Skip to main content

HB 2091

Signed

House

Bargaining/employee info.

Requiring public employers under chapter 41.80 RCW to provide employee information to exclusive bargaining representatives.

How does a bill become law?
  1. Introduced: The bill is filed and assigned a number.
  2. Committee: A subject-matter committee holds hearings, takes public testimony, and decides whether to advance the bill.
  3. Floor Vote: The full chamber (House or Senate) debates and votes on the bill.
  4. Opposite Chamber: The bill repeats the committee and floor vote process in the other chamber.
  5. Governor: The Governor reviews the bill and decides whether to sign or veto it.
  6. Signed: The bill has been signed into law.
Introduced: January 11, 2026
Last Action: March 24, 2026
Status: C 195 L 26

AI Analysis

This analysis was generated by AI and may contain errors. It is not legal advice. Always refer to the official bill text for authoritative information.
People & CommunitiesPeople-leaningCorporate & Wealthy Interests

This bill clarifies that Washington’s four public universities must share employee information with the union representing their employees, as required by existing law (RCW 41.56.065). It adds explicit language to include all four universities under the scope of that requirement.

  • Amends RCW 41.80.075 to clarify that RCW 41.56.065 (which requires public employers to provide employee information to exclusive bargaining representatives) applies to all four public universities in Washington.
  • Explicitly includes Western Washington University, Central Washington University, Eastern Washington University, and The Evergreen State College as public employers subject to the information-sharing requirement.
  • Ensures that exclusive bargaining representatives (i.e., the union negotiating on behalf of employees) receive necessary employee information to fulfill their duties in collective bargaining.

Who is affected

  • Public universities in WashingtonPublic employers at Washington's four public universities (Western, Central, Eastern, and Evergreen) must now share certain employee information with the union that represents their employees in collective bargaining.
Model: Intel/Qwen3-Coder-Next-int4-AutoRoundGenerated: Mar 19, 2026 at 7:35 PM

Pro/Con Analysis

Stronger case for benefits

Potential Benefits (3)
  • Ensures that union-represented employees at all four public universities have equal access to the information necessary for effective collective bargaining — including data on wages, benefits, working conditions, and staffing — enabling them to hold employers accountable and negotiate informed contracts.

    Rights & LibertiesPeopleRef: Sec. 1, amending RCW 41.80.075 to clarify RCW 41.56.065 applies to all four public universities
  • Strengthens the ability of public-sector unions to perform their statutory duty of fair representation by ensuring they receive timely, complete employee data — which supports equitable contract enforcement, grievance handling, and workplace advocacy across academic, technical, and service staff.

    Business & EmploymentPeopleRef: Sec. 1, amending RCW 41.80.075 to clarify RCW 41.56.065 applies to all four public universities
  • Improves transparency and accountability in public-sector labor relations, reducing the risk of labor disputes or strikes stemming from perceived or actual information asymmetry between universities and unions — particularly relevant for safety-sensitive roles like campus police, maintenance, and emergency responders.

    Public SafetyPeopleRef: Sec. 1, amending RCW 41.80.075 to clarify RCW 41.56.065 applies to all four public universities
Potential Concerns (1)
  • The bill imposes an administrative burden on university HR and legal staff to comply with mandatory information-sharing obligations, including verifying data accuracy and responding to union requests — though this is a clarification of existing law, not a new requirement, implementation may require procedural adjustments.

    Local GovernmentRef: Sec. 1, amending RCW 41.80.075 to clarify RCW 41.56.065 applies to all four public universities

Who Is Most Affected

Union-represented public university employeesPositive Impact

Union-represented employees at the four public universities — including faculty, academic staff, professional staff, and service employees — gain stronger legal backing to access information needed for effective bargaining and contract oversight, improving their ability to advocate for fair compensation and working conditions.

Public university leadership and HR departmentsMixed Impact

University administrations (HR, legal, and executive leadership) must ensure compliance with the information-sharing mandate, but the requirement merely codifies existing obligations under RCW 41.56.065 — so actual operational impact is minimal, though documentation and audit readiness may increase.

Public-sector unions (e.g., WEA, AFSCME locals)Positive Impact

Unions representing public university employees gain legal clarity and enforceability over information rights, strengthening their capacity to monitor employer compliance, investigate grievances, and negotiate informed contracts — especially important for non-tenure-track and part-time faculty.

Students and families of public university employeesPositive Impact

Students and families may indirectly benefit from more stable labor relations and improved staff morale, but this is a secondary effect; no direct financial or service impact is expected.

State taxpayersPositive Impact

State taxpayers benefit from more transparent labor negotiations and potentially reduced risk of costly labor disputes, though the bill does not alter funding levels or tax policy.

Sponsors

Representative Reed(Democrat)District 36Primary
Representative Parshley(Democrat)District 22Secondary
Representative Zahn(Democrat)District 41Secondary
Representative Ryu(Democrat)District 32Secondary
Representative Stearns(Democrat)District 47Secondary
Representative Leavitt(Democrat)District 28Secondary
Representative Callan(Democrat)District 5Secondary
Representative Ramel(Democrat)District 40Secondary
Representative Doglio(Democrat)District 22Secondary
Representative Simmons(Democrat)District 23Secondary
Representative Scott(Democrat)District 43Secondary
Representative Berry(Democrat)District 36Secondary
Representative Pollet(Democrat)District 46Secondary
Representative Mena(Democrat)District 29Secondary
Representative Obras(Democrat)District 33Secondary
Representative Santos(Democrat)District 37Secondary
Representative Cortes(Democrat)District 38Secondary
Representative Nance(Democrat)District 23Secondary
Representative Street(Democrat)District 37Secondary
Representative Duerr(Democrat)District 1Secondary
Representative Gregerson(Democrat)District 33Secondary
Representative Ormsby(Democrat)District 3Secondary
Representative Goodman(Democrat)District 45Secondary
Representative Reeves(Democrat)District 30Secondary
Representative Farivar(Democrat)District 46Secondary
Representative Macri(Democrat)District 43Secondary
Representative Fosse(Democrat)District 38Secondary
Representative Hill(Democrat)District 3Secondary
Representative Davis(Democrat)District 32Secondary
Representative Salahuddin(Democrat)District 48Secondary