Most employment disputes end with a payment and a promise not to talk about it. In Minnesota, when the employer is a government entity, the second half of that bargain is unenforceable — and the Legislature said so twice.
Section 13.43, subd. 2(a)(6), makes “the complete terms of any agreement settling any dispute arising out of an employment relationship” public data. Not the fact of settlement. The terms.
Section 13.43, subd. 10, then voids the confidentiality clause itself — and paragraph (c) extends that to a court order containing the same terms. A stipulated protective order does not fix the problem, because the statute reaches the order.
Everything else in this article follows from that structural choice. Minnesota treats a government employee’s personnel file as presumptively the public’s business, carves out a defined list of what stays private, and refuses to let the parties contract around the line.
Can a Minnesota government employer settle an employment dispute confidentially?
No — and the prohibition is written to defeat the workarounds. Subdivision 10(a):
A government entity may not enter into an agreement settling a dispute arising out of the employment relationship with the purpose or effect of limiting access to or disclosure of personnel data or limiting the discussion of information or opinions related to personnel data. An agreement or portion of an agreement that violates this paragraph is void and unenforceable.
Note “or effect.” Intent is not required. A neutral-sounding clause that in operation limits discussion of personnel data is inside the prohibition.
Paragraph (b) names three specific forms it reaches — “but only to the extent that the data or information could otherwise be made accessible to the public”: (1) an agreement not to discuss, publicize, or comment on personnel data or information; (2) an agreement limiting the data subject’s ability to release or consent to the release of data; and (3) any other provision having the effect of limiting disclosure or discussion of information that could otherwise be made accessible to the public — “except a provision that limits the ability of an employee to release or discuss private data that identifies other employees.”
That limiting phrase is the whole scope of the rule, and it cuts both ways. Data that would be private anyway can still be protected by agreement. Data that § 13.43 makes public cannot.
And paragraph (c): “Paragraph (a) also applies to a court order that contains terms or conditions prohibited by paragraph (a).”
Now pair that with subdivision 2(a)(6), which makes public “the complete terms of any agreement settling any dispute arising out of an employment relationship, including a buyout agreement as defined in section 123B.143, subdivision 2, paragraph (a); except that the agreement must include specific reasons for the agreement if it involves the payment of more than $10,000 of public money” — that is the whole of clause (6).
Read the exception carefully — it is not a threshold for publicity. The agreement’s complete terms are public regardless of the dollar figure. Above $10,000 of public money, the statute adds an affirmative drafting requirement: the agreement itself must state specific reasons. A settlement of a public-employment dispute for more than $10,000 that recites nothing but consideration and release does not comply.
Practical translation. If you represent a Minnesota public employee, confidentiality is not a term you can trade for money, because you cannot deliver it. Price the case accordingly. If you represent the entity, a settlement drafted from a private-sector template will contain a clause that is void by statute and, over $10,000, will be missing a clause the statute requires.
What is public about a government employee even when nothing has gone wrong?
Eight categories, under subdivision 2(a), for current and former employees, volunteers, and independent contractors — subject to the exceptions in subdivisions 5 and 5a. Stated in the statute’s order:
- Compensation and identity — name; employee identification number, “which must not be the employee’s Social Security number”; actual gross salary; salary range; terms and conditions of the employment relationship; contract fees; actual gross pension; the value and nature of employer-paid fringe benefits; and the basis for and amount of any added remuneration, including expense reimbursement.
- Position and background — job title and bargaining unit; job description; education and training background; previous work experience.
- Dates — date of first and last employment.
- Complaints — the existence and status of any complaints or charges against the employee, “regardless of whether the complaint or charge resulted in a disciplinary action”.
- Discipline — the final disposition of any disciplinary action, the specific reasons, and the documentation of the basis, excluding data identifying confidential sources who are employees of the public body.
- Settlements — the complete terms, as above.
- Work contact and recognition — work location; a work telephone number; badge number; work-related continuing education; honors and awards received.
- Time records — payroll time sheets or comparable data used only to account for work time for payroll purposes, “except to the extent that release of time sheet data would reveal the employee’s reasons for the use of sick or other medical leave or other not public data.”
Two of these deserve a note. Clause (2) makes a public employee’s résumé content public — education, training, and prior work experience — which is not intuitive to someone who supplied it in confidence during hiring. And clause (4) is independent of clause (5): the existence and status of a complaint is public even if the employee was exonerated. The reasons and the underlying file are not; those turn on clause (5) and on the final-disposition definition in paragraph (b), which is worked through in the peace officer discipline article and in building a data practices civil rights case. This article does not repeat that analysis.
When does a job applicant’s name become public?
At the moment the appointing authority decides to interview you. Subdivision 3 makes a defined set of applicant data public — veteran status, relevant test scores, rank on eligible list, job history, education and training, and work availability — and then handles names separately:
Names of applicants shall be private data except when certified as eligible for appointment to a vacancy or when applicants are considered by the appointing authority to be finalists for a position in public employment. For purposes of this subdivision, “finalist” means an individual who is selected to be interviewed by the appointing authority prior to selection.
Selection for an interview is the trigger. Not the offer, not the hire. Someone applying for a Minnesota government job while employed elsewhere should understand that being invited to interview makes their name public data, and that a records request can surface it before they have decided whether they want the job.
Are senior officials treated differently?
Yes — for a defined group, the entire complaint file becomes public, not just its existence and outcome. Subdivision 2(e) provides that notwithstanding clause (5), and subject to paragraph (f), on completion of an investigation of a complaint or charge against a “public official” — or if the official resigns or is terminated while the complaint is pending — “all data relating to the complaint or charge are public, unless access to the data would jeopardize an active investigation or reveal confidential sources.”
Subdivision 2(e) defines “public official” in five categories: (1) the head of a state agency and deputy and assistant state agency heads; (2) members of boards or commissions required by law to be appointed by the governor or other elective officers; (3) members of the Metropolitan Council appointed by the governor under § 473.123, subd. 3; (4) executive or administrative heads of departments, bureaus, divisions, or institutions within state government; and (5) an enumerated list of local and Metropolitan Council employees — including the chief administrative officer or equivalent in all political subdivisions; individuals a political subdivision must identify under § 471.701; in a city or county, managers, chiefs, and heads or directors of departments, divisions, bureaus, or boards and equivalent positions; in a school district, business managers, human resource directors, qualifying athletic directors, chief financial officers, directors, superintendents and principals as defined by rule, and comparable charter school positions; and, in the Metropolitan Council, the positions listed in item (v).
For that fifth category only, subdivision 2(f) imposes two conditions. Data relating to the complaint are public only if (1) the complaint results in disciplinary action or the employee resigns or is terminated while it is pending, or (2) “potential legal claims arising out of the conduct that is the subject of the complaint or charge are released as part of a settlement agreement.”
Condition (2) is worth sitting with alongside subdivision 10. Settling with a city manager and taking a release of the claims arising from the underlying conduct is itself the event that makes the whole complaint file public.
What is not public?
Everything else, by default. Subdivision 4: “All other personnel data is private data on individuals but may be released pursuant to a court order. Data pertaining to an employee’s dependents are private data on individuals.”
Four specific protections are worth naming.
- Home contact information and dates of birth. Subdivision 6(e) classifies as private the home addresses, non-employer-issued phone numbers and email addresses, dates of birth, and communications between exclusive representatives and their members, prospective members, and nonmembers.
- Harassment complainants and witnesses. Subdivision 8 withholds from the accused employee data identifying the complainant or other witnesses if the responsible authority determines that access would threaten their personal safety or subject them to harassment — but if a disciplinary proceeding is initiated, that data “shall be available to the employee as may be necessary for the employee to prepare for the proceeding.”
- Undercover officers. Subdivision 5 makes all personnel data on an undercover law enforcement officer or applicant private, with the subdivision 2 and 3 data becoming public when the individual leaves the undercover assignment, unless the agency determines release would threaten the officer’s safety or jeopardize an active investigation.
- Certain corrections and treatment staff. Subdivision 5a, discussed next.
Law enforcement has further special rules, including body-worn camera data under § 13.825.
Did the 2026 session change § 13.43, and is the change in force?
Yes, and yes — since May 15, 2026. Laws 2026, ch. 95, art. 1, § 4, amended subdivision 5a. The amendment expands the group of protected employees to include employees of a secure treatment facility as defined in § 253D.02, subd. 13 (in addition to § 253B.02, subd. 18a), and employees of a treatment program as defined in § 253D.02, subd. 17; it adds facility “clients” alongside patients and inmates on the list of persons to whom the data must not be disclosed; and it numbers the three protected data categories, which are unchanged in substance — place of previous education or training, place of prior employment, and payroll timesheets to the extent disclosure may reveal future work assignments, a home address or telephone number, the employee’s location during nonwork hours, or the location of an immediate family member.
The effective-date clause is what settles currency: “This section is effective the day following final enactment and applies to any data request pending on or received after that date.” S.F. 476 was presented to the governor on May 13, 2026, approved May 14, 2026, and filed with the Secretary of State as chapter 95 on May 15, 2026. Under Minn. Stat. § 645.01, subd. 2, “final enactment” for a bill signed by the governor “means the date and time of day the governor signed the bill” — here, May 14, 2026 — so the day following is May 15, 2026. The August 1 default in Minn. Stat. § 645.02 — which supplies an effective date only “unless a different date is specified in the act” — never came into play.
One caution for anyone reading the section online: as of this writing, the Revisor’s codified text of subdivision 5a still displays the pre-amendment 2024 language, under a banner noting that the subdivision “has been amended by Chapter 95, Article 1, Section 4.” The banner is not a warning that the change is pending. It is in force. Read the session law.
How is this different from a private employer’s personnel file?
The direction of the right is reversed. Minnesota’s private-sector statute, the Personnel Record Review Act at §§ 181.960–.966, gives the employee a right to see and respond to their own file. Chapter 13 gives the public a right to see part of a government employee’s file: § 13.03, subd. 1, makes government data public unless classified otherwise, and § 13.02, subd. 15, defines “public data on individuals” as data accessible to the public under § 13.03. A public employee has the private-sector-style right too — private data are, by definition under § 13.02, subd. 12, accessible to the data subject — but they have it on top of a regime in which strangers can obtain their salary, their discipline outcome, and their settlement.
For the mechanics of making and answering a request, see the data practices request guide; for where chapter 13 sits relative to Minnesota’s other privacy regimes, see Minnesota’s three privacy regimes; and for the private-employer counterpart, the Personnel Record Review Act.
Enforcement runs through § 13.08, which makes a violating responsible authority or government entity liable for damages plus costs and reasonable attorney fees, with exemplary damages of not less than $1,000 and not more than $15,000 for each willful violation, and separately authorizes an action to compel compliance.
Madgett Law, LLC works with Minnesota public employees on personnel-data classification, records requests, and the terms of separation and settlement agreements, and with requesters seeking data a government entity has withheld. If you are being asked to sign a confidentiality clause in a public-employment settlement, or you have been told that data you believe is public is not, send us a message or call 612-470-6529.
Sources: Minn. Stat. § 13.43 (2025 Minnesota Statutes, Minnesota Office of the Revisor of Statutes): subd. 1 (definition of personnel data); subd. 2(a) opening (public for current and former employees, volunteers, and independent contractors, “[e]xcept for employees described in subdivision 5 and subject to the limitations described in subdivision 5a”) and clauses (1)–(8) (the eight public categories, including the Social Security number bar in clause (1), the “regardless of whether the complaint or charge resulted in a disciplinary action” language in clause (4), the confidential-source exclusion in clause (5), the settlement-terms and $10,000 specific-reasons rule in clause (6), and the sick-and-medical-leave carve-out in clause (8)); subd. 2(b) (definition of final disposition — referenced, not analyzed here); subd. 2(e) (public officials; all complaint data public on completion of investigation or on resignation or termination while pending, “unless access to the data would jeopardize an active investigation or reveal confidential sources”; the five defining categories, clauses (1)–(5), including items (i)–(v) of clause (5)); subd. 2(f)(1)–(2) (the two conditions applicable to clause (5) employees); subd. 3 (applicant data; names private except on certification as eligible or as a finalist; the definition of “finalist”); subd. 4 (all other personnel data private; dependents’ data private); subd. 5 (undercover law enforcement officers); subd. 5a (limitation on disclosure of certain personnel data); subd. 6(e) (home addresses, non-employer-issued phone numbers and email addresses, dates of birth, and exclusive-representative communications are private); subd. 8 (harassment complainant and witness data; the two determinations and the disciplinary-proceeding proviso); and subd. 10(a), (b)(1)–(3), and (c) (void confidentiality agreements; the “only to the extent that the data or information could otherwise be made accessible to the public” limit; the carve-out for provisions limiting release of private data identifying other employees; application to court orders). Minn. Stat. § 13.02, subd. 12 (private data on individuals — accessible to the data subject) and subd. 15 (public data on individuals). Minn. Stat. § 13.03, subd. 1 (government data public unless classified otherwise). Minn. Stat. § 13.08, subd. 1 (damages, costs, and reasonable attorney fees; exemplary damages of not less than $1,000 nor more than $15,000 for each willful violation) and subd. 4(a) (action to compel compliance). Minn. Stat. § 645.02 (August 1 default effective date “unless a different date is specified in the act”). Minn. Stat. § 645.01, subd. 2 (“final enactment” for a bill signed by the governor means the date and time of day the governor signed the bill). Minn. Stat. §§ 181.960–181.966 (Personnel Record Review Act — named for contrast; no text quoted). Session law: Laws 2026, ch. 95 (S.F. No. 476), art. 1, § 4, amending Minn. Stat. 2024, § 13.43, subd. 5a, with the effective-date clause “This section is effective the day following final enactment and applies to any data request pending on or received after that date,” read from the Revisor’s session law text at revisor.mn.gov/laws/. Enactment dates from the Revisor’s bill history for S.F. 476 (94th Legislature, 2026 Regular Session): presentment 05/13/2026, governor’s approval 05/14/2026, filed with the Secretary of State as Chapter 95 on 05/15/26; the Revisor’s 2026 chapter table records no veto.
Currency note: § 13.43 was pulled on 2026-08-10 and returned a 2026 currency banner reading “13.43 subd. 5a has been amended by Chapter 95, Article 1, Section 4.” The session law was retrieved and its effective-date clause read; the amendment took effect May 15, 2026 and is in force as of the date of this article. No other subdivision of § 13.43 was identified as amended by the 2026 Regular Session. The Revisor’s codified display of subd. 5a still showed the pre-amendment 2024 text when checked.
This article is general legal information about Minnesota law, not legal advice, and reading it does not create an attorney–client relationship. Whether particular data is public depends on the entity, the employee’s position, and the posture of any complaint or settlement. No outcome is promised or implied.