WSHRC Digest Archives — LAW OFFICE OF GREGORY A. WILLIAMS

October 16, 2025October 16, 2025

WSHRC: Voluntary Dismissal

Under the Washington State Administrative Code (hereinafter, “WAC”), what are the Washington State Human Rights Commission (hereinafter, “WSHRC”) regulations concerning a party’s voluntary dismissal? Here’s my point of view.

IMPORTANT: All hyperlinks in this article with an asterisk (*) will take the reader away from this website to either our Williams Law Group Blog* or an official governmental website. This article is for informational purposes only and is based upon my point of view. Due to the rapidly changing nature of the law, we make no warranty or guarantee concerning the accuracy or reliability of the content in this article. No content on this site, regardless of date, should ever be used as a substitute for direct legal advice from your attorney. Please review our Disclaimer|Terms of Use|Privacy Policy before proceeding.

Advertisement

Understanding Voluntary Dismissal Under WAC 162-08-268

In Washington State, parties involved in discrimination cases before the Washington State Human Rights Commission (WSHRC) sometimes choose to withdraw their claims or end their participation in an administrative proceeding. WAC 162-08-268*, titled Voluntary Dismissal, outlines how and when a party may do so—and what legal consequences follow.

1. Dismissal Before the Hearing

Before a hearing begins, the Commission or any party supporting the complaint (hereinafter, “complainant”) may voluntarily dismiss their case or specific claims by filing and serving written notice. See WAC 162-08-268(1)*. This step effectively withdraws those issues from consideration. See id. The only exception applies to cases involving alleged unfair practices in real estate transactions, which are governed by separate rules. See id.

2. Dismissal After the Hearing Has Started

Once a hearing has commenced, the Commission or a complainant may move for voluntary dismissal of the complainant’s case or claim(s) therein; thus, a formal motion is required. See WAC 162-08-268(2)*. If the motion is made before the complainant finishes presenting its opening case, the administrative law judge (ALJ) must grant the dismissal as a matter of right. See id. However, if the motion is made after the complainant has rested, dismissal is discretionary—the ALJ may allow it only for “good cause” and may impose appropriate terms or conditions. See id.

Again, the only exception applies to cases involving alleged unfair practices in real estate transactions, which are governed by separate rules. See id.

3. Legal Effect of a Voluntary Dismissal

Importantly, a voluntary dismissal does not decide the case on the merits. See WAC 162-08-268(2)*. It merely ends the administrative proceeding for the dismissed claim or complainant. See id. The dismissed complainant may still pursue their claims in another forum—such as superior court—if permitted by law and filed within the required time limits. See id.

A dismissal of one claim does not affect any remaining claims, and one complainant’s dismissal does not automatically remove other complainants from the case. See id. However, if the Commission takes a voluntary dismissal of the case in support of the complaint the entire case is closed—”unless the complainant has appeared independently under WAC 162-08-261* or another party has intervened on the complainant’s side pursuant to WAC 162-08-288(4)*, in which circumstance the hearing shall proceed with the remaining parties.” Id.

4. iMPLICATIONS

For complainants and counsel, WAC 162-08-268* provides flexibility to reassess strategy mid-process. Whether to dismiss depends on procedural posture, alternative remedies, and timing. Because dismissal is not a ruling on the merits, parties who wish to pursue their claims in court can generally do so—so long as they act promptly and within statutory deadlines.

We invite you to read more of our articles related to this topic:

» WA State Human Rights Commission Complaints

» WA State Human Rights Commission: Functions, Powers, and Duties

» WSHRC: From Complaint to Conclusion

» WSHRC: Organization and Operations

» WSHRC: Relationship of Commission to Complainant

» WSHRC: Withdrawal of Complaint

LEARN MORE

If you would like to learn more, then consider contacting an experienced attorney to discuss your case. This article is not offered as legal advice and will not establish an attorney-client relationship with Law Office of Gregory A. Williams or the author of this article; please refer to our Disclaimer | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy for more information.

–gw

September 11, 2025September 11, 2025

WSHRC: Breach of Conciliated Agreement

Under the Washington State Administrative Code (hereinafter, “WAC”), how may the Washington State Human Rights Commission address the breach of a conciliated agreement? Here’s my point of view.

Advertisement

Breach of Conciliated Agreement Under Washington Law

When discrimination complaints are resolved through Washington’s administrative process, the parties may enter into a conciliated agreement approved by the Washington State Human Rights Commission (WSHRC). These agreements are designed to eliminate unlawful practices under the Washington Law Against Discrimination (WLAD), RCW 49.60*. But what happens if one party fails to honor the terms of that agreement?

WAC 162-08-109* addresses this issue by outlining the tools available to the Commission’s executive director when a conciliation agreement is breached; it states as follows:

WAC 162-08-109
Breach of conciliated agreement.

If an agreement and order for the elimination of an unfair practice made under RCW 49.60.240* is breached, the executive director may take action appropriate in the circumstances, including one or more of the following:

(1) Specific enforcement. Bringing an action in superior or district court for specific enforcement of the agreement, or for damages pursuant to the conciliation agreement;

(2) Setting aside. Recommending to the commissioners that the agreement and order be set aside, in whole or in part, and that the case be returned to the staff for renewed conference, conciliation and persuasion, or to be referred to commission counsel for hearing; or

(3) Report to prosecuting attorney. Reporting the violation to the appropriate prosecuting attorney for prosecution under RCW 49.60.310*.

WAC 162-08-109* (emphasis and paragraph formatting added).

Options Available to the Commission

Thus, if a party violates the agreement, the executive director may choose one or more of the following steps, depending on the circumstances:

1. Specific Enforcement in Court

The Commission may file an action in superior or district court to enforce the agreement. This could mean seeking a court order that compels compliance with the original terms, or pursuing damages that were provided for in the agreement.

2. Setting Aside the Agreement

The executive director may recommend that the Commissioners void the agreement, in whole or in part. If this occurs, the case can be reopened for further conciliation efforts, or it may be referred to the Commission’s legal counsel for a formal hearing.

3. Referral for Prosecution

In certain cases, the violation may be referred to the appropriate prosecuting attorney for enforcement under RCW 49.60.310*, which provides for criminal penalties in connection with violations of the WLAD.

Why This Rule Matters

For individuals, this rule ensures that entering into a conciliation agreement is not the end of the road—there is accountability if the other party fails to follow through. For attorneys, it highlights the importance of drafting and reviewing conciliation agreements carefully, since breach can lead to renewed litigation, enforcement actions, or even criminal referral.

In short, WAC 162-08-109* underscores that compliance with conciliation agreements is not optional. The Human Rights Commission has meaningful enforcement mechanisms to protect both the integrity of the process and the rights of the parties involved.

We invite you to read more of our articles related to this topic:

» Remedies for Breach of Conciliation Agreements*

» WSHRC: Objective of Conciliation

LEARN MORE

–gw

July 4, 2025September 11, 2025

WSHRC: Objective of Conciliation

Under the Washington State Administrative Code (hereinafter, “WAC”), what does the term “conciliation” mean when pursuing complaints through the Washington State Human Rights Commission (hereinafter, “WSHRC”)? Here’s my point of view.

Advertisement

Understanding WAC 162-08-102: The Objective of Conciliation in Washington State Discrimination Law

When an allegation of discrimination arises under Washington’s Law Against Discrimination (WLAD), RCW 49.60*, one of the first tools employed by the Washington State Human Rights Commission (“Commission”) is conciliation. This process—grounded in WAC 162-08-102*—offers both legal professionals and the public insight into how the state prioritizes resolution of disputes in a way that not only halts discriminatory practices but also remedies their lingering effects.

The Regulatory Framework

The relevant Washington State Administrative Code* (“WAC”) states as follows:

WAC 162-08-102
Objective of conciliation.

The commission‘s staff in its endeavors to eliminate an unfair practice by conference, conciliation and persuasion under RCW 49.60.250* shall be guided by the purposes of the law against discrimination and by the policies and objectives of the commission, particularly as expressed in WAC 162-08-061*, 162-08-062* and 162-08-298*. Elimination of an unfair practice includes elimination of the effects of the unfair practice, as well as assurance of the discontinuance of the unfair practice.

WAC 162-08-102* (first & second hyperlinks added). This administrative regulation establishes that conciliation is not simply about stopping an unfair practice; it is about eliminating both the discriminatory conduct and its consequences. The regulation instructs the Commission’s staff to approach conciliation guided by:

• The purposes of the WLAD (ensuring equal opportunity and freedom from discrimination).

• The policies and objectives of the Commission, especially those articulated in related provisions:

– WAC 162-08-061* (Relationship of commission to complainant),

– WAC 162-08-062* (Concurrent remedies–Other remedies), and

– WAC 162-08-298* (Remedies).

By linking WAC 162-08-102* to these provisions, the regulation underscores that conciliation is not a mere formality—it is a central mechanism for enforcing civil rights protections in Washington.

What Conciliation Means in Practice

For attorneys representing clients, understanding the scope of conciliation is critical. The process typically involves:

1. Conference and Persuasion – Informal discussions between the Commission, complainant, and respondent to explore resolution.

2. Conciliation Agreements – Negotiated commitments by respondents to both cease the discriminatory conduct and remedy its effects (for example, reinstatement, back pay, or policy changes).

3. Forward-Looking Protections – Ensuring that the respondent adopts practices to prevent recurrence, often through training, monitoring, or systemic reforms.

Unlike private settlement agreements, Commission conciliation carries a public interest dimension: it is designed not just to resolve disputes between parties, but to advance the state’s broader mandate of eradicating discrimination.

Why the Distinction Matters

The language of WAC 162-08-102* makes clear that a successful conciliation must address two distinct goals:

• Stopping the discriminatory practice itself.

• Eliminating its ripple effects. For example, in an employment discrimination case, this could include back wages, seniority adjustments, or workplace reforms that restore the complainant’s position and opportunities.

For practitioners, this means conciliation is not just about negotiating a quick settlement—it is about ensuring structural and remedial relief consistent with the Commission’s objectives.

Implications for Legal Professionals and the Public

For Attorneys: Awareness of conciliation’s dual focus equips counsel to advise clients realistically about potential remedies and obligations. Respondents must be prepared to do more than simply “stop” a practice—they must also correct its consequences.

For the Public: The Commission’s emphasis on conciliation reflects a commitment to fairness. Individuals subjected to discrimination should know that the process aims not only to halt misconduct but also to restore their rights and opportunities.

Conclusion

WAC 162-08-102 reinforces that conciliation is more than compromise—it is corrective justice. By requiring elimination of both the practice and its effects, Washington’s regulatory framework ensures that conciliation serves as a meaningful tool in advancing the WLAD’s mission: a state free from discrimination.

We invite you to read more of our articles related to this topic:

» Remedies for Breach of Conciliation Agreements*

» The Intersection of WSHRC and EEOC*

» WA State Human Rights Commission Complaints

» WA State Human Rights Commission: Damages for Humiliation and Suffering*

» WA State Human Rights Commission: Functions, Powers, and Duties

» WSHRC: Breach of Conciliated Agreement

» WSHRC: From Complaint to Conclusion

» WSHRC: Organization and Operations

» WSHRC: Procedure When None Is Specified

» WSHRC: Relationship of Commission to Complainant

» WSHRC: Withdrawal of Complaint

LEARN MORE

–gw

June 15, 2025August 7, 2025

WSHRC: Investigation

Under the Washington State Administrative Code (hereinafter, “WAC”), what is the Washington State Human Rights Commission (hereinafter, “WSHRC”) regulation concerning investigation? Here’s my point of view.

Advertisement

Understanding WAC 162-08-094: A Simple Explanation of the Investigation Process for Discrimination Complaints in Washington State

If you’ve ever filed or responded to a WSHRC discrimination complaint, it’s helpful to understand how that agency handles investigations. Washington Administrative Code (WAC) 162-08-094 outlines key steps in this process. The relevant provision states as follows:

WAC 162-08-094
Investigation.

(1) Copy of complaint to respondent. Except as may be provided for complaints alleging an unfair practice in a real estate transaction, within a reasonably prompt time after a complaint is filed the staff shall furnish a copy of the complaint to the respondent and shall afford the respondent an opportunity to reply in writing. No error or omission in carrying out this step shall affect the validity of the complaint or prevent further processing of it.

(2) Preliminary evaluation of complaint. Whenever the allegations of the complaint, if true, show no basis for commission action, then the staff without further investigation may enter a finding of no reasonable cause or write a recommendation for a finding of no jurisdiction, or other appropriate disposition.

(3) Scope of investigation. The investigation is limited to ascertaining the facts concerning the unfair practice(s) alleged in the complaint. RCW 49.60.240.

WAC 162-08-094*. Here’s a plain-language overview to help you understand what this rule means.

Step 1: Notifying the Respondent

Once a discrimination complaint is filed—except in cases involving real estate—the person or organization being accused (called the respondent) will receive a copy of the complaint. The Commission will also give them a chance to respond in writing. Even if there’s a delay or error in this notification, it doesn’t invalidate the complaint or stop the investigation from moving forward.

Step 2: Early Review of the Complaint

Before launching a full investigation, the Commission takes a preliminary look at the complaint. If, even assuming the allegations are true, there’s no legal basis for the Commission to act, they may decide to:

• Dismiss the complaint (finding “no reasonable cause”),

• Recommend that the Commission doesn’t have jurisdiction (authority),

• Or suggest another appropriate outcome.

This step helps ensure that only valid complaints move forward.

Step 3: Focused Fact-Finding

If the complaint proceeds, the investigation will focus solely on the facts related to the specific unfair practice alleged. This means investigators won’t go on a broad search—they’ll stick to what’s directly relevant to the complaint, as required by state law (RCW 49.60.240*).

In Summary

This rule outlines how the Washington State Human Rights Commission manages the early stages of a discrimination complaint. It ensures that both parties are informed and treated fairly, starting with notification, followed by a careful review to determine if the complaint has legal grounds, and ending with a fact-based investigation focused on the specific issues raised. Understanding this process helps everyone involved know their rights and what steps may come next.

We invite you to read more of our articles related to this topic:

» WA State Human Rights Commission Complaints

» WA State Human Rights Commission: Functions, Powers, and Duties

» WSHRC: From Complaint to Conclusion

» WSHRC: Organization and Operations

» WSHRC: Procedure When None Is Specified

» WSHRC: Relationship of Commission to Complainant

» WSHRC: Withdrawal of Complaint

LEARN MORE

–gw

April 17, 2025April 21, 2025

WSHRC: Sanctions

Under the Washington State Administrative Code (hereinafter, “WAC”), what are the Washington State Human Rights Commission (hereinafter, “WSHRC”) regulations concerning sanctions? Here’s my point of view.

Advertisement

WSHRC: PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE: SANCTIONS

In administrative law, procedural compliance is essential to ensuring fairness and efficiency. Washington State’s Administrative Code, specifically WAC 162-08-015*, outlines the authority of administrative law judges and the Washington State Human Rights Commission to impose sanctions for misconduct or procedural abuse during administrative proceedings. This provision plays a critical role in maintaining the integrity of administrative processes, especially in cases related to discrimination and civil rights enforcement. The relevant provision states as follows:

WAC 162-08-015
Sanctions.

(1) Administrative hearings. In a case which has been noted for hearing the administrative law judge, on his or her own initiative or on motion of a party, may order a party or counsel who uses these rules for the purpose of delay, or who fails to comply with these rules or other procedures previously ordered, to satisfy terms or pay compensatory damages including attorney’s fees to any other person who has been harmed by the delay or the failure to comply. The administrative law judge may condition the right of a party to take specific action or raise specific defenses on satisfaction of the terms of the order or payment of the damages and attorney’s fees. The administrative law judge may condition the right of a counsel to participate further in the case upon satisfaction of the terms of an order or payment of the damages and attorney’s fees. The administrative law judge shall incorporate in his or her final order any sanctions order which has not been complied with, so that the sanctions order may be enforced as provided in RCW 49.60.260* and 49.60.270* and appealed from as provided in RCW 34.05.514*.

(2) Other proceedings. In a proceeding not covered by subsection (1) of this section, the chairperson of the commission may order a person or counsel who uses these rules for the purpose of delay, or who fails to comply with these rules or other procedures previously ordered, to satisfy terms, and the chairperson may condition further participation in a proceeding on compliance with these rules or orders imposing terms, but the chairperson of the commission shall not impose sanctions in the form of payment of damages or attorney’s fees.

WAC 162-08-015*.

OVERVIEW OF WAC 162-08-015

WAC 162-08-015* sets forth two primary categories where sanctions may be imposed: administrative hearings and other commission proceedings. Each category has distinct rules and enforcement mechanisms designed to deter misuse of the process and ensure accountability.

1. Sanctions in Administrative Hearings

When a case proceeds to a formal hearing, the administrative law judge (ALJ) is empowered to issue sanctions against parties or their legal representatives. These sanctions may arise under the following circumstances:

a. Using procedural rules for delay: If a party or attorney exploits the rules solely to stall the process.

b. Non-compliance: If there is a failure to follow procedural requirements or prior orders from the ALJ.

In such cases, the ALJ may require the offending party or attorney to:

• Satisfy certain terms (such as taking remedial actions),

• Pay compensatory damages,

• Reimburse attorney’s fees incurred by the opposing party.

Importantly, the ALJ may condition further participation in the hearing on compliance with these sanctions. This includes limiting the party’s ability to take actions or raise defenses until the sanctions are fulfilled.

Any unresolved sanctions at the time of the final ruling are incorporated into the final order, making them enforceable under RCW 49.60.260* and RCW 49.60.270*, and subject to appeal as described in RCW 34.05.514*.

2. Sanctions in Other Proceedings

Outside of formal hearings—such as during investigations or informal commission processes—the Chairperson of the Washington State Human Rights Commission holds similar, though more limited, authority.

In these contexts, if a person or attorney causes delay or violates procedural rules or orders, the Chairperson can:

• Impose conditions for continued participation in the proceeding,

• Order compliance with previously established rules or directives.

However, unlike in administrative hearings, the Chairperson cannot order the payment of damages or attorney’s fees in these situations.

IMPORTANCE AND IMPACT

The inclusion of sanctions in WAC 162-08-015 reinforces a critical principle in administrative justice: that efficiency and fairness must be preserved throughout the legal process. By allowing for compensatory remedies in formal settings and enforcing procedural discipline in informal ones, the regulation discourages frivolous tactics and promotes respectful engagement.

These provisions also help protect claimants and respondents alike from unnecessary delays and expenses, especially in matters involving civil rights and discrimination claims—areas where timely resolution is often essential to justice.

FINAL THOUGHTS

WAC 162-08-015* is a valuable tool in Washington State’s administrative framework, promoting accountability among participants in legal proceedings under the Human Rights Commission’s jurisdiction. Whether you are a party to a case or a legal representative, understanding this regulation is essential for navigating administrative hearings with integrity and professionalism.

If you are involved in a case before the Washington State Human Rights Commission, it’s wise to consult with an attorney who understands the nuances of administrative law and can help ensure compliance with all applicable rules—including WAC 162-08-015*.

We invite you to read more of our articles related to this topic:

» WA State Human Rights Commission Complaints

» WA State Human Rights Commission: Functions, Powers, and Duties

» WSHRC: From Complaint to Conclusion

LEARN MORE

-gw

March 13, 2025March 20, 2025

WSHRC: Organization and Operations

Under the Washington State Administrative Code (hereinafter, “WAC”), what are the Washington State Human Rights Commission (hereinafter, “WSHRC”) regulations concerning its organization and operations? Here’s my point of view.

Advertisement

WSHRC: ORGANIZATION AND OPERATIONS

“Regulations of executive branch agencies are issued by authority of statutes. Like legislation and the Constitution, regulations are a source of primary law in Washington State.” Official Washington State Legislature Website, https://app.leg.wa.gov/WAC/default.aspx*, (last visited 3/13/25). The WSHRC regulations concerning its organization and operations are categorized as follows: (1) Membership; (2) Meetings; (3) Quorum; (4) Executive Director; (5) Authority and Duty; (6) Offices; (7) Where to obtain information; and (8) Where to make submissions or requests. See WAC 162-04-020*.

(1) Membership

“The Washington state human rights commission consists of five members, one of whom is designated as chairperson, appointed by the governor for staggered five-year terms.” WAC 162-04-020(1)*.

(2) Meetings

“The commission holds regular meetings commencing at 9:30 a.m. on the fourth Thursday of each month, except for November and December, at various places throughout the state. No regular meeting is held in August. The place and dates of the meetings can be learned by writing or calling the commission clerk at the Olympia office at (360) 753-6770.” WAC 162-04-020(2)*.

(3) Quorum

“Three members constitute a quorum. The affirmative vote of a majority of those present is action of the commission when there is a quorum at a meeting.” WAC 162-04-020(3)*.

(4) Executive director

“The executive director is the commission’s chief executive. [This individual] … is responsible for carrying out the commission’s programs and directing the commission’s staff.” WAC 162-04-020(4)*.

(5) Authority and duty

“It is the commission’s duty to administer the law against discrimination, chapter 49.60* RCW, which has as its purpose the elimination and prevention of discrimination because of race, creed, color, national origin, sex, marital status, age or handicap [sic]. The commission has the authority and duty to, among other things:

(a) Study and report on all things having an impact on human rights;

(b) Make recommendations to the governor, legislature, and agencies of state and local government;

(c) Create advisory agencies and conciliation councils;

(d) In the areas of employment, public accommodations, real property transactions, credit transactions and insurance transactions, initiate, receive and process complaints of unfair practices, hold hearings, issue orders, and seek enforcement of the orders in court.

WAC 162-04-020(5)* (emphasis and paragraph formatting added).

(6) Offices

“The commission’s principal office is 402 Evergreen Plaza Building, Seventh and Capitol Way, Olympia, Washington 98504-3341. Branch offices are maintained at the following locations:

Seattle:
1516 Second Avenue
Suite 400
Seattle, Washington 98101

Spokane:
W. 905 Riverside Ave.
Suite 416
Spokane, Washington 99201-1099

Tacoma:
Suite 110 Hess Building
901 Tacoma Avenue South
Tacoma, Washington 98402-2101

Yakima:
Washington Mutual Bldg.
Suite 441
32 No. Third St.
Yakima, Washington 98901-2730

WAC 162-04-020(6)* (emphasis and paragraph formatting added).

(7) Where to obtain information

“Information on the application of the law against discrimination and related material is available at all offices of the commission. Information that branch offices are not able to supply may be obtained from the clerk at the Olympia office.” WAC 162-04-020(7)*.

(8) Where to make submissions or requests

“In circumstances where no special provision is made by rule in this Title 162* WAC, submissions or requests to the commission may be directed to the executive director at either the Olympia or Seattle office.” WAC 162-04-020(8)*.

We invite you to read more of our articles related to this topic:

» WA State Human Rights Commission Complaints

» WA State Human Rights Commission: Functions, Powers, and Duties

» WSHRC: From Complaint to Conclusion

LEARN MORE

-gw

February 14, 2025July 24, 2025

WSHRC: Concurrent Remedies

Under the Washington State Administrative Code (hereinafter, “WAC”), what are the Washington State Human Rights Commission (hereinafter, “WSHRC”) regulations concerning both concurrent and other remedies? Here’s my point of view.

Advertisement

I. Understanding WAC 162-08-062: Concurrent Remedies Under Washington’s Law Against Discrimination

Washington State’s commitment to eradicating discrimination is firmly established under the Washington Law Against Discrimination (WLAD), codified in Chapter 49.60* RCW. A critical regulation within this framework is WAC 162-08-062*, which clarifies how individuals may pursue remedies when facing unlawful discrimination, particularly when multiple legal avenues are available.

This regulation addresses the doctrine of concurrent remedies, ensuring complainants understand how administrative, civil, and criminal processes intersect under state law. It states as follows:

WAC 162-08-062
Concurrent remedies—Other remedies.

Except as otherwise provided by RCW 49.60.340*, the law against discrimination preserves the right of a complainant or aggrieved person to simultaneously pursue other available civil or criminal remedies for an alleged violation of the law in addition to, or in lieu of, filing an administrative complaint of discrimination with the commission, with the following limitations:

(1) Abeyance—Real estate transactions. A complaint of an unfair practice in a real estate transaction filed concurrently with the commission and another federal, state or local instrumentality with whom the commission has entered into a cooperative agreement under the terms of RCW 49.60.226* or other provision of law will be held in abeyance during the pendency of the other proceeding unless the other proceeding has been deferred pending state action under the terms of the cooperative agreement.

(2) Abeyance—General rule. A complaint of an unfair practice other than in real estate transactions will be held in abeyance during the pendency of a case in federal or state court litigating the same claim, whether under the law against discrimination or a similar law, unless the executive director or the commissioners direct that the complaint continue to be processed. A complaint of an unfair practice other than in real estate transactions will not be held in abeyance during pendency of a federal, state, or local administrative proceeding, unless the executive director or commissioners determine that it should be held in abeyance.

(3) No complainant or aggrieved person may secure relief from more than one governmental agency, instrumentality or tribunal for the same harm or injury.

(4) Where the complainant or aggrieved person elects to pursue simultaneous claims in more than one forum, the factual and legal determinations issued by the first tribunal to rule on the claims may, in some circumstances, be binding on all or portions of the claims pending before other tribunals.

WAC 162-08-062* (emphasis added). Here’s a breakdown of the key provisions:

II. Breakdown of Key Provisions — WAC 162-08-062

1. Right to Pursue Other Remedies

The core principle of WAC 162-08-062* is that individuals alleging discrimination are not limited to filing a complaint with the WSHRC. Instead, they retain the right to simultaneously pursue:

• Civil litigation, such as filing a lawsuit in state or federal court.

• Criminal complaints, if applicable.

• Other administrative proceedings, including those conducted by local human rights agencies or federal bodies like the EEOC.

This right is preserved except where otherwise limited by RCW 49.60.340*, which pertains to the exclusivity of certain remedies under collective bargaining agreements.

2. Real Estate Complaints and Cooperative Agreements

Under subsection (1), discrimination complaints involving real estate transactions are subject to special treatment. If a complainant files a real estate discrimination complaint both with the WSHRC and another agency (e.g., HUD) with whom the WSHRC has a cooperative agreement, the state complaint will generally be held in abeyance—or temporarily paused—while the other agency investigates.

This provision avoids duplicative investigations and streamlines enforcement when multiple agencies have jurisdiction. However, if the cooperating agency defers to the state under the terms of their agreement, the WSHRC will proceed with the case.

3. General Rule for Other Claims

In non-real estate discrimination cases, if the same claim is being actively litigated in a state or federal court, the WSHRC will typically pause its investigation unless the Executive Director or Commission decides it should continue.

However, if the matter is pending in another administrative forum, the WSHRC will generally continue its investigation unless the leadership determines a pause is appropriate. This flexibility helps prevent inconsistent findings and conserves public resources.

4. Single Recovery Rule

Per subsection (3), a complainant cannot obtain relief from multiple government entities for the same harm or injury. This prevents double recovery—a legal concept that bars individuals from receiving overlapping damages from different sources for a single injury.

For example, a successful damages award from a federal court bars a separate damages award for the same incident from the WSHRC or a local human rights agency.

5. Binding Effect of First Decision

Finally, subsection (4) warns complainants of the potential legal implications of pursuing claims in multiple forums. When different tribunals review the same set of facts and legal issues, the first body to issue a ruling may have a binding effect on subsequent proceedings.

This could mean that factual or legal determinations made in one forum may limit or preclude arguments in another—particularly under the doctrines of res judicata or collateral estoppel.

III. Conclusion

WAC 162-08-062* reflects Washington State’s effort to offer flexibility to discrimination complainants while maintaining the integrity and efficiency of its administrative and judicial systems. By allowing—but carefully regulating—concurrent remedies, the law ensures access to justice without unnecessary duplication or conflicting outcomes. Anyone considering multiple legal paths should do so with a full understanding of both their rights and responsibilities under the law.

We invite you to read more of our articles related to this topic:

» WA State Human Rights Commission Complaints

» WA State Human Rights Commission: Functions, Powers, and Duties

» WSHRC: From Complaint to Conclusion

» WSHRC: Organization and Operations

» WSHRC: Procedure When None Is Specified

» WSHRC: Relationship of Commission to Complainant

» WSHRC: Withdrawal of Complaint

LEARN MORE

–gw

January 17, 2025August 21, 2025

WSHRC: Protective Orders

Under the Washington State Administrative Code (hereinafter, “WAC”), what is the Washington State Human Rights Commission (hereinafter, “WSHRC”) regulation concerning protective orders? Here’s my point of view.

Advertisement

Understanding Protective Orders Under Washington’s Anti-Discrimination Law: A Closer Look at WAC 162-08-096

When people hear the term protective order, they often think of restraining orders in domestic violence cases. But in Washington State’s legal system, protective orders can also play a vital role in protecting sensitive information during legal investigations—especially in cases handled by the Washington State Human Rights Commission (WSHRC).

One such rule is WAC 162-08-096*, a regulation that gives the WSHRC the authority to protect individuals and businesses from unnecessary harm during the information-gathering process in discrimination investigations. This blog post breaks down what this rule means in plain English, why it matters, and how it may affect you if you’re involved in one of these proceedings.

What Is WAC 162-08-096?

WAC 162-08-096* is part of Washington’s administrative rules that guide how the WSHRC handles discrimination complaints. Specifically, this rule allows the chairperson of the Commission to issue protective orders—official directives that limit how certain information is shared or used during an investigation. The relevant law states as follows:

WAC 162-08-096
Protective orders.

(1) Upon motion by a party or by the person from whom information is sought pursuant to WAC 162-08-09501*, and for good cause shown, the chairperson of the commission may make any order which justice requires to protect a party or person from annoyance, embarrassment, oppression, or undue burden or expense caused by revealing private information, or trade secrets, including all orders a court can make under CR 26(c).

(2) If a motion for a protective order is denied in whole or in part, the chairperson may, on such terms and conditions as are just, order that any party or person provide or permit information to be revealed subject to the provisions of WAC 162-08-097*.

(3) The chairperson may, on such terms and conditions as are just, grant a protective order sealing the produced documents pursuant to WAC 162-04-035*.

WAC 162-08-096*.

Protective orders are designed to prevent:

• Annoyance

• Embarrassment

• Oppression

• Undue burden or expense

These concerns may arise, for example, when sensitive personal information or trade secrets are requested by the Commission as part of a discrimination investigation.

When Can a Protective Order Be Requested?

A protective order under WAC 162-08-096* can be requested in two main ways:

1. By a party to the case – This could be the person who filed the discrimination complaint or the person or entity being accused.

2. By someone who’s being asked to provide information – Even if they’re not directly involved in the case.

The person requesting the order must show “good cause,” meaning a valid reason supported by facts. The chairperson then decides whether justice requires limiting how the information is disclosed.

What Can the Chairperson Do?

If the chairperson finds good cause, they can issue a protective order similar to those a judge can issue under civil court rules (specifically Civil Rule 26(c)*). These orders might:

• Restrict who can see the information.

• Limit how the information can be used.

• Require documents to be sealed (kept confidential).

• Prevent certain types of questions in a deposition.

• Allow disclosure only under specific conditions (e.g., only to attorneys).

The goal is to balance the need for a full investigation with the right to privacy or protection of confidential information.

What Happens If the Request Is Denied?

If the request for a protective order is denied in whole or in part, the chairperson may still set fair terms and conditions for how the information must be disclosed. In such cases, the party or person would still need to provide the requested information—but possibly under safeguards outlined in WAC 162-08-097*, which deals with confidentiality and limits on how that information is used.

Sealing Documents

The chairperson may also issue an order to seal documents, meaning they become part of the official file but are not available to the public. This is governed by a related rule: WAC 162-04-035*, which allows for keeping sensitive materials out of the public record if justice so requires.

Why This Matters

If you’re involved in a WSHRC investigation—whether you’re making a discrimination complaint, responding to one, or simply being asked to provide information—you have the right to ask for protection if the request invades your privacy or risks exposing confidential business information.

WAC 162-08-096* ensures that the fact-finding process doesn’t come at an unreasonable personal or professional cost. It’s one of the many ways Washington law aims to protect people from both discrimination and unnecessary harm during the process of addressing it.

Key Takeaway

WAC 162-08-096* gives individuals and businesses a tool to protect themselves from unfair exposure during discrimination investigations. If you’re facing a request for sensitive information in one of these cases, you may be able to ask for a protective order. Consulting an attorney familiar with Washington’s anti-discrimination laws can help you navigate this process and assert your rights effectively.

We invite you to read more of our articles related to this topic:

» WA State Human Rights Commission Complaints

» WA State Human Rights Commission: Functions, Powers, and Duties

» WSHRC: From Complaint to Conclusion

» WSHRC: Organization and Operations

» WSHRC: Procedure When None Is Specified

» WSHRC: Relationship of Commission to Complainant

» WSHRC: Withdrawal of Complaint

LEARN MORE

–gw

October 21, 2024April 21, 2025

WSHRC: Relationship of Commission to Complainant

Under the Washington State Administrative Code (hereinafter, “WAC”), what are the Washington State Human Rights Commission (hereinafter, “WSHRC”) regulations concerning the relationship of Commission to complainant? Here’s my point of view.

Advertisement

WSHRC: PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE: RELATIONSHIP OF COMMISSION TO COMPLAINANT

Washington Administrative Code (WAC) 162-08-061* outlines the Washington State Human Rights Commission’s neutral and public-focused role in investigating discrimination complaints. The Commission is tasked with determining whether there is “reasonable cause” to believe an unfair practice has occurred under Washington’s Law Against Discrimination (RCW 49.60*), without favoring either party. Its ultimate goal is to eliminate and prevent discrimination—not merely to secure individual remedies for complainants.

While the Commission often seeks to restore a complainant to their prior position, it prioritizes broader systemic remedies when necessary. Notably, the Commission operates independently of a complainant’s personal interests; it may pursue different outcomes if doing so better serves the public interest. Complainants focused solely on personal relief are encouraged to consider pursuing their claims in court, as the law preserves their right to do so.

THE BLACK LETTER LAW: WAC 162-08-061

The relevant WAC provision states as follows:

WAC 162-08-061
Relationship of commission to complainant.

(1) Commission’s role and objectives. In investigating cases the commission seeks to ascertain the facts in order to make an impartial finding of “reasonable cause” or “no reasonable cause.” It has no predisposition in favor of either complainants or respondents. If “reasonable cause” is found, then the objective of the commission is to obtain the remedy that will best eliminate the unfair practices and prevent their recurrence. The judgment as to what will eliminate an unfair practice for purposes of reaching an agreement under RCW 49.60.240* is made initially by the executive director, or other staff persons pursuant to the executive director’s direction, and ultimately by the commissioners. The judgment as to what will eliminate an unfair practice and carry out the purposes of the human rights law after hearing under RCW 49.60.250* is made by the administrative law judge. The commission was not designed to compete with the courts as a forum for the vindication of private rights; its task is to work for the public good of eliminating and preventing discrimination. Although the facts and circumstances giving rise to a claim of discrimination may sometimes give rise to other claims based upon other statutes or principles of common law, the commission will investigate only claims of unfair practices arising under chapter 49.60* RCW et seq. The law against discrimination expressly preserves the right of complainants and/or aggrieved parties to seek other civil or criminal remedies in court or other available forums, either simultaneously with a complaint filed with the commission or in lieu of such a complaint, subject to any limitations or conditions provided in WAC 162-08-062* or elsewhere.

(2) Independence from complainant. The commission’s primary objective is to eliminate and prevent discrimination, which may or may not be consistent with the goals or objectives of a particular complainant or aggrieved person. In negotiating a settlement or seeking an order, the commission generally works for provisions restoring the complainant as nearly as possible to the position he or she would be in if he or she had not been discriminated against, because this is usually an effective way to eliminate the discrimination and prevent its recurrence. But where, in the commission’s judgment, provisions fully restoring the complainant (for instance, reinstatement to the job with back pay) would be inadequate to eliminate a pattern of discrimination, the commission will hold out for additional terms, even though the respondent is willing to settle on the basis of full relief for the complainant only. Except as may be otherwise provided for complaints alleging unfair practices in real estate transactions, the commission may determine that discrimination will be effectively eliminated and prevented by an order that does not afford the complainant every item of relief to which he or she may have a legal claim. The commission assumes that persons who complain to it are as interested in the elimination and prevention of discrimination in general as in their individual cases. If a person is interested only in relief for himself or herself, he or she is advised to seek his or her remedy directly in court pursuant to RCW 49.60.020*, 49.60.030* and/or WAC 162-08-062*.

WAC 162-08-061* (emphasis added).

We invite you to read more of our articles related to this topic:

» WA State Human Rights Commission Complaints

» WA State Human Rights Commission: Functions, Powers, and Duties

» WSHRC: From Complaint to Conclusion

LEARN MORE

-gw

August 22, 2024April 29, 2025

Discrimination Because of Marital Status (WSHRC)

Under the Washington State Human Rights Commission regulations, what is the rule concerning discrimination because of marital status? Here’s my point of view.

Advertisement

THE WASHINGTON STATE HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION

Created by the Washington State Legislature in 1949, the Washington State Human Rights Commission (WSHRC) is a key state agency tasked with both administering and enforcing the Washington Law Against Discrimination (WLAD). See Washington State Human Rights Commission Website, https://www.hum.wa.gov/about-us* (last visited August 21, 2024). Its “mission … is to eliminate and prevent discrimination in Washington State through the fair application of the law, efficient use of resources, and establishment of productive partnerships in the community.” Id.

DISCRIMINATION BECAUSE OF MARITAL STATUS

WSHRC regulations are contained under Title 162 WAC* (WAC is the acronym for Washington Administrative Code). The general rule concerning discrimination because of marital status is found therein, as follows:

WAC 162-16-250
Discrimination because of marital status.

(1) General rule. It is an unfair practice to discriminate against an employee or job applicant because of marital status. Examples of unfair practices include, but are not limited to:

(a) Refusing to hire a single or divorced applicant because of a presumption that “married persons are more stable.”

(b) Refusing to promote a married employee because of a presumption that he or she “will be less willing to work late and travel.”

WAC 162-16-250(1)* (hyperlinks and paragraph formatting added).

EXCEPTIONS TO THE RULE

There are exceptions to the general rule, as follows:

WAC 162-16-250
Discrimination because of marital status.

…

(2) Exceptions to the rule. There are narrow exceptions to the rule that an employer, employment agency, labor union, or other person may not discriminate on the basis of marital status:

(a) If a bona fide occupational qualification applies (please see WAC 162-16-240*).

(b) If an employer is enforcing a documented conflict of interest policy limiting employment opportunities on the basis of marital status:

(i) Where one spouse would have the authority or practical power to supervise, appoint, remove, or discipline the other;

(ii) Where one spouse would be responsible for auditing the work of the other;

(iii) Where other circumstances exist which would place the spouses in a situation of actual or reasonably foreseeable conflict between the employer’s interest and their own; or

(iv) Where, in order to avoid the reality or appearance of improper influence or favor, or to protect its confidentiality, the employer must limit the employment of close relatives of policy level officers of customers, competitors, regulatory agencies, or others with whom the employer deals.

WAC 162-16-250(2)* (hyperlinks and paragraph formatting added).

WLAD REMEDIES

Victims of discrimination in violation of the WLAD may seek generous remedies. “Any person deeming himself or herself injured by any act in violation of … [the WLAD] shall have a civil action in a court of competent jurisdiction to enjoin further violations, or to recover the actual damages sustained by the person, or both, together with the cost of suit including reasonable attorneys’ fees or any other appropriate remedy authorized by this chapter* or the United States Civil Rights Act of 1964 as amended, or the Federal Fair Housing Amendments Act of 1988 (42 U.S.C. Sec. 3601* et seq.).” RCW 49.60.030(2)*.

READ OUR RELATED ARTICLES

» Definition of Commission (WLAD)

» Definition of Marital Status (WLAD)

» Remedies for Breach of Conciliation Agreements*

» The Intersection of WSHRC and EEOC*

» The Washington State Human Rights Commission*

» WA State Human Rights Commission Complaints

» WA State Human Rights Commission: Functions, Powers, Duties

» WA State Human Rights Commission: Damages for Humiliation & Suffering*

LEARN MORE

If you would like to learn more, then consider contacting an experienced attorney to discuss your case. This article is not offered as legal advice and will not establish an attorney-client relationship with Law Office of Gregory A. Williams, or the author of this article; please refer to our Disclaimer | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy for more information.

July 5, 2024April 21, 2025

WSHRC: Definitions

Under the Washington State Administrative Code (hereinafter, “WAC”), what are the Washington State Human Rights Commission (hereinafter, “WSHRC”) regulations concerning general-provisions definitions? Here’s my point of view.

Advertisement

WSHRC: GENERAL PROVISIONS: DEFINITIONS

The WSHRC General Provisions definitions fall under WAC 162-04-010. Definitions aren’t just technicalities—they shape how the Washington State Human Rights Commission applies the law. A clear, shared understanding of terms like “complaint,” “respondent,” or “discrimination” ensures consistency, fairness, and transparency in legal proceedings. Without these definitions, the intent of the law could be misunderstood, misapplied, or challenged. In short, definitions provide the legal “language map” that keeps everything on course.

Accordingly, WAC 162-04-010 defines the following terms, as follows:

In general, words are used with this title* in the same meaning as they are used in the law against discrimination, chapter 49.60* RCW. See, in particular, RCW 49.60.040*. The following words are used with the meaning given, unless the context clearly indicates another meaning.

“Administrative Procedure Act” means chapter 34.05* RCW.

“Age” means between forty and seventy years of age.

“Chairperson” means the chairperson of the commission. The word “chairperson” is used in the place of “chairman” where that word appears in the law against discrimination. The chairperson of the commission is the member of the commission designated as chairman by the governor under RCW 49.60.050*.

“Civil rule” or “CR” means the superior court civil rules as now or hereafter amended.

“Clerk” means the clerk of the commission appointed pursuant to WAC 162-04-026*.

“Commission” means the Washington state human rights commission.

“Complainant” means a person who has filed a complaint under authority of RCW 49.60.230*.

“Complaint” means a formal complaint filed with the commission pursuant to RCW 49.60.230* and these rules.

“Executive director” means the executive director of the commission appointed pursuant to RCW 49.60.120(1)*.

“Handicap” [sic] is short for the phrase “the presence of any sensory, mental, or physical handicap [sic]” used in the law against discrimination, and means the full phrase. See WAC 162-22-040*.

“Law against discrimination” means chapter 49.60* RCW.

“Marital status” refers to the legal status of being married, single, divorced, or widowed.

“Member” means a member of the commission, except where the context indicates another meaning is intended.

“Protected class” means the persons who are members of (or who are treated as members of) one of the groups against whom discrimination is declared to be an unfair practice by the law against discrimination. Protected classes include persons between the ages of forty and seventy, persons of any race, creed, color, national origin, sex, or marital status, and persons who are handicapped [sic].

“Respondent” means one against whom a complaint has been filed under authority of RCW 49.60.230*.

WAC 162-04-010* (emphasis added).

We invite you to read more of our articles related to this topic:

» WA State Human Rights Commission Complaints

» WA State Human Rights Commission: Functions, Powers, and Duties

» WSHRC: From Complaint to Conclusion

LEARN MORE

-gw

January 15, 2024April 27, 2025

WSHRC: Procedure When None Is Specified

Under the Washington State Administrative Code (hereinafter, “WAC”), what are the Washington State Human Rights Commission (hereinafter, “WSHRC”) regulations concerning procedure when none is specified? Here’s my point of view.

Advertisement

WSHRC–PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE–PROCEDURE WHEN NONE IS SPECIFIED (WAC 162-08-019)

When it comes to legal or administrative procedures, rules are essential—but what happens when there’s no clear rule in place? That’s where WAC 162-08-019 steps in for the Washington State Human Rights Commission. The relevant rule states as follows:

WAC 162-08-019
Procedure when none is specified.

(1) Any orderly procedure. To take care of a problem for which no procedure is specified by this chapter, the Administrative Procedure Act, chapter 34.05* RCW, or the law against discrimination, chapter 49.60* RCW, any orderly procedure may be used. Appropriate procedures may be taken from the Washington civil rules for superior courts, the federal rules of civil procedure, or the rules of other administrative agencies of the state of Washington or of the United States.

(2) By chairperson. The chairperson of the commission or an administrative law judge may specify the procedure to be used to dispose of any matter not covered by this chapter, or any matter covered by a rule that has been waived or altered in the interest of justice under authority of WAC 162-08-013*.

WAC 162-08-019* (emphasis added).

WAC 162-08-019 — A CLOSER LOOK

Thus, WAC 162-08-019* provides guidance for situations where no specific procedure is outlined in the WAC, the Administrative Procedure Act (RCW 34.05*), or the state’s Law Against Discrimination (RCW 49.60*). Essentially, if there’s no official roadmap, the commission can use any “orderly procedure” to resolve the issue. These procedures might be borrowed from Washington’s civil court rules, federal court procedures, or even rules from other state or federal agencies.

Additionally, the chairperson of the commission or an administrative law judge has the authority to decide what procedure should be followed in these cases—especially when an existing rule has been waived or adjusted for fairness under WAC 162-08-013*.

CONCLUSION

In short, WAC 162-08-019* ensures flexibility and fairness, making sure the WSHRC can still act efficiently and justly, even when the rulebook is silent.

We invite you to read more of our articles related to this topic:

» WA State Human Rights Commission Complaints

» WA State Human Rights Commission: Functions, Powers, and Duties

» WSHRC: From Complaint to Conclusion

LEARN MORE

-gw

October 21, 2023April 29, 2025

WSHRC: Withdrawal of Complaint

Under the Washington State Administrative Code (hereinafter, “WAC”), what are the Washington State Human Rights Commission (hereinafter, “WSHRC”) regulations concerning the withdrawal of a complaint? Here’s my point of view.

Advertisement

WSHRC — PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE — WITHDRAWAL OF COMPLAINT (WAC 162-08-091)

Filing a discrimination complaint with the Washington State Human Rights Commission (WSHRC) is a serious step in seeking justice. But what happens if a complainant later decides they no longer wish to pursue the matter? Washington Administrative Code (WAC) 162-08-091* provides clear guidance on how — and under what conditions — a complaint can be withdrawn. The relevant provision states as follows:

WAC 162-08-091
Withdrawal of complaint.

(1) Consent necessary. A complaint or any part thereof may be withdrawn only with the consent of the commission.

(2) Form. A request for withdrawal of a complaint must be in writing and signed by the complainant and must state in full the reasons why withdrawal is requested. Blank forms may be obtained at commission offices.

WAC 162-08-091*.

Withdrawal Isn’t Automatic

First and foremost, the rule makes one thing clear: you cannot simply retract your complaint on your own. According to subsection (1), any withdrawal — whether partial or complete — requires the consent of the commission. This ensures the integrity of the process and allows the commission to determine whether the withdrawal is appropriate, especially in cases where broader public interest may be at stake.

A Formal Process

Subsection (2) of WAC 162-08-091 outlines the proper method for requesting a withdrawal. The request must be:

• In writing

• Signed by the complainant

• Accompanied by a full explanation of why the withdrawal is being sought

This formal process helps the commission assess the reasons behind the request and ensures that the decision to withdraw is made voluntarily and without coercion. For convenience, blank withdrawal request forms can be obtained at commission offices.

Why This Matters

The withdrawal rule protects both individual rights and the public interest. While it respects a complainant’s autonomy, it also enables the commission to evaluate whether continuing the investigation might still be warranted — for example, if the issue reveals a systemic problem.

In short, WAC 162-08-091 balances personal choice with public accountability, ensuring that discrimination complaints in Washington are handled thoughtfully and responsibly from start to finish.

We invite you to read more of our articles related to this topic:

» WA State Human Rights Commission Complaints

» WA State Human Rights Commission: Functions, Powers, and Duties

» WSHRC: From Complaint to Conclusion

LEARN MORE

-gw

July 23, 2023April 23, 2025

WSHRC: Bona Fide Occupational Qualification

Under the Washington State Administrative Code (hereinafter, “WAC”), what are the Washington State Human Rights Commission (hereinafter, “WSHRC”) regulations concerning bona fide occupational qualification? Here’s my point of view.

Advertisement

WSHRC — EMPLOYMENT — BONA FIDE OCCUPATIONAL QUALIFICATION

In Washington State, discrimination in employment based on protected characteristics is prohibited under the Washington Law Against Discrimination. However, the Washington Administrative Code (WAC 162-16-240) recognizes a narrow exception to this rule: the bona fide occupational qualification (BFOQ).

A BFOQ allows an employer to consider a person’s protected status only when it is genuinely necessary to the job. This isn’t a loophole for bias—it’s a specific, limited carve-out. The Washington State Human Rights Commission emphasizes that BFOQs must be applied narrowly and thoughtfully.

THE BLACK LETTER LAW: WAC 162-16-240

The relevant provision is WAC 162-16-240*, and it states as follows:

WAC 162-16-240
Bona fide occupational qualification.

Under the law against discrimination, there is an exception to the rule that an employer, employment agency, labor union, or other person may not discriminate on the basis of protected status; that is if a bona fide occupational qualification (BFOQ) applies. The commission believes that the BFOQ exception should be applied narrowly to jobs for which a particular quality of protected status will be essential to or will contribute to the accomplishment of the purposes of the job. The following examples illustrate how the commission applies BFOQs:

(1) Where it is necessary for the purpose of authenticity or genuineness (e.g., model, actor, actress) or maintaining conventional standards of sexual privacy (e.g., locker room attendant, intimate apparel fitter) the commission will consider protected status to be a BFOQ.

(2) A 911 emergency response service needs operators who are bilingual in English and Spanish. The job qualification should be spoken language competency, not national origin.

(3) An employer refuses to consider a person with a disability for a receptionist position on the basis that the person’s disability “would make customers and other coworkers uncomfortable.” This is not a valid BFOQ.

(4) A person with a disability applies for promotion to a position at a different site within the firm. The firm does not promote the person because doing so would compel the firm to install an assistive device on equipment at that site to enable the person to properly perform the job. This is not a valid BFOQ.

WAC 162-16-240* (emphasis and hyperlinks added).

What Qualifies as a BFOQ?

Thus, some key examples clarify when a BFOQ may or may not apply:

• Authenticity or Privacy: A protected status may be essential when authenticity matters—such as hiring an actor for a culturally specific role—or when maintaining privacy is necessary, like hiring locker room attendants or intimate apparel fitters.

• Skill Over Status: Requiring bilingual ability for a 911 operator position is acceptable. However, the requirement should be based on language skills, not the applicant’s ethnic background.

• Discomfort Isn’t a Defense: Employers cannot reject a person with a disability simply because coworkers or customers might feel “uncomfortable.” That’s not a valid BFOQ.

• Accommodation is Not Optional: Refusing to promote someone with a disability to avoid the cost of accommodations—like assistive equipment—also fails to meet the BFOQ standard.

CONCLUSION

The BFOQ rule exists to ensure that only in rare, well-justified cases can an employer factor in protected status. Washington law draws a clear line between legitimate job requirements and discriminatory practices disguised as necessity.

Employers should tread carefully—and consult legal guidance—before invoking a BFOQ. Misusing this exception can lead to serious legal consequences and undermine workplace equity.

We invite you to read more of our articles related to this topic:

» WA State Human Rights Commission Complaints

» WA State Human Rights Commission: Functions, Powers, and Duties

» WSHRC: From Complaint to Conclusion

LEARN MORE

-gw

Understanding Voluntary Dismissal Under WAC 162-08-268

1. Dismissal Before the Hearing

2. Dismissal After the Hearing Has Started

3. Legal Effect of a Voluntary Dismissal

4. iMPLICATIONS

RELATED ARTICLES

LEARN MORE

Breach of Conciliated Agreement Under Washington Law

Options Available to the Commission

1. Specific Enforcement in Court

2. Setting Aside the Agreement

3. Referral for Prosecution

Why This Rule Matters

RELATED ARTICLES

LEARN MORE

Understanding WAC 162-08-102: The Objective of Conciliation in Washington State Discrimination Law

The Regulatory Framework

What Conciliation Means in Practice

Why the Distinction Matters

Implications for Legal Professionals and the Public

Conclusion

RELATED ARTICLES

LEARN MORE

Understanding WAC 162-08-094: A Simple Explanation of the Investigation Process for Discrimination Complaints in Washington State

Step 1: Notifying the Respondent

Step 2: Early Review of the Complaint

Step 3: Focused Fact-Finding

In Summary

RELATED ARTICLES

LEARN MORE

WSHRC: PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE: SANCTIONS

OVERVIEW OF WAC 162-08-015

1. Sanctions in Administrative Hearings

2. Sanctions in Other Proceedings

IMPORTANCE AND IMPACT

FINAL THOUGHTS

RELATED ARTICLES

LEARN MORE

WSHRC: ORGANIZATION AND OPERATIONS

(1) Membership

(2) Meetings

(3) Quorum

(4) Executive director

(5) Authority and duty

(6) Offices

(7) Where to obtain information

(8) Where to make submissions or requests

RELATED ARTICLES

LEARN MORE

I. Understanding WAC 162-08-062: Concurrent Remedies Under Washington’s Law Against Discrimination

II. Breakdown of Key Provisions — WAC 162-08-062

1. Right to Pursue Other Remedies

2. Real Estate Complaints and Cooperative Agreements

3. General Rule for Other Claims

4. Single Recovery Rule

5. Binding Effect of First Decision

III. Conclusion

RELATED ARTICLES

LEARN MORE

Understanding Protective Orders Under Washington’s Anti-Discrimination Law: A Closer Look at WAC 162-08-096

What Is WAC 162-08-096?

When Can a Protective Order Be Requested?

What Can the Chairperson Do?

What Happens If the Request Is Denied?

Sealing Documents

Why This Matters

Key Takeaway

RELATED ARTICLES

LEARN MORE

WSHRC: PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE: RELATIONSHIP OF COMMISSION TO COMPLAINANT

THE BLACK LETTER LAW: WAC 162-08-061

WAC 162-08-061 Relationship of commission to complainant.

RELATED ARTICLES

LEARN MORE

THE WASHINGTON STATE HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION

DISCRIMINATION BECAUSE OF MARITAL STATUS

EXCEPTIONS TO THE RULE

WLAD REMEDIES

READ OUR RELATED ARTICLES

LEARN MORE

WAC 162-08-061
Relationship of commission to complainant.