Kentucky Revised Statutes

Ky. Rev. Stat. § 344.100 (2026)

Discrimination in wages or conditions not unlawful when made on basis

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section KY-LRCapps.legislature.ky.gov JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

other than race, color, religion, national origin, sex, or age forty and over, or because person is a qualified individual with a disability. Notwithstanding any other provision of this chapter, it is not an unlawful practice for an employer to apply different standards of compensation, or different terms, conditions, or privileges of employment pursuant to a bona fide seniority or merit system, or a system which measures earnings by quantity or quality of production or to employees who work in different locations, if the differences are not the result of an intention to discriminate because of race, color, religion, national origin, sex, or age forty (40) and over, or because the person is a qualified individual with a disability, nor is it an unlawful practice for an employer to give and to act upon the results of any professionally developed ability test provided that the test, its administration or action upon the results is not designed, intended, or used to discriminate because of race, color, religion, national origin, sex, or age forty (40) and over, or because the person is a qualified individual with a disability. Effective: July 15, 1994 History: Amended 1994 Ky. Acts ch. 378, sec. 9, effective July 15, 1994. – Amended 1992 Ky. Acts ch. 282, sec. 10, effective July 14, 1992. -- Amended 1980 Ky. Acts ch. 245, sec. 8, effective July 15, 1980. -- Amended 1972 Ky. Acts ch. 255, sec. 8. -- Created 1966 Ky. Acts ch. 2, Art. 3, sec. 309.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 2 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 2016–2022 · leading case: Adkins v. Excel Mining, LLC, 214 F. Supp. 3d 617 (E.D. Ky. 2016).
Adkins v. Excel Mining, LLC, 214 F. Supp. 3d 617 (E.D. Ky. 2016). · cites it 2× “KRS §§ 344.100, 344.450. Because it does both, the KCRA is the proper — and only — avenue for Adkins’s claim.”
Johnson v. Pennyrile Allied Cmty. Servs. (W.D. Ky. 2022). · cites it 8× “050 (Count 4); wage discrimination under KRS 344.100 (Count 5); negligent infliction of emotional distress (Count 6); intentional infliction of emotional distress (Count 7); negligent hiring, retention, and supervision (Count 8); wrongful termination (Count 9); retaliation in…”
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.