Kansas Statutes Annotated

K.S.A. § 44-1009 (2026)

Unlawful employment practices; unlawful discriminatory practices

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section KS-LEGkslegislature.org JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

44-1009. Unlawful employment practices; unlawful discriminatory practices. (a) It shall be an unlawful employment practice:

(1) For an employer, because of the race, religion, color, sex, disability, national origin or ancestry of any person to refuse to hire or employ such person to bar or discharge such person from employment or to otherwise discriminate against such person in compensation or in terms, conditions or privileges of employment; to limit, segregate, separate, classify or make any distinction in regards to employees; or to follow any employment procedure or practice which, in fact, results in discrimination, segregation or separation without a valid business necessity.

(2) For a labor organization, because of the race, religion, color, sex, disability, national origin or ancestry of any person, to exclude or to expel from its membership such person or to discriminate in any way against any of its members or against any employer or any person employed by an employer.

(3) For any employer, employment agency or labor organization to print or circulate or cause to be printed or circulated any statement, advertisement or publication, or to use any form of application for employment or membership or to make any inquiry in connection with prospective employment or membership, which expresses, directly or indirectly, any limitation, specification or discrimination as to race, religion, color, sex, disability, national origin or ancestry, or any intent to make any such limitation, specification or discrimination, unless based on a bona fide occupational qualification.

(4) For any employer, employment agency or labor organization to discharge, expel or otherwise discriminate against any person because such person has opposed any practices or acts forbidden under this act or because such person has filed a complaint, testified or assisted in any proceeding under this act.

(5) For an employment agency to refuse to list and properly classify for employment or to refuse to refer any person for employment or otherwise discriminate against any person because of such person's race, religion, color, sex, disability, national origin or ancestry; or to comply with a request from an employer for a referral of applicants for employment if the request expresses, either directly or indirectly, any limitation, specification or discrimination as to race, religion, color, sex, disability, national origin or ancestry.

(6) For an employer, labor organization, employment agency, or school which provides, coordinates or controls apprenticeship, on-the-job, or other training or retraining program, to maintain a practice of discrimination, segregation or separation because of race, religion, color, sex, disability, national origin or ancestry, in admission, hiring, assignments, upgrading, transfers, promotion, layoff, dismissal, apprenticeship or other training or retraining program, or in any other terms, conditions or privileges of employment, membership, apprenticeship or training; or to follow any policy or procedure which, in fact, results in such practices without a valid business motive.

(7) For any person, whether an employer or an employee or not, to aid, abet, incite, compel or coerce the doing of any of the acts forbidden under this act, or attempt to do so.

(8) For an employer, labor organization, employment agency or joint labor-management committee to: (A) Limit, segregate or classify a job applicant or employee in a way that adversely affects the opportunities or status of such applicant or employee because of the disability of such applicant or employee; (B) participate in a contractual or other arrangement or relationship, including a relationship with an employment or referral agency, labor union, an organization providing fringe benefits to an employee or an organization providing training and apprenticeship programs that has the effect of subjecting a qualified applicant or employee with a disability to the discrimination prohibited by this act; (C) utilize standards criteria, or methods of administration that have the effect of discrimination on the basis of disability or that perpetuate the discrimination of others who are subject to common administrative control; (D) exclude or otherwise deny equal jobs or benefits to a qualified individual because of the known disability of an individual with whom the qualified individual is known to have a relationship or association; (E) not make reasonable accommodations to the known physical or mental limitations of an otherwise qualified individual with a disability who is an applicant or employee, unless such employer, labor organization, employment agency or joint labor-management committee can demonstrate that the accommodation would impose an undue hardship on the operation of the business thereof; (F) deny employment opportunities to a job applicant or employee who is an otherwise qualified individual with a disability, if such denial is based on the need to make reasonable accommodation to the physical or mental impairments of the employee or applicant; (G) use qualification standards, employment tests or other selection criteria that screen out or tend to screen out an individual with a disability or a class of individuals with disabilities unless the standard, test or other selection criteria, as used, is shown to be job-related for the position in question and is consistent with business necessity; or (H) fail to select and administer tests concerning employment in the most effective manner to ensure that, when such test is administered to a job applicant or employee who has a disability that impairs sensory, manual or speaking skills, the test results accurately reflect the skills, aptitude or whatever other factor of such applicant or employee that such test purports to measure, rather than reflecting the impaired sensory, manual or speaking skills of such employee or applicant (except where such skills are the factors that the test purports to measure).

(9) For any employer to:

(A) Seek to obtain, to obtain or to use genetic screening or testing information of an employee or a prospective employee to distinguish between or discriminate against or restrict any right or benefit otherwise due or available to an employee or a prospective employee; or

(B) subject, directly or indirectly, any employee or prospective employee to any genetic screening or test.

(b) It shall not be an unlawful employment practice to fill vacancies in such way as to eliminate or reduce imbalance with respect to race, religion, color, sex, disability, national origin or ancestry.

(c) It shall be an unlawful discriminatory practice:

(1) For any person, as defined herein being the owner, operator, lessee, manager, agent or employee of any place of public accommodation to refuse, deny or make a distinction, directly or indirectly, in offering its goods, services, facilities, and accommodations to any person as covered by this act because of race, religion, color, sex, disability, national origin or ancestry, except where a distinction because of sex is necessary because of the intrinsic nature of such accommodation.

(2) For any person, whether or not specifically enjoined from discriminating under any provisions of this act, to aid, abet, incite, compel or coerce the doing of any of the acts forbidden under this act, or to attempt to do so.

(3) For any person, to refuse, deny, make a distinction, directly or indirectly, or discriminate in any way against persons because of the race, religion, color, sex, disability, national origin or ancestry of such persons in the full and equal use and enjoyment of the services, facilities, privileges and advantages of any institution, department or agency of the state of Kansas or any political subdivision or municipality thereof.

History: L. 1961, ch. 248, § 5; L. 1965, ch. 323, § 6; L. 1970, ch. 192, § 5; L. 1972, ch. 194, § 7; L. 1974, ch. 209, § 6; L. 1991, ch. 147, § 6; L. 1999, ch. 32, § 2; July 1.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 72 cases (8 in the last 5 years), 1967–2025 · leading case: Stephens v. Unified Sch. Dist. No. 500, 546 P.2d 197 (Kan. 1975).
Stephens v. Unified Sch. Dist. No. 500, 546 P.2d 197 (Kan. 1975). · cites it 7× “Stephens subsequently filed a complaint with the Kansas commission on civil rights alleging that the transfer was racially discriminatory and constituted an unlawful employment practice in violation of K.S.A. 44-1009 ( a ) (1). An investigating commissioner found probable cause…”
Wagher v. Guy's Foods, Inc., 885 P.2d 1197 (Kan. 1994). · cites it 4× “With respect to the teachers’ claims against the school, the court concluded that “[a]fter a No Probable Cause determination is made and the Commission’s file is closed, an aggrieved person may bring an independent civil action in the district court, based upon an alleged…”
Cessna Aircraft Co. v. Kansas Comm'n on Civil Rights, 622 P.2d 124 (Kan. 1981). · cites it 7× “Her complaint based upon a violation of K.S.A. 1979 Supp. 44-1009( a )(1), omitting formal parts, reads: 1.”
Kansas Comm'n on Civil Rights v. Howard, 544 P.2d 791 (Kan. 1975). · cites it 4× “Upon first consideration the trial court agreed with the respondents, finding that the complaint "does not allege acts which come within the purview and jurisdiction of the Kansas Commission on Civil Rights, because K.S.A. 1972 Supp. 44-1009 ( c ) (3) relates to unlawful…”
Woods v. Midwest Conveyor Co., 648 P.2d 234 (Kan. 1982). · cites it 2× “K.S.A. 44-1009 states: "( a ) It shall be an unlawful employment practice: "(1) For an employer, because of the race, religion, color, sex, physical handicap, national origin or ancestry of any person to refuse to hire or employ, or to bar or to discharge from employment such…”
Garvey Elevators, Inc. v. Kansas Human Rights Comm'n, 961 P.2d 696 (Kan. 1998). · cites it 4× “2d at 604 ; and (2) the work environment constituted an unlawful employment practice under K.S.A. 44-1009(a). 24 Kan. App. 2d at 603 .”
Harder v. Kansas Comm'n on Civil Rights, 592 P.2d 456 (Kan. 1979). · cites it 3× “The relevant portion of Title VII under consideration by the Court was comparable to K.S.A. 44-1009. We find no merit in appellant’s first point.”
Hill v. State, 448 P.3d 457 (Kan. 2019). “See K.S.A. 44-1009 (unlawful for employer to terminate or otherwise discriminate against a person because of race, religion, color, sex, disability, national origin, or ancestry or to commit other discriminatory employment practices listed in the statute).”
Curry v. Allan S. Goodman, Inc., 944 A.2d 925 (Conn. 2008). “§ 22-9-5-7 (5) (LexisNexis 2007); Kan. Stat. Ann. § 44-1009 (a) (8) (2006); La.”
Palmer v. Brown, 752 P.2d 685 (Kan. 1988). “44-831 states an employee has a cause of action against any employer who violates the state’s “right to work” amendment, Kan.”
Campbell v. Husky Hogs, L.L.C., 255 P.3d 1 (Kan. 2011). “See K.S.A. 44-1009 (It is unlawful for an employer to terminate or otherwise discriminate against a person because of race, religion, color, sex, disability, national origin, or ancestry or to commit other discriminatory employment practices listed in the statute.”
Wynn v. Boeing Military Airplane Co., 595 F. Supp. 727 (D. Kan. 1984). · cites it 3× “As plaintiff points out, state and federal race discrimination law is not coextensive. The Kansas common law action may provide remedies not available under federal law and does not have requisites that the federal law possesses.”
— K.S.A. § 44-1009(1) — 1 case
Parker v. Kansas Neurological Inst., 778 P.2d 390 (Kan. Ct. App. 1989).
— K.S.A. § 44-1009(4) — 1 case
Sporleder v. U.S. Bancorp (D. Kan. 2019).
— K.S.A. § 44-1009(a) — 4 cases
Garvey Elevators, Inc. v. Kansas Human Rights Comm'n, 961 P.2d 696 (Kan. 1998). “2d at 604 ; and (2) the work environment constituted an unlawful employment practice under K.S.A. 44-1009(a). 24 Kan. App. 2d at 603 .”
Zion Lutheran Church v. Kansas Comm'n on Civil Rights, 821 P.2d 334 (Kan. Ct. App. 1991).
Garvey Elevators, Inc. v. Kansas Human Rights Comm'n, 948 P.2d 1150 (Kan. Ct. App. 1997).
Lumry v. State (Kan. 2016).
— K.S.A. § 44-1009(a)(1) — 10 cases
Sandlin v. Roche Labs., Inc., 991 P.2d 883 (Kan. 1999).
Reber v. Mel Falley, Inc., 683 P.2d 1229 (Kan. 1984).
Kansas State Univerity v. Kansas Comm'n on Civil Rights, 796 P.2d 1046 (Kan. Ct. App. 1990).
Reed v. Nellcor Puritan Bennett, 244 F. Supp. 2d 1205 (D. Kan. 2003).
Houck v. City of Prairie Vill., 977 F. Supp. 1128 (D. Kan. 1997).
— K.S.A. § 44-1009(a)(4) — 6 cases
Rupp v. Purolator Courier Corp., 790 F. Supp. 1069 (D. Kan. 1992).
Spillman v. Carter, 918 F. Supp. 336 (D. Kan. 1996).
McCabe v. Johnson Cnty., Bd. of Cnty. Commissioners, 616 P.2d 780 (Kan. Ct. App. 1980).
Lawyer v. Eck & Eck MacH. Co., Inc., 197 F. Supp. 2d 1267 (D. Kan. 2002).
— K.S.A. § 44-1009(a)(8) — 1 case
Hutchings v. Kuebler, 5 F. Supp. 2d 1186 (D. Kan. 1998).
— K.S.A. § 44-1009(a)(8)(E) — 2 cases
Brinkman v. Kansas Dep't of Corr., 863 F. Supp. 1479 (D. Kan. 1994).
Brinkman v. State of Kan., Dept. of Corr., 869 F. Supp. 902 (D. Kan. 1994).
— K.S.A. § 44-1009(a)(l) — 13 cases
Palmer v. Brown, 752 P.2d 685 (Kan. 1988). “44-831 states an employee has a cause of action against any employer who violates the state’s “right to work” amendment, Kan.”
Harder v. Kansas Comm'n on Civil Rights, 592 P.2d 456 (Kan. 1979). “The relevant portion of Title VII under consideration by the Court was comparable to K.S.A. 44-1009. We find no merit in appellant’s first point.”
Cessna Aircraft Co. v. Kansas Comm'n on Civil Rights, 622 P.2d 124 (Kan. 1981). “Her complaint based upon a violation of K.S.A. 1979 Supp. 44-1009( a )(1), omitting formal parts, reads: 1.”
Garvey Elevators, Inc. v. Kansas Human Rights Comm'n, 961 P.2d 696 (Kan. 1998). “2d at 604 ; and (2) the work environment constituted an unlawful employment practice under K.S.A. 44-1009(a). 24 Kan. App. 2d at 603 .”
Nurge v. Univ. of Kansas Med. Ctr., 674 P.2d 459 (Kan. 1983).
— K.S.A. § 44-1009(c) — 1 case
— K.S.A. § 44-1009(c)(1) — 2 cases
Seabourn v. Coronado Area Council, 891 P.2d 385 (Kan. 1995).
Jackson v. Ford Motor Co. (D. Kan. 2023).
— K.S.A. § 44-1009(c)(3) — 2 cases
— K.S.A. § 44-1009(c)(l) — 2 cases
Holler v. Cinemark USA, Inc., 185 F. Supp. 2d 1242 (D. Kan. 2002).
Kansas Human Rights Comm'n v. Topeka Golf Ass'n, 856 P.2d 515 (Kan. Ct. App. 1993).
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.