44-322.
Enforcement; hearings; powers of secretary; contempt.
(a) The secretary shall enforce and administer the provisions of this act and the secretary or authorized representatives of the secretary are empowered to hold hearings and otherwise to investigate violations or alleged violations of this act.
(b) The secretary or authorized representatives of the secretary are empowered to enter such places, question such employees and investigate such facts, conditions or matters as they may deem appropriate to determine whether any person has violated any provision of this act or any rule or regulation issued hereunder or which may aid in the enforcement of the provisions of this act.
(c) The secretary or authorized representatives of the secretary shall have the power to administer oaths and examine witnesses under oath or otherwise, issue compulsory process to compel the attendance of witnesses and the production of papers, books, accounts, records, payrolls, documents and testimony relating to claims for unpaid wages, and to take depositions and affidavits in the administration of this act.
(d) In case of failure of any person to comply with any compulsory process lawfully issued, the secretary may apply to the judge of the district court for citation in contempt and such judge may punish for contempt, as in other cases of refusal to obey the orders and processes of the court.
History:
L. 1973, ch. 204, § 10; L. 1976, ch. 370, § 6; July 1.
Notes of Decisions
Campbell v. Husky Hogs, L.L.C., 255 P.3d 1 (Kan. 2011).
· cites it 4× “44-321); and mandates that the Secretary of Labor enforce and administer the KWPA’s provisions through administrative proceedings, compulsory process to compel witness attendance and document production, and permits application to the district courts for citations in contempt…”
Craig v. Fedex Ground Package Sys., Inc., 686 F.3d 423 (7th Cir. 2012).
“[the KWPA],” Kan. Stat. Ann. § 44-322 (a), and to “adopt such rules and regulations as necessary for the purposes of administering and enforcing the [Act’s] provisions,” id.”
Yuille v. Pester Mktg. Co., 682 P.2d 676 (Kan. Ct. App. 1984).
“44-319, and K.S.A. 44-322 grants the secretary power to enforce the wage statutes.”
Spor v. Presta Oil Co., 798 P.2d 68 (Kan. Ct. App. 1990).
“Can plaintiffs choose their forum by initially filing their claim with the district court or the Department of Human Resources? K.S.A. 44-322 and K.S.A. 1989 Supp. 44-322a establish a comprehensive administrative remedy for claims for back wages.”
Sporleder v. U.S. Bancorp (D. Kan. 2019).
· cites it 2× “42 Next, Plaintiff argues that the KAAD offers an inadequate remedy unless the statute allows for the same damages as a common law retaliation claim.”
Herr v. Mccormick Grain-the Heiman Co., Inc., 841 F. Supp. 1500 (D. Kan. 1994).
· cites it 2× “The main reason, however, is because we do not feel you are considered an “employee”. Our office handles claims where there has been an employer/employee relationship.”
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.