Kentucky Revised Statutes

Ky. Rev. Stat. § 212.636 (2026)

Department employees -- Compensation plan -- Merit system -- Personnel

✓ current as of May 2026

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section KY-LRCapps.legislature.ky.gov JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

board.

(1) The board shall establish the compensation plan for all employees of the department, and such compensation shall be as nearly comparable as practicable with the compensation paid to and received by employees in comparable agencies.

(2) The employees of the department shall be employed and governed in accordance with a merit system. The board shall provide for the recruitment, examination, appointment, promotion, transfer, lay-off, removal, discipline, compensation, and welfare of the department's employees by establishing a system of personnel administration based on merit principles and scientific methods whereby the rules and regulations of such system shall not be less stringent than those of the merit system of the Cabinet for Health and Family Services. Such system shall include a personnel board of five (5) members appointed by the board for two (2) year terms. The board shall select as members of the personnel board public-spirited citizens of recognized experience in the improvement of public administration and in the impartial selection of efficient public personnel. The personnel board shall be responsible for establishing rules and regulations for the purpose of governing the administration of the personnel system. The commissioner shall function as appointing authority in and with respect to the personnel matters of the board. The board shall have one (1) year from July 1, 1977, to implement such a system.

(3) Notwithstanding the provisions of KRS 61.510 to 61.692 and KRS 78.510 to 78.852, on July 1, 1977, all regular full-time present and future public health employees of the department shall be included within the provisions of the state retirement system.

(4) When the board is qualified and organized as provided in KRS 212.626 to 212.639, all city-county department of health employees at that time shall be transferred to and continued in the service of the department created under KRS 212.626 to 212.639. Provided, however, that any and all of such employees who at that time are in the classified service of the city-county department of health shall be continued in the classified service of the department with the same status they have had in the classified service of the city-county department of health. Effective: June 20, 2005 History: Amended 2005 Ky. Acts ch. 99, sec. 416, effective June 20, 2005. -- Amended 1998 Ky. Acts ch. 426, sec. 367, effective July 15, 1998. -- Amended 1980 Ky. Acts ch. 188, sec. 207, effective July 15, 1980. -- Created 1976 Ky. Acts ch. 347, sec. 10, effective July 1, 1977.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 2 cases, 2003–2003 · leading case: Lexington-Fayette Urban Cnty. Health Dep't v. Lloyd, 115 S.W.3d 343 (Ky. Ct. App. 2003).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Lexington-Fayette Urban Cnty. Health Dep't v. Lloyd, 115 S.W.3d 343 (Ky. Ct. App. 2003). · cites it 5× “Furthermore, there is no language in KRS 212.636 to support the appellants’ claim that the Merit System Council’s role in hearing an employee’s appeal of a disciplinary action is purely advisory.”

Lexington-fayette Urban Cty Health v. Lloyd, 115 S.W.3d 343 (Ky. Ct. App. 2003). · cites it 6× “Furthermore, there is no language in KRS 212.636 to support the appellants' claim that the Merit System Council's role in hearing an employee's appeal of a disciplinary action is purely advisory.”

— Ky. Rev. Stat. § 212.636(2) — 2 cases

Lexington-Fayette Urban Cnty. Health Dep't v. Lloyd, 115 S.W.3d 343 (Ky. Ct. App. 2003). “Furthermore, there is no language in KRS 212.636 to support the appellants’ claim that the Merit System Council’s role in hearing an employee’s appeal of a disciplinary action is purely advisory.”

Lexington-fayette Urban Cty Health v. Lloyd, 115 S.W.3d 343 (Ky. Ct. App. 2003). “Furthermore, there is no language in KRS 212.636 to support the appellants' claim that the Merit System Council's role in hearing an employee's appeal of a disciplinary action is purely advisory.”

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.