Revised Code of Washington

Wash. Rev. Code § 49.46.080 (2026)

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section WA-LEGapp.leg.wa.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
(1) As new regulations or changes or modification of previously established regulations are proposed, the director shall call a public hearing for the purpose of the consideration and establishment of such regulations following the procedures used in the promulgation of standards of safety under chapter 49.17 RCW.
(2) Any interested party may obtain a review of the director's findings and order in the superior court of county of petitioners' residence by filing in such court within sixty days after the date of publication of such regulation a written petition praying that the regulation be modified or set aside. A copy of such petition shall be served upon the director. The finding of facts, if supported by evidence, shall be conclusive upon the court. The court shall determine whether the regulation is in accordance with law. If the court determines that such regulation is not in accordance with law, it shall remand the case to the director with directions to modify or revoke such regulation. If application is made to the court for leave to adduce additional evidence by any aggrieved party, such party shall show to the satisfaction of the court that such additional evidence is material, and that there were reasonable grounds for the failure to adduce such evidence before the director. If the court finds that such evidence is material and that reasonable grounds exist for failure of the aggrieved party to adduce such evidence in prior proceedings, the court may remand the case to the director with directions that such additional evidence be taken before the director. The director may modify the findings and conclusions, in whole or in part, by reason of such additional evidence.
(3) The judgment and decree of the court shall be final except that it shall be subject to review by the supreme court or the court of appeals as in other civil cases.
(4) The proceedings under this section shall not, unless specifically ordered by the court, operate as a stay of an administrative regulation issued under the provisions of this chapter. The court shall not grant any stay of an administrative regulation unless the person complaining of such regulation shall file in the court an undertaking with a surety or sureties satisfactory to the court for the payment to the employees affected by the regulation, in the event such regulation is affirmed, of the amount by which the compensation such employees are entitled to receive under the regulation exceeds the compensation they actually receive while such stay is in effect.
[ 1983 c 3 s 157; 1971 c 81 s 117; 1959 c 294 s 8.]
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 2 cases, 2000–2000 · leading case: Seattle Prof'l Eng'g Emp's Ass'n v. Boeing Co., 1 P.3d 578 (Wash. 2000).
Seattle Prof'l Eng'g Emp's Ass'n v. Boeing Co., 1 P.3d 578 (Wash. 2000). “In the first and second lines from the top of page 829 [1st column, second full paragraph, lines 9 & 10 of page 1129 of 991 P.2d] the words "on the basis of an eight-hour day" are deleted.”
SPEEA v. Boeing Co., 991 P.2d 1126 (Wash. 2000). “46 RCW, were entitled to recover damages as specified in RCW 49.46.080. We further hold the applicable limitation period for the employees' claims is three years.”
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.