Wash. Rev. Code » Title 49 · Chapter 49.36
Revised Code of Washington

Wash. Rev. Code § 49.36.010 (2026)

Unions legalized

✓ 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 lawful for working men and women to organize themselves into, or carry on labor unions for the purpose of lessening the hours of labor or increasing the wages or bettering the conditions of the members of such organizations; or carry out their legitimate purposes by any lawful means.
[ 1919 c 185 s 1; RRS s 7611.]
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 7 cases, 1965–2010 · leading case: Krystad v. Lau, 400 P.2d 72 (Wash. 1965).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Krystad v. Lau, 400 P.2d 72 (Wash. 1965). · cites it 10× “Respondents say that, under the common law, unions were not only unlawful but were held to be a criminal conspiracy which workingmen had neither the right to organize nor join, and mention so recent an enactment as RCW 49.36.010, passed in 1919, to confirm this point.”
Plumbers & Steamfitters Union Local 598 v. Washington Pub. Power Supply Sys., 724 P.2d 1030 (Wash. Ct. App. 1986). · cites it 8× “[3] RCW 49.36.010 [2] allows working men and women to organize themselves and carry out the legitimate purposes of the union by "any lawful means.”
Kilb v. First Student Transp., LLC, 236 P.3d 968 (Wash. Ct. App. 2010). · cites it 2× “[3] RCW 49.36.010; RCW 49.32.020. Kilb claimed his discharge violated the right of employees to organize *971 and form unions, RCW 49.”
Kilb v. First Student Transp., LLC, 188 L.R.R.M. (BNA) 3506 (Wash. Ct. App. 2010). · cites it 2× “3 RCW 49.36.010; RCW 49.32.020. Kilb claimed his discharge violated the right of employees to organize and form unions, RCW 49.”
State v. Fox, 510 P.2d 230 (Wash. 1973). “It shall be lawful for working men and women to organize themselves into, or carry on labor unions for the purpose of lessening the hours of labor or increasing the wages or bettering the conditions of the members of such organizations; or carry out their legitimate purposes by…”
Lund v. Grant Cnty. Pub. Hosp. Dist. No. 2, 932 P.2d 183 (Wash. Ct. App. 1997). “Lund’s complaint alleged breach of contract, negligence, wrongful discharge in violation of public policy, and violation of RCW 49.36.010 (recognizing the legal rights of labor unions).”
United Food & Com. Workers Union Local 367 v. Canned Foods, Inc., 900 P.2d 569 (Wash. Ct. App. 1995). · cites it 3× “” 4 More specifically, it relies on RCW 49.36.010, State v. Fox, 82 Wn.2d 289 , 510 P.”
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.