BlogLine

Washington Supreme Court clarifies “job applicant” under EPOA—but July 27, 2025 amendments to EPOA help employers

9/5/25

By: Cory A. Chipman and Galina Kletser Jakobson

On September 4, 2025, the Washington Supreme Court clarified the meaning of “job applicant” under the Washington Equal Pay and Opportunities Act (EPOA), RCW 49.58.110.¹ EPOA seeks to improve pay transparency and equity by requiring employers to provide wage and salary information in job postings.

The ruling in Branson v. Washington Fine Wine & Spirits LLC² is that a plaintiff must apply to a specific job posting, but is not required to prove they are a “bona fide” or “good faith” applicant by being willing to accept a job to obtain remedies under the statute.

Case Background

Plaintiffs Lisa Branson and Cherie Burke applied for retail positions at Total Wine & More via Indeed.com. The job postings failed to include the required wage scale or salary range, violating RCW 49.58.110(1). Burke interviewed for the job but declined the offer. Both plaintiffs filed a class action lawsuit seeking statutory damages under RCW 49.58.070. Total Wine argued that only applicants who would accept employment were eligible for remedies under the statute.

Supreme Court Holding

The Court defined a “job applicant” as any person who applies to a job posting. The Court based its decision on the statute’s plain language that did not include qualifiers like “bona fide” or “good faith” and the legislative history that changed the term “individual” to “job applicant or employee” to narrow eligibility without addressing an applicant’s intent.

Limitations Imposed by the 2025 Amendments to RCW 49.58.110

While the Supreme Court’s ruling expands liability for employers, recent legislative amendments, effective July 27, 2025, impose new procedural limitations on job applicants seeking remedies.

Cure Period for Employers (2025–2027)

Under the amended RCW 49.58.110(1)(b), employers have five business days to correct a noncompliant job posting after receiving written notice. If timely corrected, no damages, penalties or other relief may be awarded for that violation. However, the cure period only applies between July 27, 2025, and July 27, 2027.

Exclusive Remedies

The 2025 amendments also limit job applicants to either administrative remedies (via the Department of Labor & Industries (L&I)) or private civil actions. Applicants may recover statutory damages between $100 and $5,000 per violation, but not through both L&I and court action. The courts and L&I assess damages by considering factors like willfulness, employer size and deterrence.

Fixed Pay Disclosure Option

Employers may now disclose a fixed wage amount instead of a range if only one amount is offered—this applies to both new hires and internal transfers.

Narrower Definition of “Posting”

The law excludes postings that are digitally replicated without employer consent, reducing exposure to liability for third-party reposting.

Conclusion

The Branson decision affirms a broad interpretation of “job applicant” under Washington’s EPOA. However, the 2025 amendments to EPOA introduce procedural safeguards for employers, including a cure period and exclusive remedy provisions. For employers, compliance remains critical, but there is a limited window to correct errors upon written notice. For applicants and attorneys, the decision and amendments together provide a clearer framework for enforcing wage transparency rights.

For more information, please contact Cory A. Chipman at cory.chipman@fmglaw.com, Galina Kletser Jakobson at galina.jakobson@fmglaw.com or your local FMG attorney.

1. RCW 49.58.110: Disclosure of wage or salary range by employer—When required—Remedies. App.leg.wa.gov. https://app.leg.wa.gov/RCW/default.aspx?cite=49.58.110 ↩︎
2. Branson v. Washington Fine Wine & Spirits LLC, (Supreme Court of Washington State September 4, 2025). https://www.courts.wa.gov/opinions/pdf/1033940.pdf ↩︎

Information conveyed herein should not be construed as legal advice or represent any specific or binding policy or procedure of any organization. Information provided is for educational purposes only. These materials are written in a general format and not intended to be advice applicable to any specific circumstance. Legal opinions may vary when based on subtle factual distinctions. All rights reserved. No part of this presentation may be reproduced, published or posted without the written permission of Freeman Mathis & Gary, LLP.