Wash. Rev. Code » Title 49 · Chapter 49.12
Revised Code of Washington

Wash. Rev. Code § 49.12.020 (2026)

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section WA-LEGapp.leg.wa.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
It shall be unlawful to employ any person in any industry or occupation within the state of Washington under conditions of labor detrimental to their health; and it shall be unlawful to employ workers in any industry within the state of Washington at wages which are not adequate for their maintenance.
[ 1973 2nd ex.s. c 16 s 3; 1913 c 174 s 2; RRS s 7624.]
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 18 cases (9 in the last 5 years), 2000–2026 · leading case: Wingert v. Yellow Freight Sys., Inc., 146 Wash. 2d 841 (Wash. 2002).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Wingert v. Yellow Freight Sys., Inc., 146 Wash. 2d 841 (Wash. 2002). “RCW 49.12.020. This statutory language evidences a strong legislative intent that employees be afforded healthy working conditions and adequate wages.”
Wingert v. Yellow Freight Sys., Inc., 50 P.3d 256 (Wash. 2002). “RCW 49.12.020. This statutory language evidences a strong legislative intent that employees be afforded healthy working conditions and adequate wages.”
Drinkwitz v. Alliant Techsystems, Inc., 996 P.2d 582 (Wash. 2000). “16, § 3 (codified at RCW 49.12.020). Washington has also had a law requiring an eight-hour workday since 1899.”
Drinkwitz v. Alliant Techsystems, Inc., 140 Wash. 2d 291 (Wash. 2000). “16, § 3 (codified at RCW 49.12.020). Washington has also had a law requiring an eight-hour workday since 1899.”
Wingert v. Yellow Freight Sys., Inc., 13 P.3d 677 (Wash. Ct. App. 2000). “RCW 49.12.020 provides: *593 It shall be unlawful to employ any person in any industry or occupation within the state of Washington under conditions of labor detrimental to their health .”
Wingert v. Yellow Freight Sys., Inc., 13 P.3d 677 (Wash. Ct. App. 2001). “RCW 49.12.020 provides: It shall be unlawful to employ any person in any industry or occupation within the state of Washington under conditions of labor detrimental to their health .”
Rojas v. Int'l Paper Co. (E.D. Wash. 2025). · cites it 4× “4 In his First Amended Complaint, Plaintiff brings claims for (1) failure to 5 provide rest periods, in violation of Wash. Rev. Code § 49.12.020 and Wash. 6 Admin.”
Skau v. JBS Carriers, Inc (W.D. Wash. 2019). · cites it 2× “See RCW § 49.12.020; RCW § 9 43.22.270; WAC 296-126-092(4).”
Horton v. Americool Heating & A/C LLC (W.D. Wash. 2023). · cites it 2× “First, for failing to provide employees 21 with rest breaks in violation of the Industrial Welfare Act, RCW § 49.12.020, and WAC 296‐126‐ 22 092 (“Count I”).”
Tyrone Washington v. Kerry Inc (W.D. Wash. 2025). · cites it 2× “4 Specifically, Plaintiff claims: 5 (1) Violations of RCW 49.12.020 and WAC 296-126-092 – Failure to Provide Rest Periods; (2) Violations of RCW 49.”
Virginia Mason Med. Ctr., V. Rheannon Androckitis (Wash. Ct. App. 2024). “16, § 3 (emphasis added) (codified at RCW 49.12.020). In so doing, the legislature declared that [t]he welfare of the state of Washington demands that .”
Freitas v. Heartland Express Inc of Iowa (E.D. Wash. 2022). “26 Specifically, these causes of action include: (3) Failure to Provide Meal and Rest 27 Breaks and Ensure Those Breaks Are Taken, RCW 49.12.020 and WAC 296-126- 28 092; (9) Failure to Provide Meal Periods, or Compensation in Lieu Thereof, 1 California Labor Code §§ 226.”
Show all 18 citing cases →
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.