CHARLES SIMPSON, District Judge
This matter is before the court on motion of the defendant, The National Care Network, Inc. ("NCN"), to dismiss the plaintiff's claims for violation of Kentucky Revised Statutes Chapter 337 ("KRS § 337"), the Kentucky Wage and Hour Law (DN 6). This action arises from a dispute regarding the payment of commissions and bonus money allegedly earned by Timothy E. Cahill ("Cahill").
Cahill alleges that NCN made him a written offer of employment on October 31, 2002, which he accepted when he began work with NCN on January 6, 2003. Under the terms of the employment contract Cahill was entitled to commissions for sales that he was directly responsible for and bonuses based on NCN revenue. Cahill further asserts that he earned commissions and bonuses that NCN failed to pay in 2003 and 2004.
The Amended Complaint contains two counts. Count I alleges that NCN's failure to pay commissions and bonus money earned by Cahill constitutes a violation of KRS § 337. Count II alleges that NCN's failure to pay commissions and bonus money was a breach of contract.
NCN's motion to dismiss rests on its argument that original jurisdiction to hear Wage and Hour disputes arising under KRS § 337 lies with the Secretary of the Labor Cabinet. We agree, and have previously held, in Hasken v. City of Louisville, 173 F.Supp.2d 654, 662 (W.D. Ky. 2001), that "a claim which seeks recovery for an alleged violation of KRS § 337 must first be brought administratively. Cahill does not dispute that he has not filed an action with the Kentucky Labor Cabinet to recover his commissions and bonus money, and we therefore accept it as true. Since Cahill has failed to exhaust his administrative remedies, we must dismiss his § 337 claim. However, as we held in Hasken, Cahill's claim for breach of contract is a "separate and distinct claim from any statutory claim." Therefore, we have jurisdiction to hear Cahill's breach of contract claim.
Motions having been made and for the reasons set forth hereinabove, and the court being otherwise sufficiently advised, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that the motion of the defendant to dismiss (DN 6) is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART. The motion is GRANTED as to the claim for violations of Kentucky's Wage and Hour Law, and therefore Count I of the Amended Complaint is DISMISSED. The motion is DENIED as to the breach of contract claim contained in Count II of the Amended Complaint.