Printable Format44-312. Preference of wages of employees in insolvency. That whenever a receiver shall be appointed of the estate of any corporation, copartnership, or individual, under the laws of this state, or whenever any corporation, copartnership or individual shall make a general assignment for the benefit of the creditors of such corporation, copartnership, or individual, the wages due to all laborers or employees other than officers of such corporation, accruing within the six months immediately preceding such appointment of a receiver or such assignment, shall be preferred to every other debt or claim against such corporation, copartnership, or individual, and shall be paid by the receiver or assignee of such corporation, copartnership or individual from the moneys thereof which shall first come into the hands of such receiver or assignee.
History: L. 1901, ch. 229, § 1; May 1; R.S. 1923, 44-312.
Law Review and Bar Journal References:
Survey of law of contracts, Fred W. Six, 12 K.L.R.176 (1963).
"Commercial Transactions Under the New Bankruptcy Act," Paul B. Rasor, 48 J.B.A.K 199, 210 (1979).
"Obstacles to Wage Claim Recovery," Corlin J. Pratt, XIV J.K.T.L.A. No. 1, 20 (1990).
"Conflict of Laws in Kansas: A Guide to Navigating the Dismal Swamp," Terri Savely Bezek, 71 J.K.B.A. No. 8, 21 (2002).
"See Dick and Jane Work: A Kansas Wage Payment Act Primer," Boyd A. Byers and Carolyn L. Rumfelt, 72 J.K.B.A. No. 9, 14 (2003).
Attorney General's Opinions:
Payment of compensation—definitions; wages, unused sick leave. 89-14.
CASE ANNOTATIONS
1. Preference not defeated by applying first proceeds to other purposes. Geppelt v. Stone Co., 90 Kan. 539, 544, 135 P. 573.
2. Section cited in considering liability for wages. Copp v. Zimmerman, 123 Kan. 461, 465, 256 P. 145.
3. Statute applies to receiverships in cases of insolvency only. Acme Foundry and Machine Co. v. Wampler, 124 Kan. 486, 490, 260 P. 972.
4. Executive director and general manager of corporation, although not an elected officer, held to be an officer within meaning of section; no preference for wages; assignment of claim valid. Alldritt v. Kansas Centennial Global Exposition, 189 Kan. 649, 651, 652, 655, 658, 371 P.2d 181.
5. Cited in showing protection of wage earners as principal objective of many laws. Burris v. Northern Assurance Co. of America, 236 Kan. 326, 333, 691 P.2d 10 (1984).
6. Claimants not entitled to profit-sharing benefits unless employed on distribution date of employment contract. Morton Bldgs., Inc. v. Department of Human Resources, 10 Kan. App. 2d 197, 198, 202, 695 P.2d 450 (1985).
7. Preference created for wages due employees does not create lien or give priority over perfected security interests. First Nat'l Bank v. Family Medicine Clinic of Medicine Lodge, 14 Kan. App. 2d 749, 751, 798 P.2d 519 (1990).
8. Cited in Kansas wage payment act claim involving FMLA. Wallace v. Microsoft Credit Corp., 563 F. Supp. 2d 1197, 1203 (2008).
9. Evidence presented by plaintiffs sufficient to allow the jury to award damages for violation of FLSA and KWPA. Garcia v. Tyson Foods, Inc., 890 F. Supp. 2d 1273 (D. Kan. 2012).
10. Statute does not give employee wages a lien or priority over secured liens but only indicates a preference for wages over other general debts. Bank Midwest v. R.F. Fisher Elec. Co., LLC, 514 F. Supp. 3d 1310, 1317 (D. Kan. 2021).