HB 1335
In CommitteeHouse
Military spouse employment
Protecting military spouses from employment discrimination.
This status may be delayed. See Action History below for the latest updates.
How does a bill become law?
- Introduced: The bill is filed and assigned a number.
- Committee: A subject-matter committee holds hearings, takes public testimony, and decides whether to advance the bill.
- Floor Vote: The full chamber (House or Senate) debates and votes on the bill.
- Opposite Chamber: The bill repeats the committee and floor vote process in the other chamber.
- Governor: The Governor reviews the bill and decides whether to sign or veto it.
- Signed: The bill has been signed into law.
AI Analysis
This bill adds 'military spouse status' as a protected class under Washington’s Law Against Discrimination, making it illegal for employers, labor unions, and employment agencies to discriminate against military spouses in employment contexts. It also updates definitions and enforcement provisions to support this new protection.
- Adds 'military spouse status' as a protected class under the state's Law Against Discrimination (RCW 49.60).
- Prohibits employers from refusing to hire, discharging, or discriminating against individuals in compensation or terms of employment because of their status as a military spouse.
- Bars labor unions and employment agencies from denying membership, expelling members, or discriminating in job referrals based on military spouse status.
- Clarifies that discrimination based on military spouse status includes discriminatory hiring practices, job advertisements, and application processes unless justified by a bona fide occupational qualification.
- Defines 'military spouse status' as any person currently or previously married to a service member during the service member’s active duty service.
Who is affected
- Military spouses — Military spouses are explicitly protected from employment discrimination by being added as a protected class under state anti-discrimination law, giving them the right to fair hiring, promotion, and retention practices.
- Employers — Employers in Washington must ensure their hiring, firing, compensation, and job advertisement practices do not discriminate against military spouses, or risk being found in violation of state law.
- Labor unions and employment agencies — Labor unions and employment agencies must avoid discriminatory practices toward military spouses in membership, referrals, and job placement, and may face legal consequences if they do not comply.
- Washington State Human Rights Commission — The Washington State Human Rights Commission gains clearer authority to investigate and enforce complaints involving discrimination against military spouses in employment contexts.
Pro/Con Analysis
Stronger case for benefits
Potential Benefits (4)
Explicitly affirms and enforces the right of military spouses to equal employment opportunity, strengthening legal recourse against discriminatory hiring, firing, promotion, and compensation practices — a protection previously absent at state law.
Rights & LibertiesPeopleRef: Sec. 1 (findings), Sec. 2 (intent), Sec. 3(1)(h), Sec. 4(18), Sec. 5–7Empowers military spouses to pursue civil remedies (injunctive relief, actual damages, attorney fees) for employment discrimination, improving access to justice and deterring bad-faith practices by employers and unions.
Rights & LibertiesPeopleRef: Sec. 3(2) (civil action provision), Sec. 5–7 (unfair practice provisions)Reduces barriers to employment mobility for military spouses — who often face frequent relocations and career interruptions — by discouraging discriminatory job advertisements and application processes that exclude them.
Business & EmploymentPeopleRef: Sec. 4(18) (definition), Sec. 5(4), Sec. 7 (advertising prohibitions)Supports military readiness and retention by reducing spousal employment instability — a known stressor for service members — thereby contributing to force stability and morale.
Public SafetyPeopleRef: Sec. 1 (findings), Sec. 2 (intent), Sec. 3(1)(h)
Potential Concerns (1)
Increases compliance burden and legal risk for employers, labor unions, and employment agencies by adding a new protected class subject to enforcement under RCW 49.60 — requiring updated hiring protocols, training, recordkeeping, and potential liability for unintentional violations.
Business & EmploymentPeopleRef: Sec. 4(18), Sec. 5(1), Sec. 5(2), Sec. 5(3), Sec. 5(4), Sec. 6(1), Sec. 6(2), Sec. 6(3), Sec. 7
Who Is Most Affected
Military spouses benefit significantly — especially those who relocate frequently due to PCS orders and face gaps in employment history or credential portability. The law provides a clear legal tool to challenge discriminatory hiring or termination based solely on marital status to a service member.
Small and mid-sized employers face increased compliance obligations (e.g., revising job postings, training hiring managers, documenting BFOQs), but the burden is modest relative to larger firms due to the 8+ employee threshold and existing anti-discrimination infrastructure.
Labor unions and employment agencies must revise membership and referral protocols to avoid unintentional discrimination — a modest administrative cost, but one that aligns with existing non-discrimination obligations for other protected classes.
The Washington State Human Rights Commission gains clearer statutory authority and mandate to investigate and adjudicate complaints, potentially increasing caseload but without additional funding specified — a strain on existing resources.
Families with young children or dual-career households where one partner is in the military may experience improved household income stability and reduced employment disruption — though this is an indirect, secondary effect.