May 2018 • WSHRC Digest

Employment Agencies

by Gregory Williams, Esq. | Under Washington State Human Rights Commission (WSHRC) Employment Regulations, what are the rules concerning employment agencies? 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 employment agencies. See WAC 162-16-270, 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).

EMPLOYMENT AGENCIES

WAC 162-16-270 is the relevant regulation, and it addresses employment agencies as follows:

(1) It is an unfair practice for any employment agency to:

(a) Handwrite, print, or circulate any interoffice or interagency communication, job order, advertisement, brochure, or notice which expresses overtly or subtly, directly or indirectly a preference, specification or limitation on the basis of protected status. An exception is if a bona fide occupational qualification applies (please see WAC 162-16-240).

(b) Maintain, formally or informally, agency division titles that are not clearly neutral in terms of sex.

(2) It is not an unfair practice for an employment agency to assist an employer in recruiting applicants based on protected status when:

(a) The employer has a documented affirmative action plan; and

(b) The employer’s affirmative action plan is authorized or required by a governmental agency or court of competent authority and jurisdiction.

WAC 162-16-270 (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

Discrimination Because of Marital Status

by Gregory Williams, Esq. | Under Washington State Human Rights Commission (WSHRC) Employment Regulations, what are the rules concerning discrimination because of marital status? 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 discrimination because of marital status. See WAC 162-16-250, 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).

DISCRIMINATION BECAUSE OF MARITAL STATUS

WAC 162-16-250 is the relevant regulation, and it addresses discrimination because of marital status as follows:

(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.”

(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 (emphasis added) (hyperlinks added).

LEARN MORE

–gw

Bona Fide Occupational Qualification

by Gregory Williams, Esq. | Under Washington State Human Rights Commission (WSHRC) Employment Regulations, what are the rules concerning bona fide occupational qualification? 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 bona fide occupational qualification. See WAC 162-16-240, 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).

BONA FIDE OCCUPATIONAL QUALIFICATION

WAC 162-16-240 is the relevant regulation, and it addresses bona fide occupational qualification as follows:

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 added) (hyperlinks added).

LEARN MORE

–gw

Advice of Commission

by Gregory Williams, Esq. | Under Washington State Human Rights Commission (WSHRC) Employment Regulations, what are the rules concerning advice of the commission? 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 advice of the commission. See WAC 162-16-210, 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).

ADVICE OF COMMISSION

WAC 162-16-210 is the relevant regulation, and it addresses advice of the commission as follows:

(1) When requested to do so, the commission‘s staff will advise persons on how to meet particular employment needs consistently with the law against discrimination.

(2) Persons may petition the commission for an executive director’s opinion determining whether protected status would be a bona fide occupational qualification in particular circumstances, unless the commission or another public agency with comparable jurisdiction has directed or authorized the action. (Please see WAC 162-04-070 on executive director’s opinions and WAC 162-16-240 on bona fide occupational qualification.)

WAC 162-16-210 (emphasis added) (hyperlinks added).

LEARN MORE

–gw

Parties

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

PARTIES

WAC 162-08-288 is the relevant regulation, and it addresses parties as follows:

(1) Who are parties. The parties to the hearing shall be the commission, through its counsel presenting the case in support of the complaint, a complainant or aggrieved person under RCW 49.60.040(15) who has filed a notice of independent appearance under WAC 162-08-261, the respondent or respondents named in the notice of hearing or an amended notice of hearing, and any other person who moves to intervene and is permitted to do so by order of the administrative law judge.

(2) Adding parties. Any party may move to join an additional party or parties. The motion must be directed to the administrative law judge. If the motion is granted, the administrative law judge shall cause to be issued an amended notice of hearing showing the addition of the party or parties and making such other provisions as are appropriate for an orderly hearing.

(3) Substituting parties. If death, incompetency, transfer of interest, or other occurrence should make the substitution of parties necessary or desirable, the administrative law judge may make the substitution by order. The administrative law judge may act on his or her own motion, or on motion of a party or of the person asking to be substituted for a party.

(4) Intervention. A person claiming an interest in the subject matter of the hearing may move to intervene. The motion must be directed to the administrative law judge. The administrative law judge shall grant or deny the motion as a matter of discretion.

(5) Factors considered. The administrative law judge in ruling on a motion to add a party shall be guided by whether the presence of the party will be helpful in carrying out the purposes of the law against discrimination (compare WAC 162-08-061). In addition, the administrative law judge shall consider whether adding the party will cause unnecessary delay or will divert the hearing from the objectives of the statute and of the commission‘s amended complaint. The administrative law judge need not follow court rules or precedents on the joinder of parties.

(6) Not class actions. Hearings under RCW 49.60.250 are not class actions, in the technical sense of that term in court practice. The commission, presenting the case in support of a complaint, may ask that a respondent be ordered to pay back pay or to afford other relief to all persons injured by an unfair practice, and the administrative law judge may issue such an order to carry out the purposes of the law against discrimination (WAC 162-08-298(6)). If such an order is made, the right to have the payments made will belong to the commission, not to the injured persons (WAC 162-08-305). The legal rights of persons of the class alleged to have been injured are not at issue in the case, and those persons are not bound by the administrative law judge‘s decision unless they accept the benefits of it in full satisfaction of their potential claims. Only the commission and the respondent and other persons named as parties are bound by the order of an administrative law judge.

WAC 162-08-288 (emphasis added) (hyperlinks added).

LEARN MORE

–gw

Prehearing Conference

by Gregory Williams, Esq. | Under Washington State Human Rights Commission (WSHRC) Practice-and-Procedure Regulations, what are the rules concerning prehearing conferences? 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 prehearing conferences. See WAC 162-08-286, 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).

PREHEARING CONFERENCE

WAC 162-08-286 is the relevant regulation, and it addresses prehearing conferences as follows:

(1) Conference. The administrative law judge, as a matter of discretion, with or without a motion from a party, may direct the attorneys for the parties to appear before the administrative law judge for a conference to consider:

(a) The simplification of the issues;

(b) The necessity or desirability of amendments to the pleadings;

(c) The possibility of obtaining admissions of fact and of documents which will be premarked for admission into evidence in order to avoid unnecessary proof;

(d) The limitation of the number of expert witnesses; and

(e) Other matters that may aid in the disposition of the case.

(2) Order. The administrative law judge shall make an order which recites the action taken at the conference, the amendments allowed to the pleadings, and the agreements made by the parties as to any of the matters considered, and which limits the issues for hearing to those not disposed of by admissions or agreements of counsel. The order when served and filed controls the subsequent course of the case, unless it is modified at the hearing to prevent manifest injustice.

WAC 162-08-286 (emphasis added) (hyperlinks added).

LEARN MORE

–gw

Summary Judgment

by Gregory Williams, Esq. | Under Washington State Human Rights Commission (WSHRC) Practice-and-Procedure Regulations, what are the rules concerning summary judgment? 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 summary judgment. See WAC 162-08-282, 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).

SUMMARY JUDGMENT

WAC 162-08-282 is the relevant regulation, and it addresses summary judgment as follows:

(1) Authorized. At any time prior to the tenth day before the date of a hearing, any party may serve and file a motion for summary judgment in the party’s favor as to all or part of the case.

(2) Procedure. The usual procedure for motions made before an administrative law judge, WAC 162-08-271, shall apply except where this section provides a different procedure.

(3) Response. Any party may serve and file opposing affidavits and a response, or either of these, within seven days after the motion for summary judgment has been served on that party.

(4) When decided. The administrative law judge shall decide a motion for summary judgment promptly after ten days have elapsed since the motion was filed with the administrative law judge.

(5) Oral argument optional. Oral argument shall be heard only if ordered by the administrative law judge.

(6) What is decided. The administrative law judge‘s final order shall be rendered forthwith if the pleadings, depositions, and admissions on file, together with the affidavits, if any, and other documents and evidence properly before the administrative law judge, show that there is no genuine issue as to any material fact and that the moving party is entitled to judgment as a matter of law. A summary judgment, interlocutory in character, may be rendered on the issue of whether an unfair practice has been committed although there is a genuine issue as to the amount or nature of relief to be ordered. Otherwise, summary judgment shall be denied.

(7) Orders when case not fully adjudicated on motion. If summary judgment is not ordered for the whole case or for all of the relief asked and a hearing is necessary, the administrative law judge shall if practicable ascertain what material facts exist without substantial controversy and what material facts are actually and in good faith controverted. The administrative law judge may summon counsel for all parties and interrogate them for this purpose. The administrative law judge shall then make an order specifying the facts that appear without substantial controversy, including the extent to which the amount or nature of relief is not in controversy, and directing such further proceedings as are just. At the hearing, the facts so specified shall be deemed established, and the hearing shall be conducted accordingly.

(8) Form of affidavits; further testimony. Supporting and opposing affidavits must be made on personal knowledge, must set forth facts that would be admissible in evidence, and must show affirmatively that the affiant is competent to testify to what is stated. Sworn or certified copies of all papers or parts of papers referred to in an affidavit shall be attached to the affidavit or served with it. The administrative law judge may permit affidavits to be supplemented or opposed by depositions or by further affidavits.

(9) When affidavits are unavailable. Should it appear from the affidavits of a party opposing the motion that the party cannot, for reasons stated, present by affidavit facts essential to justify the party’s opposition, the administrative law judge may refuse the motion, or may order a continuance to permit affidavits to be obtained or depositions to be taken or discovery to be had, or the administrative law judge may issue such other order as is just.

(10) Affidavits made in bad faith. Should it appear to the satisfaction of the administrative law judge at any time that any of the affidavits were presented in bad faith or solely for the purpose of delay, the administrative law judge shall order the party employing them to pay to the other party the amount of the reasonable expenses which the filing of the affidavits caused the party to incur, including reasonable attorney’s fees. The administrative law judge shall include this order in the final order.

WAC 162-08-282 (emphasis added) (hyperlinks added).

LEARN MORE

–gw

Motions Before Administrative Law Judge

by Gregory Williams, Esq. | Under Washington State Human Rights Commission (WSHRC) Practice-and-Procedure Regulations, what are the rules concerning motions before administrative law judges? 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 motions before administrative law judges. See WAC 162-08-271, 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).

MOTIONS BEFORE ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE

WAC 162-08-271 is the relevant regulation, and it addresses motions before administrative law judges as follows:

(1) Scope of section. This section governs all motions made to the administrative law judge except those made orally on the record during an administrative hearing.

(2) Form. A motion must be in writing. It must state the order or other relief requested and the grounds for the motion. It may be accompanied by affidavits. It must be supported by legal authorities, set out in the motion or in a supporting brief.

(3) Response. Any party may serve and file a response within five days after the motion has been served on that party.

(4) Filing. The original and one copy of every motion and response, with supporting papers, must be filed with the clerk, along with proof of service.

(5) Ruling. When the administrative law judge has received a response from all parties, or five days have elapsed since the last party was served, the administrative law judge shall rule on the motion without oral argument, unless the administrative law judge, in his or her discretion, orders that argument be heard.

WAC 162-08-271 (emphasis added) (hyperlinks added).

LEARN MORE

–gw

Voluntary Dismissal

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

VOLUNTARY DISMISSAL

WAC 162-08-268 is the relevant regulation, and it addresses voluntary dismissal as follows:

(1) Prior to day of hearing. Except as may be provided for cases alleging unfair practices in real estate transactions, on the day when the hearing of a case commences the commission or any other party on the side supporting the complaint may voluntarily dismiss the party’s case or a claim by serving and filing a written notice of dismissal.

(2) After hearing commenced. Except as may be provided for cases alleging unfair practices in real estate transactions, after a hearing has commenced the commission or any other party on the side supporting the complaint may move for voluntary dismissal of the party’s case or a claim. A motion that is made before the party rests at the conclusion of its opening case shall be granted as a matter of right. A motion made after that time may be granted if good cause is shown, and the grant may be subject to such terms and conditions as the administrative law judge deems proper.

(3) Effect of dismissal. A voluntary dismissal concludes the administrative proceeding as to the dismissed party or claim, but is not an adjudication of the merits of the issues before the administrative law judge (that is, the merits may still be adjudicated in another forum if the party has a right to sue in another forum and timely files such claim with the other forum). A voluntary dismissal of one claim does not extinguish any other claim, and a voluntary dismissal by one party does not dismiss any other party. 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 person has intervened as a party on the side of the complaint pursuant to WAC 162-08-288(4), in which circumstance the hearing shall proceed with the remaining parties.

WAC 162-08-268 (emphasis added) (hyperlinks added).

LEARN MORE

–gw

Amendment of Pleadings

by Gregory Williams, Esq. | Under Washington State Human Rights Commission (WSHRC) Practice-and-Procedure Regulations, what are the rules concerning amendment of pleadings? 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 amendment of pleadings. See WAC 162-08-265, 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).

AMENDMENT OF PLEADINGS

WAC 162-08-265 is the relevant regulation, and it addresses amendment of pleadings as follows:

(1) Right to amend. A party to an administrative hearing may amend a pleading once as a matter of course at any time more than twenty days before the date set for hearing. Otherwise, a party may amend a pleading only by leave of the administrative law judge or by written consent of all adverse parties.

(2) Action on motions to amend. The administrative law judge shall freely give leave to amend when justice so requires. The administrative law judge may designate a time for filing an answer to amended pleadings that may be answered, and may reschedule other dates, including the hearing date, if this is necessary to assure that issues for hearing are fully and properly framed.

(3) Form of amendment. An amendment other than one made on the record during a hearing must be in writing. A written amendment may be in the form of either a revised pleading superseding the entire text of the amended pleading, or a supplemental paper containing only the amendment.

WAC 162-08-265 (emphasis added) (hyperlinks added).

LEARN MORE

–gw

Discovery–Administrative Hearing

by Gregory Williams, Esq. | Under Washington State Human Rights Commission (WSHRC) Practice-and-Procedure Regulations, what are the rules concerning Discovery–Administrative Hearing? 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 Discovery–Administrative Hearing. See WAC 162-08-263, 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).

DISCOVERY–ADMINISTRATIVE HEARING

WAC 162-08-263 is the relevant regulation, and it addresses Discovery–Administrative Hearing as follows:

The commission has determined that discovery will be available in adjudicative proceedings in accordance with RCW 34.05.446(2).

(1) Methods. Upon certification of the file pursuant to WAC 162-08-190, and request for the appointment of an administrative law judge pursuant to WAC 162-08-211, any party may obtain discovery by the methods provided in CR 26(a). The procedures regarding these methods of discovery are found at CR 28 through 37 as now or hereafter amended and are hereby incorporated in this section.

(2) Scope of discovery. Any party may obtain discovery regarding any matter not privileged which is relevant to the amended complaint prepared by counsel for the commission or the additional charges filed by the complainant pursuant to WAC 162-08-261.

(3) Protective order. Rulings on motions for protective orders regarding discovery brought under this section shall be made by the administrative law judge pursuant to the provisions of WAC 162-08-271.

(4) Order compelling discovery. The administrative law judge 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 discovery. Motions for an order compelling discovery and the procedure for its disposition are governed by WAC 162-08-271.

WAC 162-08-263 (emphasis added) (hyperlinks added).

LEARN MORE

–gw

Complainant’s Participation

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

COMPLAINANT’S PARTICIPATION

WAC 162-08-261 is the relevant regulation, and it addresses complainant’s participation as follows:

(1) Notice of independent appearance. A complainant or aggrieved person under RCW 49.60.040(15) who desires to submit testimony or otherwise participate in the hearing as a party and not to leave the case in support of the complaint to be presented solely by counsel for the commission, must serve and file a notice of independent appearance within ten days after the notice of hearing is served on that complainant. The notice shall state the address where notices to the complainant shall be sent and it shall state whether the complainant elects to prove additional charges as provided in subsection (2) of this section.

(2) Election to prove additional charges. A complainant or aggrieved person under RCW 49.60.040(15) who has filed a notice of independent appearance stating an intention to prove additional charges in accordance with RCW 49.60.250(2), may at the hearing offer proof of averments included in the original complaint or in amendments to the original complaint made by the complainant, whether or not the averments are included in the amended complaint under which counsel for the commission is proceeding. For purposes of this section, the complainant may amend the original complaint without regard to intervening amendments made by the commission. The complainant may serve and file an amended complaint with a notice of independent appearance, or thereafter as provided by these rules. If no amended complaint is served with a notice of independent appearance that states an intention to prove additional charges, the clerk shall promptly place the original complaint in the file for the administrative law judge. Nothing done by the complainant under this rule shall place any duty on counsel for the commission to seek to prove matters not averred in the amended complaint accompanying the notice of hearing, or subsequent amendments by the commission.

(3) Appearance without election. If the complainant or aggrieved person under RCW 49.60.040(15) files a notice of independent appearance which does not state that he or she elects to prove additional charges, then the complainant‘s participation in the hearing shall be confined to the matters raised by the amended complaint filed with the notice of hearing, and subsequent amendments made by the commission.

(4) When no independent appearance. If the complainant or aggrieved person under RCW 49.60.040(15) does not file a notice of independent appearance as provided by this rule, the case in support of the complaint shall be presented solely by counsel for the commission.

WAC 162-08-261 (emphasis added) (hyperlinks added).

LEARN MORE

–gw

No Counterclaims or Crossclaims

by Gregory Williams, Esq. | Under Washington State Human Rights Commission (WSHRC) Practice-and-Procedure Regulations, what are the rules concerning counterclaims and crossclaims? 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 counterclaims and crossclaims. See WAC 162-08-253, 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).

NO COUNTERCLAIMS OR CROSSCLAIMS

WAC 162-08-253 is the relevant regulation, and it addresses counterclaims and crossclaims as follows:

Jurisdiction of the administrative law judge is limited to determining whether unfair practices have occurred, and counterclaims and cross claims will not be heard.

WAC 162-08-253 (emphasis added) (hyperlinks added).

LEARN MORE

–gw

Answer

by Gregory Williams, Esq. | Under Washington State Human Rights Commission (WSHRC) Practice-and-Procedure Regulations, what are the rules concerning answers? 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 answers. See WAC 162-08-251, 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).

ANSWER

WAC 162-08-251 is the relevant regulation, and it addresses answers as follows:

(1) Required. Every respondent shall file an answer to the amended complaint attached to the notice of hearing, and to any subsequent amendments or complaints that are filed.

(2) Content. The answer shall set out and assert every defense, in law or fact, to the claims of the complaint being answered.

(3) Waiver of defenses not pleaded. Defenses not pleaded in an answer are waived.

(4) Time for filing. An answer shall be filed within twenty days after notice of hearing is served, unless an extension of time is granted in writing by the administrative law judge.

(5) Form of defenses and denials. A respondent shall state in short and plain terms its defenses to each claim asserted and shall admit or deny each averment of the amended complaint. If the respondent is without knowledge or information sufficient to form a belief as to the truth of an averment, the respondent shall so state and this has the effect of a denial. Denials shall fairly meet the substance of the averments denied. When a respondent intends in good faith to deny only a part or a qualification of an averment, the respondent shall specify so much of it as is true and material and shall deny only the remainder.

(6) Affirmative defenses. A respondent who wishes to raise any matter constituting an avoidance or affirmative defense, including those required to be set forth affirmatively by CR 8(c), must plead the matter as an affirmative defense in the respondent’s answer. Among the matters which must be pleaded as affirmative defenses are the following:

(a) A bona fide occupational qualification;
(b) Business necessity that justifies a practice that has a discriminatory effect; and
(c) That another statute or rule of law precludes or limits enforcement of the law against discrimination, or regulations or precedents of the commission.

(7) Statutory steps. Any defense that the hearing cannot be held because the respondent has been prejudiced because statutory steps prior to hearing have not been taken, or because of some irregularity in statutory procedure, must be pleaded in the answer by specific negative averment, which shall include such supporting particulars as are within the answering respondent‘s knowledge or could reasonably have been learned by the answering respondent.

(8) Obligation of good faith. The assertion of denials and defenses is subject to the obligation of good faith set out in WAC 162-08-241(3) and CR-11.

(9) Reply. Unless the administrative law judge orders that a reply to an answer be filed, none shall be necessary. Averments in an answer shall be deemed denied or avoided.

WAC 162-08-251 (emphasis added) (hyperlinks added).

LEARN MORE

–gw

Record, Pleadings

by Gregory Williams, Esq. | Under Washington State Human Rights Commission (WSHRC) Practice-and-Procedure Regulations, what are the rules concerning record and pleadings? 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 record and pleadings. See WAC 162-08-231, 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).

RECORD, PLEADINGS

WAC 162-08-231 is the relevant regulation, and it addresses record and pleadings as follows:

(1) Record. The record of an administrative hearing shall include the items specified in RCW 34.05.437, including, but not limited to:

(a) All pleadings, motions, briefs, proposed findings of fact and conclusions of law and initial or final orders, objections, but not offers of settlement (RCW 49.60.250(2));
(b) Evidence received or considered;
(c) A statement of matters officially noticed;
(d) Any decision, opinion, or report by the officer presiding at the hearing.

(2) Pleadings. Pleadings for an administrative hearing shall include the notice of hearing with amended complaint attached and any amended complaints subsequently filed, plus any answers or replies filed under WAC 162-08-251, and the original complaint if, but only if, the complainant elects to proceed under it as provided in WAC 162-08-261.

(3) Proceedings before notice of hearing not part of record. No findings or other parts of the commission‘s record of action on the complaint prior to notice of hearing shall be included in the record of the administrative hearing unless the particular document is offered and admitted into evidence.

(4) Custody. The clerk shall keep custody of the official record of the administrative hearing as provided in WAC 162-04-026(3)(h) and shall keep the administrative law judge file separate from the file of the original complaint, investigation, and conciliation, of which the clerk has custody under WAC 162-04-026(3)(d) and 162-08-190.

(5) Record for appeal. The record certified to the court for the purpose of judicial review under RCW 34.05.510 et seq. shall comply with RCW 34.05.566.

(6) Record for enforcement. The record to be filed in an enforcement proceeding shall include the final order of the administrative law judge and any other portions of the record required by the court.

WAC 162-08-231 (emphasis added) (hyperlinks added).

LEARN MORE

–gw