(1) No employer shall require an employee to remit to the employer any gratuity, or any portion thereof, except for the purpose of withholding amounts required by federal or state law. The amount withheld from such gratuity shall not exceed the amount required by federal or state law.
(2) As used in this section, "gratuity" means voluntary monetary contribution received by an employee from a guest, patron, or customer for services rendered.
(3) An employer may provide custodial services for the safekeeping of funds placed in a tip pool mandated by the employer or voluntarily entered into amongst the employees, if the account is properly identified and segregated from his other business records and open to examination by pool participants. Effective:July 1, 2022 History: Amended 2022 Ky. Acts ch. 236, sec. 176, effective July 1, 2022. -- Amended 1996 Ky. Acts ch. 115, sec. 2, effective July 15, 1996. -- Created 1976 Ky. Acts ch. 222, sec. 1.
Notes of Decisions
Tina Vance v. Amazon.com, Inc., 852 F.3d 601 (6th Cir. 2017).
“3d at 95 ; compare also Ky. Rev. Stat. § 337.065(3) (prohibiting mandatory tip-pooling), with 29 U.”
Noel v. Season-Sash, Inc., 722 S.W.2d 901 (Ky. Ct. App. 1986).
· cites it 2× “060) or require an employee to turn over his tips (KRS 337.065), that an employer must provide a wage statement and rest periods (KRS 337.”
Green v. Platinum Restaurants Mid Am. LLC (W.D. Ky. 2019).
· cites it 5× “Among other alleged Kentucky wage and hour law and FLSA violations, Plaintiffs claim Platinum violated KRS 337.065 and KRS 337.385 by forcing Plaintiffs to participate in a mandatory tip pool.”
Rebollar v. DBC Food LLC 2 (W.D. Ky. 2021).
· cites it 2× “As to KRS 337.065 and KRS 337.275, those statutes mirror the FLSA minimum-wage and overtime provisions discussed above.”
— Ky. Rev. Stat. § 337.065(3) — 1 case
Tina Vance v. Amazon.com, Inc., 852 F.3d 601 (6th Cir. 2017).
“3d at 95 ; compare also Ky. Rev. Stat. § 337.065(3) (prohibiting mandatory tip-pooling), with 29 U.”
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.