Search form

Washington State Passes Law Prohibiting Discrimination Based on Sexual Orientation

By Barry Alan Johnsrud
  • February 3, 2006

On January 31, 2006, Washington Governor Christine Gregoire signed House Bill 2661 prohibiting discrimination based on sexual orientation.  The new law amends the Washington Law Against Discrimination to include sexual orientation in the categories of protected individuals under that law and defines sexual orientation as "heterosexuality, homosexuality, bisexuality, and gender expression or identity."  The WLAD already prohibited discrimination based on race, creed, color, national origin, families with children, sex, marital status, age, the presence of any sensory, mental, or physical disability and the use of a trained dog guide or service animal by a disabled person. 

Under the new law, an employer may not: (1) refuse to hire a person; (2) discharge or bar a person from a job; (3) discriminate in compensation or other terms or conditions of employment; or (4) print, circulate, or use any discriminatory statement, advertisement, publication, job application form, or make any inquiry in connection with prospective employment that is discriminatory on the basis of an individual's sexual orientation.  The WLAD is enforced through the Washington State Human Rights Commission and private litigation.  Remedies always include back pay and may include reinstatement, training to eliminate the discriminatory practice and damages for emotional distress.  The new law applies to all employers, except those with fewer than eight employees, nonprofit religious or sectarian organizations, and "any institute that is distinctly private in nature."  However, even small employers should be mindful of the potential for claims of wrongful termination in violation of public policy. 

To comply with the changes, employers should: (1) review and revise handbooks and personnel policies and procedures to assure compliance with the new law; and (2) inform and train supervisors and managers on the effect of the new law. 

©2006 Jackson Lewis P.C. This material is provided for informational purposes only. It is not intended to constitute legal advice nor does it create a client-lawyer relationship between Jackson Lewis and any recipient. Recipients should consult with counsel before taking any actions based on the information contained within this material. This material may be considered attorney advertising in some jurisdictions. Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome.

Reproduction of this material in whole or in part is prohibited without the express prior written consent of Jackson Lewis P.C., a law firm that built its reputation on providing workplace law representation to management. Founded in 1958, the firm has grown to more than 900 attorneys in major cities nationwide serving clients across a wide range of practices and industries including government relations, healthcare and sports law. More information about Jackson Lewis can be found at

See AllRelated Articles You May Like

May 15, 2019

EPLI Trends, Sexual Harassment Claims, and Planning for 2019

May 15, 2019

As workplace laws continue to evolve, the potential risk exposure is increasing. Jackson Lewis prepared this trends overview to help assess the current workplace law landscape in the #MeToo era and the wave of agency charges, latest claims, and new laws.  Highlights include: Pay Equity Lawsuits: The Next Wave of Litigation... Read More

May 7, 2019

Kentucky Employers Must Be Represented by Counsel in Unemployment Compensation Hearings, Court Rules

May 7, 2019

Non-lawyers may no longer represent employers in unemployment compensation hearings in Kentucky, the Kentucky Court of Appeals has ruled. Nichols v. Kentucky Unemployment Commission, et al., No. 2017-CA-001156-MR, 2019 Ky. App. LEXIS 73 (Ky Ct. App. Apr. 26, 2019). The Court held the section of the Kentucky unemployment compensation... Read More

April 24, 2019

U.S. Supreme Court: Employment Class Arbitration Must Be Expressly Addressed in Contract

April 24, 2019

Class action arbitration is such a departure from ordinary, bilateral arbitration of individual disputes that courts may compel class action arbitration only where the parties expressly declare their intention to be bound by such actions in their arbitration agreement, the U.S. Supreme Court has ruled in a 5-4 decision. Lamps Plus, Inc.... Read More

Related Practices