Wash. Rev. Code » Title 49 · Chapter 49.60

Wash. Rev. Code § 49.60.172

Unfair practices with respect to HIV or hepatitis C infection

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section WA-LEGapp.leg.wa.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
(1) No person may require an individual to take an HIV or hepatitis C test, as a condition of hiring, promotion, or continued employment unless the absence of HIV or hepatitis C infection is a bona fide occupational qualification for the job in question.
(2) No person may discharge or fail or refuse to hire any individual, or segregate or classify any individual in any way which would deprive or tend to deprive that individual of employment opportunities or adversely affect his or her status as an employee, or otherwise discriminate against any individual with respect to compensation, terms, conditions, or privileges of employment on the basis of the results of an HIV test or hepatitis C test unless the absence of HIV or hepatitis C infection is a bona fide occupational qualification of the job in question.
(3) The absence of HIV or hepatitis C infection as a bona fide occupational qualification exists when performance of a particular job can be shown to present a significant risk, as defined by the board of health by rule, of transmitting HIV or hepatitis C infection to other persons, and there exists no means of eliminating the risk by restructuring the job.
(4) For the purpose of this chapter, any person who is actually infected with HIV or hepatitis C, but is not disabled as a result of the infection, shall not be eligible for any benefits under the affirmative action provisions of chapter 49.74 RCW solely on the basis of such infection.
(5) Employers are immune from civil action for damages arising out of transmission of HIV or hepatitis C to employees or to members of the public unless such transmission occurs as a result of the employer's gross negligence.
[ 2020 c 76 s 19; 2003 c 273 s 2; 1988 c 206 s 903.]
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 7 cases, 1996–2003 · leading case: Marquis v. City of Spokane
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Marquis v. City of Spokane (1996) wash “RCW 49.60.172, .174 (concerning employment discrimination with respect to *122 HTV infection); RCW 49.”
Griffin v. Eller (1996) wash “90, §§ 1-6, (physically disabled with service dog); Laws of 1985, ch.”
Lins v. Children's Discovery Centers of America, Inc. (1999) washctapp “12 RCW 49.60.172(2). 13 Gardner, 128 Wn.2d at 936 ; Dicomes, 113 Wn.”
Niemann v. Vaughn Community Church (2003) washctapp “VCC counters that the deed also impermissibly limits sales to other protected people who are not evangelical Protestants.”
Niemann v. Vaughn Community Church (2003) washctapp “VCC counters that the deed also impermissibly limits sales to other protected people who are not evangelical *834 Protestants.”
Griffin v. Eller (1996) wash “127, §§ 1-11 (sensory, mental, or physical handicap); Laws of 1985, ch. 90, §§ 1-6, (physically disabled with service dog); Laws of 1985, ch.”
Marquis v. City of Spokane (1996) wash “RCW 49.60.172, .174 (concerning employment discrimination with respect to HIV infection); RCW 49.”
— Wash. Rev. Code § 49.60.172(1) — 1 case
Niemann v. Vaughn Community Church (2003) washctapp “VCC counters that the deed also impermissibly limits sales to other protected people who are not evangelical *834 Protestants.”
— Wash. Rev. Code § 49.60.172(2) — 1 case
Lins v. Children's Discovery Centers of America, Inc. (1999) washctapp “12 RCW 49.60.172(2). 13 Gardner, 128 Wn.2d at 936 ; Dicomes, 113 Wn.”
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.