Washington Supreme Court Reaches Decision in Pay Transparency Case
Megan Livres | Legal Counsel
9/19/25 10:53 AM
Recently, the Washington Supreme Court issued its decision in Branson v. Washington Fine Wine & Spirits regarding the definition of a “job applicant” under Washington’s Equal Pay and Opportunities Act (“EPOA”). In the decision, the Court held that any person who applies to a job posting that does not comply with the requirements under the EPOA may seek damages under the statute, regardless of whether the individual is a bona fide applicant or actually desired to be employed in the position for which they applied. (Note: Associated Industries first alerted members to this issue and the pending litigation in an Employer Alert last December.)
The EPOA was amended in March 2022 to require employers to disclose salary, wage, and benefits information in all job postings, even those advertised via third parties (such as Indeed.com). Under the statute, “A job applicant or employee may bring a civil action against an employer for a violation of this section. A prevailing job applicant or employee is entitled to statutory damages of no less than $100 and no more than $5,000 per violation, plus reasonable attorneys’ fees and costs” (RCW 49.58.110).
The Washington Supreme Court heard the Branson case to settle the issue of whether a plaintiff seeking damages must be a “bona fide” applicant or otherwise have a “good faith” basis for applying to a job posting in order to seek these damages under the EPOA. Ultimately, the Court reasoned that the subjective intent of the applicant is irrelevant, as “any person who applies to a job posting” has standing to sue under the statute if the job posting does not meet the requirements of the EPOA.
The Court’s ruling undoubtedly exposes Washington employers with noncompliant job postings to significant penalties. However, the EPOA was again amended this year to give employers an opportunity to correct violations of the salary posting requirement. If a business corrects the violation within five business days of being alerted to the violation in writing, no penalties, damages, or other relief may be awarded (though this opportunity is only available from July 27, 2025 through July 27, 2027). The 2025 amendments also exempted employers from liability for unauthorized third-party postings and clarified that a fixed wage can be disclosed instead of a range. Furthermore, the amendments establish a more nuanced range for statutory damages. In determining the amount of statutory damages, courts will consider several factors, including the size of the employer, whether the violation was committed willfully, and whether it was a repeat violation.
The takeaway for Washington employers: continue to ensure that all current and future job postings on company and third-party websites comply with the EPOA’s wage, salary, and benefit information requirements. Employers should also be prepared to act quickly to correct job postings within five business days after receiving written notice from an applicant. There is potential for additional litigation to clarify other aspects of the amendment, including over what constitutes sufficient notice to trigger the cure period, whether the maximum statutory damages of $5,000 applies per posting or per applicant, and if aspects of the amendments should apply to existing lawsuits, as only the section addressing the notice and cure provision is expressly prospective.
Associated Industries will keep members apprised of any further amendments or litigation related to the EPOA. Please feel free to contact us if you have any questions.