each participating department shall, on or before July 1, 1999, establish and adopt an employee problem solving procedure within such department, which shall be reduced to writing and shall be in full compliance with the provisions of the uniform problem solving procedure as adopted by rule by the administrator pursuant to subsection (4) of this section. The department problem solving procedure shall be approved by the administrator of the division of human resources prior to implementation or amendment. A copy of the approved problem solving procedure plan shall be furnished and explained to each employee of the department concerned. No employee shall be disciplined or otherwise prejudiced in his employment for exercising his rights under the plan, and department heads shall encourage the use of the plan in the resolution of grievances arising in the course of public employment. A classified employee may file under the problem solving procedure any matter, except that compensation shall not be deemed a proper subject for consideration under the problem solving procedure except as it applies to alleged inequities within a particular agency or department, and except for termination during the entrance probationary period, and except for those matters set forth in subsection (2) of this section.

(2) No action of a participating department relating to a disciplinary dismissal, suspension or demotion, or an involuntary transfer of a classified state employee shall be effective until the affected employee shall have received notice and an opportunity to be heard. The classified employee may then appeal to the Idaho personnel commission those disciplinary matters set forth in section 67-5316(1)(a), Idaho Code.

(3) If the filing concerns a matter which is reviewable pursuant to section 67-5316, Idaho Code, the time for appeal to the commission shall not commence to run until the employee has completed the problem solving procedure provided by the department in accordance with the terms thereof or, in the case of disciplinary actions set forth in subsection (2) of this section, until the disciplinary action becomes effective; provided, however, the failure of an employee to pursue the problem solving procedures established within the department shall constitute a waiver of the employee’s right of review by the commission.

(4) The division of human resources shall adopt a rule defining uniform problem solving and due process procedures for use by all participating departments with classified employees. With respect to the problem solving procedure, the rule shall provide a complete procedure for all stages of the process, including problem solving meetings with department representatives in the employee’s chain of command. With respect to the due process procedure, the rule shall provide that the employee receive notice and an opportunity to be heard before the department decides in favor of disciplinary action. The rule shall also provide for time periods for each step of the procedures. The rule shall provide for the use of an impartial mediator upon agreement between the agency and the employee. The employee shall be entitled to be represented by a person of the employee’s own choosing at each step of the procedures, except the initial informal discussion with the immediate supervisor prior to filing under the problem solving procedure.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 15 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1977–2022 · leading case: Nation v. State, Dept. of Corr., 158 P.3d 953 (Idaho 2007).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Nation v. State, Dept. of Corr., 158 P.3d 953 (Idaho 2007). · cites it 4× “It reasoned that Grigsby and Kevin Nation had failed to exhaust their administrative remedies because they did not pursue any grievance procedure under I.C. § 67-5315. It also found that the retaliation claims did not sound in tort, but were the types of claims the state…”

Jensen v. State, 72 P.3d 897 (Idaho 2003). · cites it 6× “Specifically, under I.C. § 67-5315(2), “No action of a participating department relating to disciplinary dismissal .”

Stroud v. Dep't of Labor & Indus. Servs., 736 P.2d 1345 (Idaho Ct. App. 1987). · cites it 10× “§ 67-5304(2), formerly I.C. § 67-5315; Swisher v. State Department of Environmental and Community Services, 98 Idaho 565 , 569 P.”

Pounds v. Denison, 766 P.2d 1262 (Idaho Ct. App. 1988). · cites it 6× “(This statute was amended in 1986 and recodified as I.C. § 67-5315; hereinafter brackets will contain present designations of amended or recodified statutes).”

Sheets v. Idaho Dep't of Health & Welfare, 753 P.2d 1257 (Idaho 1988). · cites it 12× “The trial court cited to I.C. § 67-5315 (formerly I.C. § 67-5309A), which requires the Department to establish a written employee grievance procedure subject to the approval of the Idaho Personnel Commission.”

Swisher v. State Dep't of Env't & Cmty. Servs., 569 P.2d 910 (Idaho 1977). · cites it 4× “However, the Personnel Commission Act, in I.C. § 67-5315, provides the following: “67-5315.”

Patterson v. State, Dep't of Health & Welfare, 256 P.3d 718 (Idaho 2011). · cites it 2× “Employee problem solving and due process procedures are mandated by I.C. § 67-5315 and provided for in Rule 200 of the Rules of the Division of Human Resources & Idaho Personnel Commission (IDAPA 15.”

Fridenstine v. Idaho Dep't of Admin., 983 P.2d 842 (Idaho 1999). · cites it 6× “Fridenstine also argues that I.C. § 67-5315 provides a statutory right to be represented by his choice of counsel.”

James v. Dep't of Transp., 876 P.2d 590 (Idaho 1994). · cites it 6× “I.C. § 67-5315(1). The department’s grievance procedure states: Any matter is grievable except: Salary, in and of itself, is not a grievable item except as it applies to alleged inequities within the department nor is dismissal for failure to complete satisfactorily the entrance…”

Dep't of Health & Welfare v. Sandoval, 742 P.2d 992 (Idaho Ct. App. 1987). · cites it 2× “I.C. § 67-5315(d). The intra-agency grievance procedure, on the other hand, is informal in nature and it contains fewer procedural safeguards.”

Sanchez v. Idaho Dep't of Corr., 5 P.2d 984 (Idaho 2000). · cites it 4× “The protections of I.C. § 67-5316(1) should not be avoided simply by the department cloaking disciplinary action under the rubric of an involuntary transfer.”

Starr v. Idaho Transp. Dep't, 795 P.2d 21 (Idaho Ct. App. 1990). · cites it 2× “After completing his departmental grievance procedure, as per I.C. § 67-5315, Starr appealed to the Idaho Personnel Commission, asserting that his layoff was in retaliation for his testimony in the fellow employee’s case and for his union membership, even though the department…”

Show all 15 citing cases →

— Idaho Code § 67-5315(1) — 3 cases

James v. Dep't of Transp., 876 P.2d 590 (Idaho 1994). “I.C. § 67-5315(1). The department’s grievance procedure states: Any matter is grievable except: Salary, in and of itself, is not a grievable item except as it applies to alleged inequities within the department nor is dismissal for failure to complete satisfactorily the entrance…”

Sheets v. Idaho Dep't of Health & Welfare, 753 P.2d 1257 (Idaho 1988). “The trial court cited to I.C. § 67-5315 (formerly I.C. § 67-5309A), which requires the Department to establish a written employee grievance procedure subject to the approval of the Idaho Personnel Commission.”

Hood v. Idaho Dep't of Health & Welfare, 868 P.2d 479 (Idaho 1994).

— Idaho Code § 67-5315(2) — 2 cases

Jensen v. State, 72 P.3d 897 (Idaho 2003). “Specifically, under I.C. § 67-5315(2), “No action of a participating department relating to disciplinary dismissal .”

Lowe v. Idaho Transp. Dep't, 878 F. Supp. 2d 1166 (D. Idaho 2012).

— Idaho Code § 67-5315(3) — 3 cases

Stroud v. Dep't of Labor & Indus. Servs., 736 P.2d 1345 (Idaho Ct. App. 1987). “§ 67-5304(2), formerly I.C. § 67-5315; Swisher v. State Department of Environmental and Community Services, 98 Idaho 565 , 569 P.”

Pounds v. Denison, 766 P.2d 1262 (Idaho Ct. App. 1988). “(This statute was amended in 1986 and recodified as I.C. § 67-5315; hereinafter brackets will contain present designations of amended or recodified statutes).”

Sanchez v. Idaho Dep't of Corr., 5 P.2d 984 (Idaho 2000). “The protections of I.C. § 67-5316(1) should not be avoided simply by the department cloaking disciplinary action under the rubric of an involuntary transfer.”

— Idaho Code § 67-5315(4)(c) — 1 case

Fridenstine v. Idaho Dep't of Admin., 983 P.2d 842 (Idaho 1999). “Fridenstine also argues that I.C. § 67-5315 provides a statutory right to be represented by his choice of counsel.”

— Idaho Code § 67-5315(d) — 1 case

Dep't of Health & Welfare v. Sandoval, 742 P.2d 992 (Idaho Ct. App. 1987). “I.C. § 67-5315(d). The intra-agency grievance procedure, on the other hand, is informal in nature and it contains fewer procedural safeguards.”

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.