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

Wash. Rev. Code § 49.12.250 (2026)

Employee inspection of personnel file—Erroneous or disputed information

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section WA-LEGapp.leg.wa.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
(1) For any employer other than those specified under subsection (2) of this section:
(a) The employer shall provide a copy of personnel file(s) within 21 calendar days after the employee, former employee, or their designee requests the file(s) at no cost to the employee, former employee, or their designee.
(b) The employer shall, within 21 calendar days of receiving a written request from a former employee or their designee, furnish a signed written statement to the former employee or their designee stating the effective date of discharge, whether the employer had a reason for the discharge, and if so, the reasons.
(2) Any employer subject to the requirements under chapter 42.56 RCW shall provide a copy of personnel file(s) when requested by the employee, former employee, or their designee in accordance with the procedures and requirements set forth in chapter 42.56 RCW. This subsection (2) does not limit or modify disclosure requirements under chapter 42.56 RCW.
(3)(a) An employee annually may petition that the employer under subsection (1) or (2) of this section review all information in the employee's personnel file(s) that are regularly maintained by the employer as a part of the employer's business records or are subject to reference for information given to persons outside of the company. The employer shall determine if there is any irrelevant or erroneous information in the file(s), and shall remove all such information from the file(s). If an employee does not agree with the employer's determination, the employee may at the employee's request have placed in the employee's personnel file a statement containing the employee's rebuttal or correction. Nothing in this subsection prevents the employer from removing information more frequently.
(b) A former employee shall retain the right of rebuttal or correction for a period not to exceed two years.
(4) For the purposes of this section, "former employee" means a person who separated from the employer within three years of the date of the person's request.
[ 2025 c 273 s 2; 1985 c 336 s 2.]
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 10 cases (5 in the last 5 years), 2000–2025 · leading case: Martin v. Gonzaga Univ., 425 P.3d 837 (Wash. 2018).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Martin v. Gonzaga Univ., 425 P.3d 837 (Wash. 2018). · cites it 4× “Martin sued Gonzaga, alleging that he was wrongfully discharged because of his whistle-blowing, and asserting a private claim under RCW 49.12.250 for an alleged violation of that statute's requirement that Gonzaga provide him with his complete personnel file.”
Wood v. Lowe, 10 P.3d 494 (Wash. Ct. App. 2000). · cites it 9× “Wood's personnel file under RCW 49.12.250. Under RCW 49.12.250(1), an employer must provide an employee with access to his or her personnel file "within a reasonable period of time" of the employee's request.”
Wood v. Lowe, 102 Wash. App. 872 (Wash. Ct. App. 2000). · cites it 9× “Wood’s personnel file under RCW 49.12.250. Under RCW 49.12.250(1), an employer must provide an employee with access to his or her personnel file “within a reasonable period of time” of the employee’s request.”
Germeau v. Mason Cnty., 271 P.3d 932 (Wash. Ct. App. 2012). · cites it 2× “¶42 In Wood, an independent, non-PRA authority, namely RCW 49.12.250(1), required an agency to make a personnel file available “ ‘within a reasonable period of time’ after the [entitled] employee requests the file.”
David O'dea, Resp/cross App V. City Of Tacoma, Apps/cross Resps, 493 P.3d 1245 (Wash. Ct. App. 2021). · cites it 2× “Wood’s blanket letter; her request could be reasonably interpreted as falling under” the personnel file statute, RCW 49.12.250(1). Id. 28 No. 53613-7-II Applying the fair notice factors, we conclude that O’Dea’s remaining requests did not give fair notice that they were intended…”
Dahlstrom v. Life Care Centers of Am. Inc (W.D. Wash. 2023). · cites it 4× “at 54–60 (Claim 5); (6) violation of 7 RCW 49.12.250 for “refusal to permit review of personnel file,” id.”
Lopez v. Nutex Health Inc (W.D. Wash. 2024). · cites it 3× “Lopez 9 also asserts a claim against Defendants for wrongfully withholding an employee personnel file in 10 violation of RCW 49.12.250. Id. ¶¶ 8.1–8.3. Lopez raises two claims against Defendants for 11 retaliation and hostile work environment in violation of the FMLA, 29 U.”
Plintron Tech. USA LLC v. Phillips (W.D. Wash. 2025). · cites it 3× “070; (4) Double Damages for Willful and Intentional Withholding of Wages, 20 RCW §§ 49.”
David Martin v. Gonzaga Univ. (Wash. Ct. App. 2017). “He contends that Gonzaga University failed to provide him, when requested, a complete copy of his personnel file in violation ofRCW 49.12.250. RCW 49.12.240 and .250 control.”
Eric Hood v. Centralia Coll. (Wash. Ct. App. 2024). “3d 494 (2000) (finding no fair notice where plaintiff’s public records request was ambiguous and could have been construed as a personnel action under RCW 49.12.250(1)). It remains possible to provide fair notice where a request is submitted in the shadow of non-PRA legal…”
— Wash. Rev. Code § 49.12.250(1) — 5 cases
Wood v. Lowe, 10 P.3d 494 (Wash. Ct. App. 2000). “Wood's personnel file under RCW 49.12.250. Under RCW 49.12.250(1), an employer must provide an employee with access to his or her personnel file "within a reasonable period of time" of the employee's request.”
Wood v. Lowe, 102 Wash. App. 872 (Wash. Ct. App. 2000). “Wood’s personnel file under RCW 49.12.250. Under RCW 49.12.250(1), an employer must provide an employee with access to his or her personnel file “within a reasonable period of time” of the employee’s request.”
Germeau v. Mason Cnty., 271 P.3d 932 (Wash. Ct. App. 2012). “¶42 In Wood, an independent, non-PRA authority, namely RCW 49.12.250(1), required an agency to make a personnel file available “ ‘within a reasonable period of time’ after the [entitled] employee requests the file.”
David O'dea, Resp/cross App V. City Of Tacoma, Apps/cross Resps, 493 P.3d 1245 (Wash. Ct. App. 2021). “Wood’s blanket letter; her request could be reasonably interpreted as falling under” the personnel file statute, RCW 49.12.250(1). Id. 28 No. 53613-7-II Applying the fair notice factors, we conclude that O’Dea’s remaining requests did not give fair notice that they were intended…”
Eric Hood v. Centralia Coll. (Wash. Ct. App. 2024). “3d 494 (2000) (finding no fair notice where plaintiff’s public records request was ambiguous and could have been construed as a personnel action under RCW 49.12.250(1)). It remains possible to provide fair notice where a request is submitted in the shadow of non-PRA legal…”
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.