April 2018 • WSHRC Digest

Default Orders

by Gregory Williams, Esq. | Under Washington State Human Rights Commission (WSHRC) Practice-and-Procedure Regulations, what are the rules concerning default orders? Here’s my point of view (NOTE: please read our DISCLAIMER before proceeding).

THE STATUTORY AUTHORITY (RCW)

RCW 49.60.120(3) is the statutory authority enabling the WSHRC to adopt rules concerning default orders. See WAC 162-08-255, WA State Legislature Website (bottom of page body). The statute declares that the WSHRC has “the function[], power[], and dut[y] … [t]o adopt, amend, and rescind suitable rules to carry out the provisions of this chapter, and the policies and practices of the commission in connection therewith.” RCW 49.60.120(3) (hyperlinks added).

DEFAULT ORDERS

WAC 162-08-255 is the relevant regulation, and it addresses default orders as follows:

(1) Entry of default order. When a respondent who has been served with a notice of hearing and amended complaint fails to answer in accordance with WAC 162-08-251, and that fact is made to appear by motion and affidavit, a motion for default may be made and served upon respondent requiring an answer within five days. If respondent fails to answer as required in the motion for default, the administrative law judge may enter an order of default providing for the relief requested in the amended complaint upon proof of service of the motion for default as provided in WAC 162-08-041.

(2) Setting aside default order. Within ten days of being served, the party against whom a default order is entered may move to have it set aside. The administrative law judge may grant or deny such motion as justice requires.

WAC 162-08-255 (emphasis added) (hyperlinks added).

LEARN MORE

If you would like to learn more, then consider contacting an experienced Washington State Employment Discrimination Attorney as soon as possible to discuss your case. Please note: the information contained in this article is not offered as legal advice and will not form an attorney-client relationship with Law Office of Gregory A. Williams, P.S., Inc.; Williams Law Group, PS; or the author of this article. Please see our DISCLAIMER.

–gw

Termination of a Case Without Findings of Fact

by Gregory Williams, Esq. | Under Washington State Human Rights Commission (WSHRC) Practice-and-Procedure Regulations, what are the rules concerning termination of a case without findings of fact? Here’s my point of view (NOTE: please read our DISCLAIMER before proceeding).

TERMINATION OF A CASE WITHOUT FINDINGS OF FACT

WAC 162-08-099 is the relevant regulation, and it states that the rules concerning termination of a case without findings of fact are follows:

(1) Authorized. The commission in appropriate circumstances may terminate its action on a case without making findings of fact pursuant to RCW 49.60.240. This section provides procedures in some of the circumstances.

(2) Withdrawal of complaint. No findings or other procedures in RCW 49.60.240 and 49.60.250 are necessary when the complainant has requested withdrawal of the complaint and the commissioners have consented to the withdrawal pursuant to WAC 162-08-091.

(3) Settled before finding. Except as may be otherwise provided for a complaint alleging an unfair practice in a real estate transaction, a complaint may be settled before findings of fact are made, when the commission‘s staff and a respondent have entered into a written settlement agreement (prefinding settlement). Prefinding settlement agreements shall be presented to the commissioners. The commissioners, if they approve, shall enter an order setting forth the terms of the agreement, using the same procedure as if the agreement were presented to the commissioners under RCW 49.60.240 and WAC 162-08-106 after findings of fact. A prefinding settlement is not binding on the commission until the commissioners vote to accept it and issue their order.

(4) Administrative closure. A case may be administratively closed by vote of the commissioners when the complaint has been resolved informally, or has been adjudicated in another forum, or has become moot, or cannot be investigated because the complainant or respondent cannot be found, or when other circumstances justify administrative closure. Administrative closure is an official termination of work on a complaint prior to completion of the entire statutory process, letting the complaint lie in its present posture. A case that has been administratively closed can be administratively reopened by vote of the commissioners.

WAC 162-08-099 (emphasis added) (hyperlinks added).

LEARN MORE

–gw

Findings

by Gregory Williams, Esq. | Under Washington State Human Rights Commission (WSHRC) Practice-and-Procedure Regulations, what are the rules concerning findings? Here’s my point of view (NOTE: please read our DISCLAIMER before proceeding).

THE STATUTORY AUTHORITY (RCW)

RCW 49.60.120(3) is the statutory authority enabling the WSHRC to adopt rules concerning findings. See WAC 162-08-098, WA State Legislature Website (bottom of page body). The statute declares that the WSHRC has “the function[], power[], and dut[y] … [t]o adopt, amend, and rescind suitable rules to carry out the provisions of this chapter, and the policies and practices of the commission in connection therewith.” RCW 49.60.120(3) (hyperlinks added).

FINDINGS

WAC 162-08-098 is the relevant regulation, and it addresses findings as follows:

(1) General. The findings document shall contain (a) findings of fact, and (b) an ultimate finding of reasonable cause or no reasonable cause for believing that an unfair practice has been or is being committed, or a finding on jurisdiction, as provided in (2) of this section.

(2) Jurisdictional dispositions. When the facts found show that the matter is not within the jurisdiction of the commission, the ultimate finding shall be “no jurisdiction” rather than “reasonable cause” or “no reasonable cause.” In extraordinary circumstances where the commission technically has jurisdiction but for overriding reasons of law or policy is unable to properly exercise its jurisdiction, the ultimate finding may be “jurisdiction declined.” An example of such an extraordinary circumstance is a complaint against the commission itself.

(3) Scope of reasonable cause finding. A finding of reasonable cause shall specify the unfair practice found and, as nearly as possible, the person or persons against whom the unfair practice has been committed. If the facts show an unfair practice against a class of persons, the class shall be indicated to the extent possible.

(4) Action by commissioners. Findings of no reasonable cause shall be reported to the commissioners at a meeting, and shall thereafter stand as the action of the commission unless the commissioners vote to set aside a particular finding. Findings of reasonable cause shall be used by the staff for the purpose of endeavoring to eliminate the unfair practices by conference, conciliation, and persuasion. Proposed findings of “no jurisdiction” or “jurisdiction declined” shall be reported to the commissioners and shall become commission action when approved by vote of the commissioners at a meeting.

(5) Effect of findings. A finding that there is or is not reasonable cause for believing that an unfair practice has been or is being committed is not an adjudication of whether or not an unfair practice has been or is being committed.

WAC 162-08-098 (emphasis added) (hyperlinks added).

LEARN MORE

–gw

Reconsideration

by Gregory Williams, Esq. | Under Washington State Human Rights Commission (WSHRC) Practice-and-Procedure Regulations, what are the rules concerning reconsideration? Here’s my point of view (NOTE: please read our DISCLAIMER before proceeding).

THE STATUTORY AUTHORITY (RCW)

RCW 49.60.120(3) is the statutory authority enabling the WSHRC to adopt rules concerning reconsideration. See WAC 162-08-311, WA State Legislature Website (bottom of page body). The statute declares that the WSHRC has “the function[], power[], and dut[y] … [t]o adopt, amend, and rescind suitable rules to carry out the provisions of this chapter, and the policies and practices of the commission in connection therewith.” RCW 49.60.120(3) (hyperlinks added).

RECONSIDERATION

WAC 162-08-311 is the relevant regulation, and it addresses reconsideration rules as follows:

(1) Motion. Within ten days after being served with the final order of an administrative law judge, any party may serve and file a motion for reconsideration with the commission clerk. The motion shall identify the points that the party desires to have reconsidered and shall fully state the reasons for reconsideration. The motion shall in all other respects proceed as provided in RCW 34.05.470.

(2) Finality for appeal. When a motion for reconsideration has been filed, the order of the administrative law judge shall not be deemed final for purposes of appeal until the ruling on the motion has been served.

(3) Reconsideration not necessary for appeal. Motions for reconsideration should be made only when a party feels that the administrative law judge has overlooked or misunderstood something. It is not necessary to file a motion for reconsideration in order to appeal. RCW 34.05.470(5).

WAC 162-08-311 (emphasis added) (hyperlinks added).

LEARN MORE

–gw

Conduct of Hearings

by Gregory Williams, Esq. | Under Washington State Human Rights Commission (WSHRC) Practice-and-Procedure Regulations, what are the rules concerning conduct of hearings? Here’s my point of view (NOTE: please read our DISCLAIMER before proceeding).

THE STATUTORY AUTHORITY (RCW)

RCW 49.60.120(3) is the statutory authority enabling the WSHRC to adopt rules concerning conduct of hearings. See WAC 162-08-291, WA State Legislature Website (bottom of page body). The statute declares that the WSHRC has “the function[], power[], and dut[y] … [t]o adopt, amend, and rescind suitable rules to carry out the provisions of this chapter, and the policies and practices of the commission in connection therewith.” RCW 49.60.120(3) (hyperlinks added).

CONDUCT OF HEARINGS

WAC 162-08-291 is the relevant regulation, and it addresses rules concerning conduct of hearings as follows:

(1) Reference to law. Hearings shall be conducted in accordance with the provisions of the Administrative Procedure Act, chapter 34.05 RCW, RCW 49.60.250, and these rules.

(2) Administrative law judge presides. The administrative law judge shall preside as provided in WAC 162-08-211.

(3) Hearings shall be public. All administrative hearings shall be open to the public. Photographs and recordings of the proceedings may be made, subject to such conditions as the administrative law judge may impose to prevent interference with the orderly conduct of the hearing. Special lighting for photographic purposes may be used only if the administrative law judge has determined in advance that it will not be distracting. The administrative law judge may order news media to use one or more television cameras on a pooling basis if the number of cameras interferes with the conduct of the hearing.

(4) Record of testimony. The clerk shall determine whether the record of testimony taken at a hearing shall be made by mechanical means or by a court reporter.

(5) Copies of record. When the record has been recorded by mechanical means, rather than by a court reporter, a party ordering a copy of the record or part thereof under RCW 34.05.566 must pay the reasonable cost of transcription, as determined by the clerk, in advance of delivery of the copy. When the record is transcribed and copies of documents are made for transmittal to a reviewing court under RCW 34.05.566, the costs of transcription and copying may be charged to a nonindigent petitioner in accordance with RCW 34.05.566(3).

WAC 162-08-291 (emphasis added) (hyperlinks added).

LEARN MORE

–gw

Findings, Conclusions, & Order

by Gregory Williams, Esq. | Under Washington State Human Rights Commission (WSHRC) Practice-and-Procedure Regulations, what are the rules concerning findings, conclusions, and orders? Here’s my point of view (NOTE: please read our DISCLAIMER before proceeding).

THE STATUTORY AUTHORITY (RCW)

RCW 49.60.120(3) is the statutory authority enabling the WSHRC to adopt rules concerning findings, conclusions, and orders. See WAC 162-08-301, WA State Legislature Website (bottom of page body). The statute declares that the WSHRC has “the function[], power[], and dut[y] … [t]o adopt, amend, and rescind suitable rules to carry out the provisions of this chapter, and the policies and practices of the commission in connection therewith.” RCW 49.60.120(3) (hyperlinks added).

FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS, AND ORDER

WAC 162-08-301 is the relevant regulation, and it addresses rules concerning findings, conclusions, and orders as follows:

(1) Preliminary decision of administrative law judge. In every administrative hearing the administrative law judge shall prepare preliminary findings of fact, conclusions of law, and order in accordance with WAC 10-08-210, which shall be mailed to the parties and their counsel for comments, objections, and proposed corrections.

(2) Final decision of administrative law judge. After the expiration of thirty days from the receipt of comments upon the preliminary decision, the administrative law judge will issue a final decision which is enforceable in accordance with RCW 49.60.260.

WAC 162-08-301 (emphasis added) (hyperlinks added).

LEARN MORE

–gw

Nature of Orders–Enforcement

by Gregory Williams, Esq. | Under Washington State Human Rights Commission (WSHRC) Practice-and-Procedure Regulations, what are the rules concerning the nature of orders–enforcement? Here’s my point of view (NOTE: please read our DISCLAIMER before proceeding).

NATURE OF ORDERS–ENFORCEMENT

WAC 162-08-305 is the relevant regulation, and it states that the nature of orders–enforcement is as follows:

(1) Nature of orders. Orders obtained by counsel for the commission are public reparation orders, not adjudications of private rights between respondents and persons aggrieved by the respondents’ unfair practices. When a respondent is ordered to rehire or compensate a person, the person who is the beneficiary of the order has no property right in the job, money, etc., until the person receives it.

(2) Enforcement of order. Except as may be otherwise provided in RCW 49.60.260 and WAC 162-08-288, only the commission, through its counsel, has the authority to enforce an order of an administrative law judge. RCW 49.60.260.

(3) Compromise of order. Except as may be otherwise provided for a complaint alleging an unfair practice in a real estate transaction, the commission, acting in good faith, may compromise an order of an administrative law judge, with or without the consent of the beneficiaries of the order.

WAC 162-08-305 (emphasis added) (hyperlinks added).

LEARN MORE

–gw

Claims of Self Incrimination–Immunity

by Gregory Williams, Esq. | Under Washington State Human Rights Commission (WSHRC) Practice-and-Procedure Regulations, what are the rules concerning claims of self incrimination–immunity? Here’s my point of view (NOTE: please read our DISCLAIMER before proceeding).

THE STATUTORY AUTHORITY (RCW)

RCW 49.60.120(3) is the statutory authority enabling the WSHRC to adopt rules concerning claims of self incrimination–immunity. See WAC 162-08-294, WA State Legislature Website (bottom of page body). The statute declares that the WSHRC has “the function[], power[], and dut[y] … [t]o adopt, amend, and rescind suitable rules to carry out the provisions of this chapter, and the policies and practices of the commission in connection therewith.” RCW 49.60.120(3) (hyperlinks added).

CLAIMS OF SELF INCRIMINATION–IMMUNITY

WAC 162-08-294 is the relevant regulation, and it addresses claims of self incrimination–immunity as follows:

(1) How claimed. A natural person who is testifying under oath, may, instead of answering a question, decline to answer the question on the ground that the testimony or evidence required of him or her may tend to incriminate him or her or subject him or her to a penalty or forfeiture.

(2) Procedure before compelling testimony. Before compelling testimony after the privilege against self incrimination has been invoked (and thereby exempting the witness from prosecution) the administrative law judge shall ask examining counsel and also counsel for the commission to state their positions on whether the witness should be ordered to answer. Counsel for the commission may ask that the ruling be deferred for such time as is necessary for counsel for the commission to consult with other public officers before responding. The position of counsel for the commission and other public officers shall be given due weight by the administrative law judge in deciding whether to order the witness to answer.

(3) Inference from silence after immunity acquired. If the witness declines to answer the question after acquiring exemption from prosecution, the administrative law judge may consider the silence as evidence and may draw such inferences from it as are warranted by the facts surrounding the incident.

WAC 162-08-294 (emphasis added) (hyperlinks added).

LEARN MORE

–gw

Conciliation Negotiations

by Gregory Williams, Esq. | Under Washington State Human Rights Commission (WSHRC) Practice-and-Procedure Regulations, what are the guidelines for conciliation negotiations? Here’s my point of view (NOTE: please read our DISCLAIMER before proceeding).

CONCILIATION NEGOTIATIONS

WAC 162-08-104 is the relevant regulation, and it states that the guidelines for conciliation negotiations are as follows:

(1) Endeavors of staff. Except as may be otherwise provided for a complaint alleging an unfair practice in a real estate transaction, the task of the commission is to endeavor to eliminate the unfair practice through agreement with the respondent. The extent of effort to be expended toward this end will depend on the likelihood that agreement on mutually acceptable terms can be reached. If, for example, it is apparent from an exchange of letters that agreement cannot be reached, it is not necessary to hold a conference. If a respondent has been afforded a reasonable opportunity to negotiate, that is sufficient to satisfy the statutory requirements pertaining to conciliation of a complaint brought under chapter 49.60 RCW and this chapter.

(2) Reopening conciliation. The making and service of a finding that no agreement can be reached does not preclude renewing negotiations or reaching an agreement at a later time. The finding that no agreement can be reached is not affected by a renewal of negotiations, but it may be superseded by any subsequent agreement which resolves the unfair practices at issue in the complaint filed with the commission.

WAC 162-08-104 (emphasis added) (hyperlinks added).

LEARN MORE

–gw

Protective Orders

by Gregory Williams, Esq. | Under Washington State Human Rights Commission (WSHRC) Practice-and-Procedure Regulations, what are the rules concerning protective orders? Here’s my point of view (NOTE: please read our DISCLAIMER before proceeding).

THE STATUTORY AUTHORITY (RCW)

RCW 49.60.120(3) is the statutory authority enabling the WSHRC to adopt rules concerning protective orders. See WAC 162-08-096, WA State Legislature Website (bottom of page body). The statute declares that the WSHRC has “the function[], power[], and dut[y] … [t]o adopt, amend, and rescind suitable rules to carry out the provisions of this chapter, and the policies and practices of the commission in connection therewith.” RCW 49.60.120(3) (hyperlinks added).

PROTECTIVE ORDERS

WAC 162-08-096 is the relevant regulation, and it addresses protective orders as follows:

(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 (emphasis added) (hyperlinks added).

LEARN MORE

–gw

Real Estate Transactions — Conciliation

by Gregory Williams, Esq. | Under Washington State Human Rights Commission (WSHRC) Practice-and-Procedure Regulations, what are the rules concerning real estate transactions and conciliation? Here’s my point of view (NOTE: please read our DISCLAIMER before proceeding).

REAL ESTATE TRANSACTIONS–CONCILIATION

WAC 162-08-107 is the relevant regulation, and it addresses real estate transactions and conciliation as follows:

During the period beginning with the filing of a complaint of an unfair practice in a real estate transaction and ending with the filing of a charge or a dismissal by the commission, the commission shall, to the extent feasible, engage in conciliation with respect to the complaint.

(1) An agreement arising out of conciliation efforts under this section shall be an agreement between the respondent and the complainant, and shall be subject to approval by the commission.

(2) Each conciliation agreement shall be made public unless the complainant and respondent agree otherwise and the commission determines that disclosure is not necessary to further the purposes of chapter 49.60 RCW.

WAC 162-08-107 (emphasis added) (hyperlinks added).

LEARN MORE

–gw

Breach of Conciliated Agreement

by Gregory Williams, Esq. | Under Washington State Human Rights Commission (WSHRC) Practice-and-Procedure Regulations, what are the rules concerning breach of a conciliated agreement? Here’s my point of view (NOTE: please read our DISCLAIMER before proceeding).

THE STATUTORY AUTHORITY (RCW)

RCW 49.60.120(3) is the statutory authority enabling the WSHRC to adopt rules concerning breach of a conciliated agreement. See WAC 162-08-109, WA State Legislature Website (bottom of page body). The statute declares that the WSHRC has “the function[], power[], and dut[y] … [t]o adopt, amend, and rescind suitable rules to carry out the provisions of this chapter, and the policies and practices of the commission in connection therewith.” RCW 49.60.120(3) (hyperlinks added).

BREACH OF CONCILIATED AGREEMENT

WAC 162-08-109 is the relevant regulation, and it addresses breach of a conciliated agreement as follows:

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 added) (hyperlinks added).

LEARN MORE

–gw

Failure To Provide Information

by Gregory Williams, Esq. | Under Washington State Human Rights Commission (WSHRC) Practice-and-Procedure Regulations, what are the rules concerning the failure to provide information? Here’s my point of view (NOTE: please read our DISCLAIMER before proceeding).

THE STATUTORY AUTHORITY (RCW)

RCW 49.60.120(3) is the statutory authority enabling the WSHRC to adopt rules concerning the failure to provide information. See WAC 162-08-097, WA State Legislature Website (bottom of page body). The statute declares that the WSHRC has “the function[], power[], and dut[y] … [t]o adopt, amend, and rescind suitable rules to carry out the provisions of this chapter, and the policies and practices of the commission in connection therewith.” RCW 49.60.120(3) (hyperlinks added).

FAILURE TO PROVIDE INFORMATION

WAC 162-08-097 is the relevant regulation, and it addresses the failure to provide information as follows:

(1) Order compelling production of information. The chairperson of the commission is authorized to make any order that a court could make under CR 37(a), including an order awarding expenses of the motion to compel production of information pursuant to WAC 162-08-09501. The executive director, upon reasonable notice to other parties and all persons affected thereby, may obtain an order compelling production of information by motion to the chairperson of the commission. The form of the motion and the procedure for its disposition is governed by WAC 162-08-019. When taking testimony under oath, the proponent of the question may either complete or adjourn the examination before moving for an order compelling production of information.

(2) Enforcement of an order compelling production of information. If the party fails to comply with a subpoena compelling production of information, the matter may be turned over to counsel for the commission for enforcement of the order in superior court.

WAC 162-08-097 (emphasis added) (hyperlinks added).

LEARN MORE

–gw

Approval of Agreements

by Gregory Williams, Esq. | Under Washington State Human Rights Commission (WSHRC) Practice-and-Procedure Regulations, what are the guidelines for approval of agreements? Here’s my point of view (NOTE: please read our DISCLAIMER before proceeding).

APPROVAL OF AGREEMENTS

WAC 162-08-106 is the relevant regulation, and it provides the guidelines for approval of agreements as follows:

Except as may be otherwise provided for a complaint alleging an unfair practice in a real estate transaction, an agreement reached between the commission‘s staff and a respondent under RCW 49.60.240 shall be reduced to writing, signed by the respondent and a member of the commission‘s staff, and presented to the commissioners at a meeting. The agreement is not binding on the commission until the commissioners vote to accept it.

WAC 162-08-106 (emphasis added) (hyperlinks added).

LEARN MORE

–gw

Objective of Conciliation

by Gregory Williams, Esq. | Under Washington State Human Rights Commission (WSHRC) Practice-and-Procedure Regulations, what is the objective of conciliation? Here’s my point of view (NOTE: please read our DISCLAIMER before proceeding).

OBJECTIVE OF CONCILIATION

WAC 162-08-102 is the relevant regulation, and it states that the objective of conciliation is as follows:

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 (emphasis added) (hyperlinks added).

LEARN MORE

–gw

Reconsideration of Findings

by Gregory Williams, Esq. | Under Washington State Human Rights Commission (WSHRC) Practice-and-Procedure Regulations, what are the guidelines regarding reconsideration of findings? Here’s my point of view (NOTE: please read our DISCLAIMER before proceeding).

THE STATUTORY AUTHORITY (RCW)

RCW 49.60.120(3) is the statutory authority enabling the WSHRC to adopt guidelines regarding reconsideration of findings. See WAC 162-08-101, WA State Legislature Website (bottom of page body). The statute declares that the WSHRC has “the function[], power[], and dut[y] … [t]o adopt, amend, and rescind suitable rules to carry out the provisions of this chapter, and the policies and practices of the commission in connection therewith.” RCW 49.60.120(3) (hyperlinks added).

RECONSIDERATION OF FINDINGS

WAC 162-08-101 is the relevant regulation, and it addresses reconsideration of findings as follows:

The commission may reconsider and correct any finding in which errors affecting the result are brought to its attention.

WAC 162-08-101 (emphasis added) (hyperlinks added).

LEARN MORE

–gw

Referrals To Staff

by Gregory Williams, Esq. | Under Washington State Human Rights Commission (WSHRC) Practice-and-Procedure Regulations, what are the guidelines regarding referrals to staff? Here’s my point of view (NOTE: please read our DISCLAIMER before proceeding).

REFERRALS TO STAFF

WAC 162-08-093 is the relevant regulation, and it addresses referrals to staff as follows:

Unless the chairperson of the commission directs otherwise for a particular complaint, all complaints shall be investigated by the section of the staff designated for that purpose by the executive director, and the executive director shall have full power to assign and reassign cases for investigation by particular staff persons, and to assign and reassign staff persons to the section of the staff that investigates complaints, on a full-time or part-time basis.

WAC 162-08-093 (emphasis added) (hyperlinks added).

LEARN MORE

–gw

Requests For Advanced Notice of Rule Making

by Gregory Williams, Esq. | Under Washington State Human Rights Commission (WSHRC) Practice-and-Procedure Regulations, what are the guidelines concerning requests for advanced notice of rule making? Here’s my point of view (NOTE: please read our DISCLAIMER before proceeding).

THE STATUTORY AUTHORITY (RCW)

RCW 49.60.120(3) is the statutory authority enabling the WSHRC to adopt guidelines regarding requests for advanced notice of rule making. See WAC 162-08-600, WA State Legislature Website (bottom of page body). The statute declares that the WSHRC has “the function[], power[], and dut[y] … [t]o adopt, amend, and rescind suitable rules to carry out the provisions of this chapter, and the policies and practices of the commission in connection therewith.” RCW 49.60.120(3) (hyperlinks added).

REQUESTS FOR ADVANCED NOTICE

WAC 162-08-600 is the relevant regulation, and it addresses requests for advanced notice of rule making as follows:

(1) Form. Requests for advance notice of rule making proceedings, as provided in RCW 34.05.320(3), shall be in writing and shall give the name of the requesting person or organization, and the address to which the notice is to be sent.

(2) Duration. Requests for advance notice of rule making proceedings will be honored for a period of three years after the date of the request, and may be renewed by written notice to the commission containing the information required for the original request.

(3) Where filed. Requests for advance notice of rule making proceedings should be filed at the Olympia office of the commission, attention rules coordinator.

WAC 162-08-600 (emphasis added) (hyperlinks added).

LEARN MORE

–gw

Petitions for Rulemaking

by Gregory Williams, Esq. | Under Washington State Human Rights Commission (WSHRC) Practice-and-Procedure Regulations, what are the guidelines concerning petitions for rulemaking? Here’s my point of view (NOTE: please read our DISCLAIMER before proceeding).

THE STATUTORY AUTHORITY (RCW)

RCW 49.60.120(3) is the statutory authority enabling the WSHRC to adopt guidelines regarding petitions for rulemaking. See WAC 162-08-610, WA State Legislature Website (bottom of page body). The statute declares that the WSHRC has “the function[], power[], and dut[y] … [t]o adopt, amend, and rescind suitable rules to carry out the provisions of this chapter, and the policies and practices of the commission in connection therewith.” RCW 49.60.120(3) (hyperlinks added).

PETITIONS FOR RULEMAKING

WAC 162-08-610 is the relevant regulation, and it addresses petitions for rulemaking as follows:

Petitions to the commission for the promulgation, amendment, or repeal of a rule under RCW 34.05.330 shall include a statement of the reasons for the requested action, and may be accompanied by a brief of any applicable law. Petitions for the promulgation of a rule shall set out the full text of the proposed rule. Petitions for the amendment of a rule shall identify the rule by its WAC number, and shall contain the complete text of the rule as proposed to be amended, showing additions by underlining the new words and showing deletions by marking them over with a dotted line. Petitions for repeal of a rule shall identify the rule by WAC number, and may quote its text.

WAC 162-08-610 (emphasis added) (hyperlinks added).

LEARN MORE

–gw

Withdrawal of Complaint

by Gregory Williams, Esq. | Under Washington State Human Rights Commission (WSHRC) Practice-and-Procedure Regulations, how can a complainant withdraw his/her complaint? Here’s my point of view (NOTE: please read our DISCLAIMER before proceeding).

THE STATUTORY AUTHORITY (RCW)

RCW 49.60.120(3) is the statutory authority enabling the WSHRC to adopt guidelines regarding how to withdraw a complaint. See WAC 162-08-091, WA State Legislature Website (bottom of page body). The statute declares that the WSHRC has “the function[], power[], and dut[y] … [t]o adopt, amend, and rescind suitable rules to carry out the provisions of this chapter, and the policies and practices of the commission in connection therewith.” RCW 49.60.120(3) (hyperlinks added).

WITHDRAWAL OF COMPLAINT

WAC 162-08-091 is the relevant regulation, and it addresses the withdrawal of complaints as follows:

(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 (emphasis added) (hyperlinks added).

LEARN MORE

–gw

Concurrent Remedies

by Gregory Williams, Esq. | Under Washington State Human Rights Commission (WSHRC) Practice-and-Procedure Regulations, what are the limitations for complainants or aggrieved persons that simultaneously pursue other available civil/criminal remedies in addition to, or in lieu of, filing an administrative discrimination complaint with the commission? Here’s my point of view (NOTE: please read our DISCLAIMER before proceeding).

SIMULTANEOUS REMEDIES & LIMITATIONS

The commission has promulgated rules that limit a complainant’s ability to simultaneously seek remedies for discrimination through the commission and other forums. The relevant rule is WAC 162-08-062, and it provides as follows:

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) [RELIEF FOR SAME HARM OR INJURY]

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

(4) [RES JUDICATA ISSUES]

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 (some hyperlinks added).

IMPLICATIONS: EMPLOYMENT DISCRIMINATION LAWSUITS

The above rule appears to say, inter alia, that if the commission files a charge of discrimination on behalf of a claimant, and the claimant simultaneously maintains an associated lawsuit in state or federal court (whether under the law against discrimination or similar law), then the commission will merely hold the charge in abeyance during the pendency of the lawsuit; however, the executive director or the commissioners may direct that the complaint continue to be processed notwithstanding the existence of an associated court action.

If the state/federal court is the first to rule on the claims after making factual and legal determinations, then, in some circumstances, those determinations may be binding on the commission in its disposition of the associated charge of discrimination. QUERY: under what circumstances will the determinations of state or federal courts be binding on the commission? In any event, the complainant or aggrieved person may not secure relief from the commission and a federal or state court for the same harm or injury.

LEARN MORE

–gw

Sanctions

by Gregory Williams, Esq. | Under Washington State Human Rights Commission (WSHRC) Practice-and-Procedure Regulations, how are sanctions applied? Here’s my point of view (NOTE: please read our DISCLAIMER before proceeding).

THE STATUTORY AUTHORITY (RCW)

RCW 49.60.120(3) is the statutory authority enabling the WSHRC to adopt guidelines for sanctions. See WAC 162-08-015, WA State Legislature Website (bottom of page body). The statute declares that the WSHRC has “the function[], power[], and dut[y] … [t]o adopt, amend, and rescind suitable rules to carry out the provisions of this chapter, and the policies and practices of the commission in connection therewith.” RCW 49.60.120(3) (hyperlinks added).

The WSHRC sanction guidelines are based on two categories: (1) Administrative Hearings; and (2) Other Hearings.

1. ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS (SUBSECTION 1)

DELAY/FAILURE TO COMPLY: “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.” WAC 162-08-015 (hyperlinks added).

CONDITION PRECEDENT: “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.” Id. (hyperlinks added).

FINAL ORDERS: “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.” Id. (hyperlinks added).

2. OTHER HEARINGS (SUBSECTION 2)

“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.” Id. (hyperlinks added).

LEARN MORE

–gw

Procedure When None Is Specified

by Gregory Williams, Esq. | Under Washington State Human Rights Commission (WSHRC) Practice-and-Procedure Regulations, what procedure is used when none is specified? Here’s my point of view (NOTE: please read our DISCLAIMER before proceeding).

ANY ORDERLY PROCEDURE MAY BE USED

When the commission is presented with a problem for which no procedure is specified by the Practice-and-Procedure Chapter, the Administrative Procedure Act (chapter 34.05 RCW), or the law against discrimination (chapter 49.60 RCW), then any orderly procedure may be used. WAC 162-08-019. “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.” Id.

BY CHAIRPERSON OR AMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE

Also, “[t]he 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” (Interpretation & Waiver). Id. (first three hyperlinks added).

LEARN MORE

–gw

Practice & Procedure Definitions – Conciliation

by Gregory Williams, Esq. | Under Washington State Human Rights Commission (WSHRC) Practice-and-Procedure Regulations, what is the definition of the term “Conciliation”? Here’s my point of view (NOTE: please read our DISCLAIMER before proceeding).

DEFINITION OF CONCILIATION

WAC 162-08-017 is the relevant regulation, and it defines the term “Conciliation” as follows:

“Conciliation” means the process provided in RCW 49.60.240 for the elimination by conference, conciliation, and persuasion of an unfair practice after a finding has been made that there is reasonable cause for believing that the unfair practice has been or is being committed.

WAC 162-08-017 (emphasis added) (hyperlink added). In the Practice-and-Procedure Chapter, the term is used with the meaning given, unless the context clearly indicates another meaning. Id.

LEARN MORE

–gw

Practice & Procedure Definitions – Commission

by Gregory Williams, Esq. | Under Washington State Human Rights Commission (WSHRC) Practice-and-Procedure Regulations, what is the definition of the term “Commission”? Here’s my point of view (NOTE: please read our DISCLAIMER before proceeding).

DEFINITION OF COMMISSION

WAC 162-08-017 is the relevant regulation, and it defines the term “Commission” as follows:

“Commission” means the Washington state human rights commission as an institution, whether acting through the commissioners, an administrative law judge, the executive director or staff, its legal counsel, or others, except where the context indicates one of the narrower meanings.

WAC 162-08-017 (emphasis added) (hyperlink added). In the Practice-and-Procedure Chapter, the term is used with the meaning given, unless the context clearly indicates another meaning. Id.

LEARN MORE

–gw