AN ACT Relating to allowing for corrections to wage and salary disclosures;
SB 5408 amends Washington’s wage and salary disclosure law to require employers to include compensation information in job postings and to create a process for correcting noncompliant postings. For each job opening posting, an employer must disclose either a wage scale or salary range, or, if only a fixed amount is offered, the fixed wage amount, along with a general description of benefits and other compensation. The bill also clarifies that “posting” includes direct and indirect recruitment postings, including electronic and printed postings, but excludes digitally replicated solicitations published without the employer’s consent.
The bill adds a correction-and-notice framework for postings made before July 27, 2025. If an employer receives written notice that a posting may be noncompliant, the employer has five business days to correct it; if corrected in time, penalties and damages generally may not be assessed for that violation. The bill also requires employers, upon request, to disclose pay ranges for internal transfers and promotions. These requirements apply only to employers with 15 or more employees.
SB 5408 creates both administrative and private enforcement mechanisms. The Department of Labor and Industries may investigate complaints, attempt conciliation, issue citations, and assess statutory damages, civil penalties, costs, and other relief. Job applicants and employees may also bring civil actions for violations, with prevailing parties entitled to statutory damages, attorney’s fees, and costs. The bill specifies that these remedies are exclusive for violations of the new disclosure section and that existing wage-payment remedies do not apply to these disclosure violations.
The overall sentiment reflected in the voting history was strongly favorable, with the bill advancing by wide margins in both chambers and receiving near-unanimous final passage in the House and Senate. The committee and floor votes suggest broad bipartisan support for greater pay transparency, while the House amendment indicates some refinement of the bill’s enforcement or implementation details rather than fundamental opposition.
The main point of contention is the balance between pay transparency and employer compliance burdens. Supporters appear to favor clearer wage information for applicants and employees, while the correction notice provision and the exclusion for postings replicated without employer consent suggest concerns about inadvertent violations, third-party job boards, and exposure to penalties. The bill’s damages and civil penalty provisions, along with the ability for private lawsuits, are the most significant enforcement features and likely the areas where employers would be most attentive.
The bill amends RCW 49.58.110 and related provisions governing wage and salary disclosure in job postings. It expands disclosure obligations for employers, adds requirements for internal transfer and promotion opportunities, establishes a notice-and-cure process for certain posting violations, and authorizes administrative and private remedies including statutory damages, civil penalties, attorney’s fees, and injunctive relief. It also limits the new section’s remedies to the exclusive enforcement path for these disclosure violations and applies the requirements only to employers with 15 or more employees.
The bill appears to have enjoyed broad support throughout the legislative process. It passed the Senate committee, Senate floor, House committee, House floor, and final Senate concurrence by large margins, including overwhelmingly lopsided final votes. The voting pattern suggests general agreement on expanding pay transparency and clarifying employer obligations, with only limited opposition or concern reflected in the recorded votes.
The principal areas of concern are compliance burden and enforcement exposure for employers. The bill’s requirement to list wage ranges or fixed pay amounts, disclose benefits, and provide pay information for internal opportunities could be viewed as increasing administrative obligations. The correction window for pre-July 2025 postings indicates lawmakers were attentive to the risk of technical violations and the role of third-party recruiters or job boards. The strongest enforcement provisions—private lawsuits, statutory damages, civil penalties, and attorney’s fees—are likely the most contentious features, especially for employers worried about litigation over posting errors.