Revised Code of Washington
Wash. Rev. Code § 51.12.110 (2026)
✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases:
SyfertCases citing this section
WA-LEGapp.leg.wa.gov
JustiaTitle on Justia
CornellLII Search
CasesGoogle Scholar
Any employer who has in his or her employment any person or persons excluded from mandatory coverage pursuant to RCW 51.12.020 may file notice in writing with the director, on such forms as the department may provide, of his or her election to make such persons otherwise excluded subject to this title. The employer shall forthwith display in a conspicuous manner about his or her works, and in a sufficient number of places to reasonably inform his or her workers of the fact, printed notices furnished by the department stating that he or she has so elected. Said election shall become effective upon the filing of said notice in writing. The employer and his or her workers shall be subject to all the provisions of this title and entitled to all of the benefits thereof: PROVIDED, That those who have heretofore complied with the foregoing conditions and are carried and considered by the department as within the purview of this title shall be deemed and considered as having fully complied with its terms and shall be continued by the department as entitled to all of the benefits and subject to all of the liabilities without other or further action. Any employer who has complied with this section may withdraw his or her acceptance of liability under this title by filing written notice with the director of the withdrawal of his or her acceptance. Such withdrawal shall become effective thirty days after the filing of such notice or on the date of the termination of the security for payment of compensation, whichever last occurs. The employer shall, at least thirty days before the effective date of the withdrawal, post reasonable notice of such withdrawal where the affected worker or workers work and shall otherwise notify personally the affected workers. Withdrawal of acceptance of this title shall not affect the liability of the department or self-insurer for compensation for any injury occurring during the period of acceptance.
The department shall have the power to cancel the elective adoption coverage if any required payments or reports have not been made. Cancellation by the department shall be no later than thirty days from the date of notice in writing by the department advising of cancellation being made.
[ 1991 c 246 s 5; 1982 c 63 s 17; 1980 c 14 s 6. Prior: 1977 ex.s. c 350 s 22; 1977 ex.s. c 323 s 8; 1971 ex.s. c 289 s 85; 1961 c 23 s 51.12.110; prior: 1959 c 308 s 11; 1929 c 132 s 5; 1923 c 136 s 6; 1911 c 74 s 19; RRS s 7696.]
Notes:
Effective date—Conflict with federal requirements—1991 c 246: See notes following RCW 51.08.195.
Effective dates—Implementation—1982 c 63: See note following RCW 51.32.095.
Severability—Effective date—1977 ex.s. c 323: See notes following RCW 51.04.040.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 10
cases, 1957–2020 · leading case: Dep't of Labor & Indus. v. Fankhauser, 849 P.2d 1209 (Wash. 1993).
Dep't of Labor & Indus. v. Fankhauser, 849 P.2d 1209 (Wash. 1993). “Sole proprietors or partners may opt into the system under RCW 51.12.110 and RCW 51.32-.030, but neither claimant in this case elected coverage during his self-employment.”
Stelter v. Dep't of Labor & Indus., 57 P.3d 248 (Wash. 2002). “095(1), in effect prior to 1987, which provided: Common or contract carriers domiciled in this state that are engaged exclusively in interstate or foreign commerce, or any combination thereof, may elect coverage under this title in the manner provided by RCW 51.12.110 for their…”
Stelter v. Dep't of Labor & Indus., 147 Wash. 2d 702 (Wash. 2002). “095(1), in effect prior to 1987, which provided: Common or contract carriers domiciled in this state that are engaged exclusively in interstate or foreign commerce, or any combination thereof, may elect coverage under this title in the manner provided by RCW 51.12.110 for their…”
Stelter v. Dep't of Labor & Indus., 107 Wash. App. 477 (Wash. Ct. App. 2001). “Before this proviso was added in 1989, the statute provided: Common or contract carriers domiciled in this' state that are engaged exclusively in interstate or foreign commerce, or any combination thereof, may elect coverage under this title in the manner provided by RCW…”
Garrisey v. Westshore Marina Assocs., 469 P.2d 590 (Wash. Ct. App. 1970). “In a class (4) case, if the injured maritime employee avails himself of the Industrial Insurance Act remedy instead of an alternative Longshoremen’s Act or Jones Act remedy, he is bound by his election as to coverage both by the statute making the remedy exclusive and by the…”
Bice v. Anderson, 324 P.2d 1067 (Wash. 1958). “Respondent had elected to place himself within the provisions of the workmen’s compensation act, as provided by RCW 51.12.110 [cf. Rem. Rev. Stat., § 7696].”
Stelter v. Dept. of Labor & Indus., 27 P.3d 650 (Wash. Ct. App. 2001). “Before this proviso was added in 1989, the statute provided: Common or contract carriers domiciled in this state that are engaged exclusively in interstate or foreign commerce, or any combination thereof, may elect coverage under this title in the manner provided by RCW…”
Jason Aguirre, V Kroger, Inc., 463 P.3d 780 (Wash. Ct. App. 2020). “1 The superior court order erroneously refers to “RCW 51.12.110,” but this citation was clearly a reference to RCW 51.”
Freeman v. Rinkel, 312 P.2d 822 (Wash. 1957). “, § 7696, and we shall trace its amendments to its present form as RCW 51.12.110.) We do not know how more explicit language could be used to indicate that the elective adoption employer and his elective adoption workmen were to be subject to the other provisions of the act,…”
Dosanjh v. Bhatti, 934 P.2d 1210 (Wash. Ct. App. 1997). “In summary, the plain statutory language of section 9 provides that if a worker covered by the B.”
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.