2SSB 6045
In CommitteeSenate
Agricultural employees/PERC
Placing agricultural employees under the jurisdiction of the public employment relations commission for the purpose of collective bargaining.
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 extends full collective bargaining rights to agricultural workers in Washington State, placing them under the jurisdiction of the Public Employment Relations Commission (PERC) for organizing, electing representatives, and negotiating contracts. It establishes new rules for union certification, bargaining, and binding arbitration, while accounting for the unique challenges of farm work.
- Extends collective bargaining rights to agricultural employees, including those who pack, process, or distribute agricultural goods.
- Defines 'agricultural employee' broadly (excluding supervisors, managers, and family members) and 'agricultural employer' to include those acting as agents.
- Grants the Public Employment Relations Commission (PERC) authority to oversee representation elections (via cross-check or secret ballot), certify bargaining representatives, and prevent unfair labor practices.
- Requires employers to bargain in good faith after a union is certified; if no agreement is reached within three months, the dispute goes to binding interest arbitration.
- Protects communications between farmworkers and their union representatives, similar to attorney-client or doctor-patient privileges.
- Includes special procedures to address barriers faced by agricultural workers, such as seasonal work, limited English proficiency, and low educational attainment — e.g., expedited processes and culturally appropriate outreach.
Who is affected
- Agricultural employees — Agricultural workers who perform tasks such as farming, canning, processing, packing, or distributing agricultural products, meat, fish, or perishable foods — including those who have stopped working due to employer violations — will gain new rights to organize, choose representatives, and bargain collectively over wages, hours, and working conditions.
- Agricultural employers — Farm owners and operators who employ agricultural workers will be required to engage in good-faith collective bargaining with certified farmworker labor organizations and may be subject to binding arbitration if agreements cannot be reached.
- Farmworker labor organizations — Farmworker labor organizations (e.g., unions or worker groups that are not created or controlled by employers) will gain the legal right to represent agricultural employees, seek certification as exclusive bargaining representatives, and negotiate binding contracts.
- Public Employment Relations Commission (PERC) — The Public Employment Relations Commission (PERC) will gain new authority to oversee agricultural labor relations, including certifying bargaining representatives, mediating disputes, and conducting binding interest arbitration.
Pro/Con Analysis
Stronger case for benefits
Potential Benefits (5)
Mandates good-faith bargaining and provides binding arbitration if no agreement is reached within three months, giving farmworkers real leverage to negotiate wages, hours, and working conditions—especially critical given historical suppression of agricultural unionization and power imbalances.
Rights & LibertiesPeopleRef: Sec. 14(1); Sec. 13(1)The commission provides free arbitration and mediation services, removing a major financial barrier for low-wage workers seeking representation and reducing the risk of employer retaliation during organizing, which is common under current patchwork state/federal enforcement.
Business & EmploymentPeopleRef: Sec. 15(1); Sec. 14(2)Establishes a statutory privilege for communications between union representatives and workers (Sec. 15(1)), similar to attorney-client privilege, which encourages open organizing without fear of employer surveillance or retaliation—addressing a documented barrier in agricultural labor organizing.
Rights & LibertiesPeopleRef: Sec. 17; Sec. 3(9)Allows cross-check (card check) certification for qualified unions and expedited elections, reducing employer interference opportunities during organizing—critical for LEP and transient workers who face intimidation, mobility, and language barriers.
Rights & LibertiesPeopleRef: Sec. 9(1); Sec. 10(1)Broad definition of ‘agricultural employee’—including those in processing, packing, and distribution—extends collective bargaining rights to thousands of non-field workers (e.g., canneries, food hubs), significantly expanding coverage beyond traditional farm labor.
Business & EmploymentPeopleRef: Sec. 2; Sec. 3(1)(a)
Potential Concerns (5)
Mandatory binding interest arbitration after three months of impasse may reduce workers’ leverage to strike over urgent safety concerns (e.g., heat exposure, pesticide handling), as arbitration outcomes are binding and strike rights are preserved only during bargaining, not after a final agreement is imposed.
Public SafetyPeopleRef: Sec. 13(3)Arbitration costs are split by the parties, but employers may pass these expenses on to workers via reduced wages or hiring freezes, especially in small operations with thin margins; the fiscal impact estimate assumes minimal cost to the state, but small farms may face disproportionate administrative burden.
FinancialLean peopleRef: Sec. 13(3); Sec. 14(2)Excluding supervisors and managers from the definition of ‘agricultural employee’ may leave mid-level farm supervisors (e.g., crew leaders, quality control leads) without collective bargaining rights despite having direct contact with workers and some authority, creating a gray zone of unprotected labor.
Rights & LibertiesPeopleRef: Sec. 3(1)(c)(i)The one-year bar on representation challenges during a valid contract may lock in suboptimal working conditions if unforeseen hazards (e.g., new pesticide approvals, extreme heat events) arise, limiting workers’ ability to renegotiate safety terms mid-contract.
Business & EmploymentLean peopleRef: Sec. 11Arbitrators may prioritize employer ability-to-pay over worker health/safety needs (e.g., rejecting higher staffing levels for pesticide application), especially given the statutory factors listed in Sec. 14(4), potentially underestimating long-term public health costs.
Public SafetyLean peopleRef: Sec. 14(4)
Who Is Most Affected
Farmworkers—especially seasonal, LEP, and migrant workers—gain unprecedented legal tools to negotiate wages, safety protocols, and working conditions. The cross-check and free arbitration significantly reduce barriers to organizing, directly improving bargaining power and reducing retaliation risk.
Small and medium-sized farms face new administrative and legal costs (e.g., arbitration, union negotiations), but large agribusinesses may absorb these more easily. The bill’s broad coverage (including packers/processors) may increase compliance costs across the sector, though the fiscal impact estimate suggests minimal state expense.
Farmworker labor organizations gain formal recognition, legal standing, and access to state-facilitated organizing tools (e.g., cross-check, expedited elections). This strengthens their capacity to represent workers and negotiate binding contracts, especially in historically unorganized sectors.
PERC gains new authority and workload but is statutorily prohibited from charging fees. The fiscal impact assumes minimal cost, but scaling up services (e.g., bilingual mediators, culturally competent arbitrators) may require additional state funding, potentially straining current resources.