Glossary · Wage & Hour

Washington Pay Transparency Law (RCW 49.58.110): Job Posting Pay Range Rules Explained

By Steve Levine · Updated July 13, 2026 · 7 min read

Quick Answer

RCW 49.58.110 is the pay transparency section of Washington's Equal Pay and Opportunities Act (EPOA). Since January 1, 2023, it has required employers with 15 or more employees to disclose in every job posting the wage scale or salary range and a general description of all benefits and other compensation. A job applicant or employee affected by a noncompliant posting can recover actual damages or statutory damages — now set at $100 to $5,000 per violation after the 2025 amendments — plus attorneys' fees and costs. The law set off a large wave of class actions over Washington job postings that left the pay range off.

What RCW 49.58.110 Is and Why It Exists

RCW 49.58.110 is one section of Washington's Equal Pay and Opportunities Act, the state's equal-pay statute codified in Chapter 49.58 RCW. The pay transparency requirement was added by the Legislature in 2022 (Senate Bill 5761) and took effect on January 1, 2023. Its purpose is to reduce pay secrecy and wage gaps by letting job seekers see, up front, what a position actually pays and what it comes with — before they apply, negotiate, or accept.

Washington was part of a broader move by several states toward wage-and-hour and pay transparency rules, but its version stands out because it gives affected job applicants a direct private right of action with statutory damages. That combination — a clear technical requirement plus a per-violation dollar figure — is what turned an ordinary compliance rule into the engine behind hundreds of class actions.

Who Is Covered and What a Posting Must Disclose

The requirement applies to employers with 15 or more employees that engage in any business in Washington or recruit for jobs that could be filled by a Washington-based employee — including remote roles that could be performed from Washington. For every covered posting, the law requires:

  1. The wage scale or salary range. The posting must state the pay the employer genuinely expects to offer for the position. A single fixed amount may be listed when only one rate is offered.
  2. A general description of all benefits. Health care, retirement, paid time off and leave, and similar benefits must be described in general terms.
  3. A general description of other compensation. Bonuses, commissions, profit-sharing, stock, and other pay elements offered for the role must be described.
The word “posting” is defined broadly: any solicitation intended to recruit applicants for a specific available position, whether the employer posts it directly or through a third party, and whether it is electronic or a printed hard copy. That breadth is why third-party job boards and recruiter listings have been swept in. The law also gives current employees the right, on request, to the wage scale or salary range when they are offered an internal transfer or promotion.

Statutory Damages and the Right to Sue

RCW 49.58.070 lets a person harmed by a violation of the Equal Pay and Opportunities Act recover actual damages or statutory damages, whichever is greater, plus interest and reasonable attorneys' fees and costs. A claimant can either file an administrative complaint with the Washington State Department of Labor & Industries (L&I) or bring a private lawsuit in court.

When the pay transparency requirement first took effect, courts generally read the statutory-damages figure as $5,000 per violation. Because a plaintiff did not have to prove a specific dollar loss to seek that amount, and because each noncompliant posting could be counted as a violation for a large class of applicants, the potential aggregate exposure was substantial — the same statutory-damages dynamic that drives litigation under laws like the California Invasion of Privacy Act. That structure is what made Washington postings a magnet for class-action filings through 2023 and 2024.

The 2025 Amendments — Cure Period & Damages Range

In response to the flood of lawsuits, the Legislature amended the law through Engrossed Substitute Senate Bill 5408, effective July 27, 2025. The key changes:

• A damages range instead of a flat figure. Statutory damages are now $100 to $5,000 per violation, with the court setting the amount based on factors such as the size of the employer, whether the violation was willful, and whether it was a repeat violation.
• A temporary cure period. From July 27, 2025 through July 27, 2027, an employer that receives written notice of a noncompliant posting generally has five business days to fix it and can avoid liability by doing so.
• A single fixed amount is allowed. If the employer will offer only one pay rate, it may list that fixed amount rather than a range, including for internal transfers.
• Exemption for unauthorized reposts. Postings that were digitally replicated and republished without the employer's consent are exempted from the requirement.

L&I may also assess civil penalties for violations — generally $500 for a first violation and up to $1,000 (or up to ten percent of damages) for repeat violations. The amendments narrowed the exposure that had built up under the original text, so cases filed over pre- and post-amendment postings can turn on which version of the law applies.

The Class-Action Wave Over Washington Job Postings

Because a covered posting that omits the pay range is a discrete, easy-to-identify violation, plaintiffs' firms filed hundreds of proposed class actions against Washington employers whose listings left out a wage scale or benefits description. Typical classes are defined as everyone who applied for a Washington job with a given company during a set window (often starting January 1, 2023) where the posting did not disclose the required pay information. Many of these have resolved in settlements that pay each approved claimant an equal share of a fund — for example, the Jiffy Lube (Team Car Care) Washington pay transparency settlement and a string of similar job-posting settlements.

One important limit came from the courts. The Washington Supreme Court addressed who actually qualifies as a “job applicant” entitled to the statutory remedy and held that a person must be a bona fide applicant — someone genuinely seeking the job — rather than anyone who submits an application solely to manufacture a claim. Whether a given person is a bona fide applicant is a fact-specific question, and the ruling reshaped which claims can proceed and how classes are defined.

As always, being named in a complaint is not a finding of wrongdoing. Defendants dispute these claims, and a filed case is not a settlement: allegations must be proven, a class must be certified, and any recovery depends on the outcome. Employers have also argued that certain postings were compliant, fell outside the statute, or were fixed within the cure period.

If You Think a Posting Left Off the Pay Range

If you applied for a Washington job and believe the posting did not include the required wage scale, salary range, or benefits description, the controlling text is the statute itself, RCW 49.58.110, together with the enforcement and damages provisions elsewhere in Chapter 49.58 RCW. You can file a complaint with the Washington State Department of Labor & Industries or consult an attorney about a private claim. Whether any particular posting violated the law — and how the 2025 amendments and the bona-fide-applicant rule apply — depends on the specific facts, so this page is general legal information, not legal advice.

Frequently Asked Questions

What is RCW 49.58.110?

RCW 49.58.110 is the pay transparency section of Washington's Equal Pay and Opportunities Act. Since January 1, 2023, it has required employers with 15 or more employees to include, in each job posting, the wage scale or salary range for the position and a general description of all of the benefits and other compensation to be offered. It applies to postings the employer makes directly and to those placed through a third party.

How much can you recover for a noncompliant Washington job posting?

A job applicant or employee affected by a noncompliant posting may recover actual damages or statutory damages, whichever is greater, plus reasonable attorneys' fees and costs and interest. Under the 2025 amendments effective July 27, 2025, statutory damages range from $100 to $5,000 per violation, with the exact amount set by the court based on factors such as the size of the employer and whether the violation was willful. Before that amendment, courts generally treated the statutory figure as $5,000 per violation. These are amounts a court may award if a violation is proven, not a guaranteed payout.

Who has to follow Washington's pay transparency law?

The disclosure requirement applies to employers with 15 or more employees that engage in any business in Washington or recruit for jobs that could be filled by a Washington-based employee, including remote positions that could be performed from Washington. Employers below 15 employees are not covered by the RCW 49.58.110 posting requirement.

What did the 2025 amendments change?

Engrossed Substitute Senate Bill 5408, effective July 27, 2025, amended the law in response to a wave of lawsuits. It set statutory damages at a range of $100 to $5,000 per violation instead of a flat figure, added a temporary five-business-day cure period (running July 27, 2025 through July 27, 2027) that lets an employer fix a noncompliant posting after written notice to avoid liability, allowed a single fixed pay amount to be listed when only one rate is offered, and exempted postings that were digitally replicated and published without the employer's consent.

Do you have to actually want the job to sue?

The Washington Supreme Court held that only a bona fide job applicant — a person genuinely seeking employment with the employer — is a "job applicant" entitled to the statutory remedy, rather than anyone who merely submits an application to trigger a claim. Whether a particular person is a bona fide applicant is a fact-specific question, and this ruling has shaped which pay-transparency claims can move forward.

Related Terms

About This Page

General legal information about Washington's pay transparency law (RCW 49.58.110), not legal advice. OpenClassActions.com is a consumer news site and is not a law firm or a settlement administrator. Statutes and case law change, and how they apply depends on the facts of a particular situation. For the controlling text, see RCW 49.58.110 and the rest of Chapter 49.58 RCW, along with the relevant Washington court decisions and the Department of Labor & Industries' guidance. If you think your rights were affected, consult a qualified attorney in Washington.

More on Wage, Pay & Job-Posting Claims

More Class Actions

Jiffy Lube (Team Car Care) Washington Pay Transparency Settlement
With Proof Settlement

Jiffy Lube (Team Car Care) Washington Pay Transparency Settlement

Est. $1,519.58 per claim · $1.18M fund · WA Jiffy Lube job applicants (Jan 2023 – Apr 2026)
BrandSafway Washington Job Postings Settlement
With Proof Settlement

BrandSafway Washington Job Postings Settlement

Est. ~$1,632 cash · WA applicants to BrandSafway & related entities (Jan 2023 – Jul 2026)
DOWL, LLC Washington Job Postings Settlement
With Proof Settlement

DOWL, LLC Washington Job Postings Settlement

Est. $1,658.76 · $805K–$1.205M fund · WA applicants to DOWL (Jan 2023 – May 2026)
Oldcastle APG West Washington Job Postings Settlement
With Proof Settlement

Oldcastle APG West Washington Job Postings Settlement

Est. ~$1,664.40 cash · up to $2.25M fund · WA applicants (Jan 2023 – Apr 2026)
All Open Class Action Settlements
With Proof Settlements

All Open Class Action Settlements

Browse settlements currently accepting claims — many with no proof required.