SB 6221
In CommitteeSenate
Wage and salary disclosures
Removing the sunset date for an employer's ability to correct wage and salary disclosures and defining "applicant."
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 makes permanent the ability for employers to fix mistakes in job postings (like missing wage ranges) without facing penalties, as long as they correct them quickly and in good faith. It also expands pay transparency by requiring employers to share wage and benefit details in job listings and for internal promotions, and clarifies who qualifies as a job applicant to prevent frivolous lawsuits.
- Requires employers with 15 or more employees to disclose wage scale or salary range (or fixed wage amount) and a general description of benefits and other compensation in all job postings.
- Defines 'applicant' as someone who applies with a genuine intent to be considered for employment—to prevent lawsuits from people without serious interest in the job.
- Provides a safe harbor for employers: if notified in writing of a disclosure error, they have 5 business days to correct the posting (and notify third-party platforms), and avoid penalties if they act in good faith.
- Removes the July 27, 2027 sunset date for the correction process, making the safe harbor permanent.
- Allows job applicants or employees to file complaints with the Department of Labor & Industries or bring a private civil lawsuit, with statutory damages of $100–$5,000 per violation.
- Requires employers to provide wage/salary ranges to current employees upon request when they are offered an internal transfer or promotion.
Who is affected
- Employers with 15 or more employees — Employers with 15 or more employees must now include wage/salary ranges and benefit descriptions in job postings and provide them upon request for internal transfers or promotions. They gain a 5-day window to correct errors without penalty if they act in good faith and notify third-party job boards.
- Job applicants and employees — Job applicants and employees can request wage/salary information for posted jobs or internal moves, and may file complaints or lawsuits if disclosures are missing or incorrect—though they must first notify the employer and give them a chance to fix the issue before seeking penalties.
- Third-party job posting platforms — Third-party job boards or recruitment platforms may be asked by employers to correct wage or salary information in job postings; they are not directly liable but may be involved in remediation.
- Washington State Department of Labor & Industries — The Washington State Department of Labor & Industries will investigate complaints, facilitate conciliation, issue citations, and collect civil penalties, which go into the state's supplemental pension fund.
Pro/Con Analysis
Stronger case for benefits
Potential Benefits (5)
Mandating wage and benefit disclosures in job postings and internal promotions increases transparency and empowers workers — especially women, people of color, and low-wage workers — to identify and challenge pay disparities, supporting equitable compensation practices.
Rights & LibertiesPeopleRef: Sec. 2(1)(a), (2)The safe harbor provision (5-day correction window) and ‘genuine intent’ applicant definition reduce exposure to opportunistic lawsuits, but the bill’s core transparency requirements still significantly strengthen worker bargaining power and reduce information asymmetry.
Rights & LibertiesPeopleRef: Sec. 2(1)(b), (3)The bill creates a clear, enforceable right to wage information, enabling workers to pursue remedies for noncompliance — and statutory damages provide meaningful deterrence against willful or repeated violations.
Business & EmploymentPeopleRef: Sec. 2(5)(a), (6)(a)By requiring wage transparency in job postings and internal promotions, the bill supports informed career decisions and may reduce wage gaps tied to lack of salary information — particularly beneficial for first-generation job seekers and students entering the workforce.
EducationPeopleRef: Sec. 2(1)(a), (2)The bill’s civil penalties ($500–$1,000) and statutory damages ($100–$5,000) fund the state’s supplemental pension fund, indirectly supporting public retirement systems — though this benefit is modest relative to the overall fiscal impact.
Business & EmploymentLean peopleRef: Sec. 2(5)(a), (6)(a)
Potential Concerns (5)
The bill imposes new administrative and legal compliance burdens on employers with 15+ employees, requiring wage disclosures in job postings and internal promotions, plus response protocols for alleged errors — which may disproportionately burden small-to-mid-sized firms lacking HR departments or legal counsel.
Business & EmploymentPeopleRef: Sec. 2(1)(b), (4)(a), (5)(a), (6)(a)The bill’s definition of ‘applicant’ (requiring ‘genuine intent to be considered for employment’) may deter legitimate job seekers from pursuing claims if they lack formal documentation of intent — potentially chilling legitimate complaints while reducing frivolous ones.
Rights & LibertiesRef: Sec. 2(1)(b), (3)The statutory damages range ($100–$5,000 per violation) and civil penalty ($500–$1,000) create exposure for employers, especially for systemic or repeated omissions — but the safe harbor (5-day correction window) and requirement for prior written notice may limit actual liability for most first-time or minor errors.
Business & EmploymentRef: Sec. 2(5)(a), (6)(a)The bill’s exclusive remedy clause (Sec. 2(7)) bars use of broader unfair labor practice remedies (RCW 49.58.060/070), limiting potential damages but also removing a stronger enforcement tool for workers in cases of wage discrimination.
Business & EmploymentRef: Sec. 2(5)(a), (6)(a)The requirement that job applicants notify employers in writing before seeking penalties may delay or deter enforcement, especially for low-income or less-literate workers unfamiliar with formal complaint procedures.
Business & EmploymentRef: Sec. 2(5)(a), (6)(a)
Who Is Most Affected
Employers with 15+ employees face new disclosure obligations and administrative costs, but gain a safe harbor for good-faith corrections. Small and mid-sized firms may bear disproportionate compliance burden due to limited HR capacity.
Job applicants and employees gain stronger access to wage information and legal recourse, especially those historically excluded from pay negotiations — though the requirement for prior written notice and narrow ‘applicant’ definition may limit some claims.
Third-party platforms are not liable but may be asked to correct postings; minimal direct impact, though increased demand for compliance tools could benefit tech firms offering job-board management software.
L&IND receives expanded enforcement authority and new revenue (penalties), but must allocate staff/time to handle complaints — net effect is neutral-to-positive for the agency’s budget and mission.