Washington WARN Act Requirements for Employers
Washington WARN Act rules: the 50-employee threshold, 60-day notice, layoffs across multiple sites, the paid leave restriction, exceptions, and penalties.
Washington WARN Act Requirements for Employers
Washington now has its own mass layoff notice law, and it reaches employers the federal WARN Act does not. The 50-employee threshold, why layoffs across several locations get added together, the paid leave restriction no other state has, and what a violation costs.
Washington has its own mass layoff notice law, and it is new enough that a large share of the material written about layoff notice in this state predates it. The Securing Timely Notification and Benefits for Laid-Off Employees Act took effect on July 27, 2025, and it reaches employers with 50 or more full-time employees in Washington, half the federal threshold.
Three features make it meaningfully different from the federal WARN Act rather than a state copy of it: a mass layoff is not confined to a single site, so separations across locations are added together; employees on state paid family and medical leave may not be included in a mass layoff; and the state can assess its own daily civil penalty on top of employee back pay. If you are planning a reduction in force in Washington, those three are where the surprises live.
Does Washington Have One?
Yes. Washington now has a state layoff notice law that operates alongside federal WARN, and it applies to a wider set of employers than the federal statute does. The Employment Security Department calls it the Mass Layoffs and Business Closings law, and describes it as varying from the federal WARN Act rather than duplicating it (Washington Employment Security Department).
Both laws can apply at once. A Washington employer with 300 employees planning a large reduction is covered federally and by state law simultaneously, and must satisfy both. Where the requirements differ, the stricter one governs in practice, because complying with the looser one does not discharge the other obligation.
Which Employers Are Covered
Employers with 50 or more full-time employees in Washington. Part-time employees are excluded from the count, as under federal law.
The word to notice is in Washington. The state threshold is measured against the Washington workforce, not the national one. That cuts both ways. A company headquartered in another state with 60 employees in Washington is covered by state law even if its total headcount is well under the federal 100. A national employer with 4,000 people and 30 of them in Washington is covered federally but falls below the state threshold.
For a multi-state employer, this means the coverage analysis has to be run once per applicable law rather than once overall. Reaching the wrong answer here is not recoverable later, because the notice period has already been missed by the time anyone discovers the error.
What Triggers Notice
Two events trigger the obligation, and the department's guidance notes that a sufficient reduction in hours can also bring the law into play.
| Event | Definition | Threshold |
|---|---|---|
| Business closing | Permanent or temporary shutdown of a single site of employment, or of one or more facilities or operating units within a site | 50 or more full-time employees at a single site |
| Mass layoff | Reduction in force that is not the result of a business closing | 50 or more employees, excluding part-time, in any 30-day period, not limited to one site |
| Reduction of hours | A sufficient ongoing reduction in hours can constitute an employment loss | Assessed against the same thresholds; confirm the current rule with the department |
The second row is the one to read carefully. Under federal WARN, a mass layoff is assessed at a single site of employment, and a reduction spread across three offices may trigger nothing because no single site reaches the threshold. Washington does not limit the definition that way, so employment losses across locations within a 30-day period are added together.
There is also a restriction with no counterpart anywhere else. An employer may not include in a mass layoff an employee who is currently on leave under the state Paid Family and Medical Leave program, unless an exception to the notice requirement applies. That makes leave status a required check on the selection list before it is final, not a detail to reconcile afterwards.
Notice Period and Contents
Sixty calendar days of advance written notice, the same period as federal WARN. Washington did not extend the period the way New York and New Jersey did; it widened who is covered instead.
The notice must contain what federal WARN requires, plus additional Washington-specific content.
| Required element | Detail |
|---|---|
| Site information | Name and address of the employment site where the closing or mass layoff will occur |
| Company contact | Name and contact details of a company official available for further information |
| Timing | Expected date of the closing or layoff and whether it is permanent or temporary |
| Relocation and contracting | Whether the action will result in relocation or in contracting out the operations or the affected positions |
| Employee details | Names and addresses of affected employees, on the notices to the bargaining representative and to the department only |
| Extended actions | Additional notice where a closing or layoff extends beyond the period announced in the original notice |
The relocation and contracting-out disclosure is a Washington addition and does not appear in the federal notice requirements. So is the obligation to issue further notice when an action runs past the period originally announced, which matters for phased reductions that get extended.
The March 2026 amendment reshaped how employee names travel. Names of affected employees are included only where they are not represented by a bargaining representative, names and addresses appear only on the notices to the bargaining representative and to the department, and those details are exempt from disclosure under the state Public Records Act. The practical result is that the publicly visible version of a filed notice no longer carries individual employee data.
Who Receives the Notice
The Employment Security Department and the affected employees, or their bargaining representative where the employees are represented. The department serves as the state dislocated worker unit and maintains a public database of filed layoff and closure notices.
Filing with the state is not a formality. Failure to notify the department is what triggers the separate daily civil penalty described below, which is assessed independently of anything owed to employees. An employer that tells its staff correctly but never files with the state has satisfied one obligation and breached the other.
Confirm the current filing method with the department before submitting. The agency has been actively updating its rules and its published contact details for layoff assistance, and a notice sent to a superseded address is not a filed notice.
Exceptions to the Notice
Four exceptions can shorten the 60-day period. None eliminates the notice, and the employer must produce documentation to establish that an exception applies.
The construction project exception is specific to Washington and has no direct federal equivalent. The other three track the familiar federal exceptions, but the documentation requirement does not: Washington employers must be able to substantiate the exception to the department, and the department has been developing rules on exactly what that documentation must contain.
Where an exception applies to only part of the 60-day window, notice is still required as soon as the exception no longer applies. Waiting until the reduction happens and asserting an exception afterwards is the pattern that produces liability, because the burden of proof sits with the employer and the contemporaneous record is what discharges it.
Penalties for No Notice
Two separate exposures, one running to employees and one running to the state.
The three-week window is worth planning around rather than discovering. An employer that realises after the fact that notice was required can still eliminate the civil penalty by paying affected employees in full inside three weeks of ordering the action. That is a narrow window and it closes quickly, but it is the one meaningful remedy available after a missed notice.
Washington vs Federal WARN
Both laws can apply to the same reduction. Where they differ, satisfying the federal requirement does not discharge the state one.
| Requirement | Federal WARN | Washington |
|---|---|---|
| Employer threshold | 100 or more employees nationally | 50 or more full-time employees in Washington |
| Notice period | 60 days | 60 days |
| Mass layoff scope | Assessed at a single site of employment | Not limited to a single site; statewide losses aggregate |
| Percentage trigger | 50 to 499 losses must be 33 percent of the site | No 33 percent requirement |
| Employees on paid leave | No restriction | May not be included in a mass layoff |
| Notice content | Federal elements | Federal elements plus relocation and contracting-out disclosure |
| State civil penalty | Up to $500 per day to local government | Up to $500 per day to the state, waivable by paying employees in 3 weeks |
| Enforcement | Federal district court; DOL does not enforce | Private right of action plus state enforcement |
| Construction exception | No direct equivalent | Limited-duration and multiemployer projects excepted |
The two rows doing the most work are the threshold and the mass layoff scope. Together they mean a mid-sized Washington employer running a distributed reduction can owe 60 days of notice in a scenario where federal WARN would have required nothing at all. California takes a different route to a similar result with its 75-employee threshold, covered in our California WARN Act guide.
Washington is not the only state that counts beyond a single site. New Jersey counts its 50-employee trigger statewide too, and goes further by including part-time staff and requiring statutory severance. If you are running a distributed reduction across either state, count first and decide second.
Under the Threshold
Below 50 full-time employees in Washington, and below 100 nationally, neither law requires advance notice. That covers most small businesses in the state. What remains are obligations that arrive faster and cost more per head than WARN does.
The Washington final paycheck rule comes first, because it is the one with a date attached rather than a process. Our guide to the final paycheck for a terminated employee covers the state-by-state deadlines, and confirming yours before the separation date is a five-minute task that prevents an avoidable penalty.
After that it is documentation and sequence: a written termination letter, a documented offboarding process, same-day access removal, and a retained record of how people were selected. Even where no law compels notice, giving what warning you reasonably can is worth doing. The employees who remain are watching how the ones who leave are treated, and that is the part of a reduction that shows up in retention two quarters later.
Running that sequence as an assigned workflow is what FirstHR handles: separation documents go out for e-signature with a dated record, offboarding tasks are assigned and tracked to completion, and everything files against the employee profile. FirstHR is an onboarding and HR platform, not a law firm and not a payroll provider, so it does not determine WARN coverage, calculate back pay, or issue final wages. Applicant tracking is coming soon to FirstHR.
Frequently Asked Questions
Does Washington have its own WARN Act?
Yes. Washington enacted the Securing Timely Notification and Benefits for Laid-Off Employees Act, Senate Bill 5525, which took effect on July 27, 2025. The Employment Security Department refers to it as the Mass Layoffs and Business Closings law. It requires employers with 50 or more full-time employees in Washington to give at least 60 days of advance written notice before a business closing or a mass layoff. Before that date, Washington employers were subject only to the federal WARN Act, which applies at 100 employees, so the state law brought a substantial number of mid-sized employers into scope for the first time. The legislature amended the law again in March 2026 through Engrossed Senate Bill 6106, and the Employment Security Department has been conducting rulemaking on the documentation required to establish an exception.
How many employees does the Washington WARN Act cover?
Fifty or more full-time employees in Washington, compared with 100 or more under the federal WARN Act. Part-time employees are excluded from the count. Because the threshold is measured against the workforce in Washington rather than nationally, an employer headquartered elsewhere can be covered by Washington law based on its Washington headcount alone, and conversely a large national employer with only a handful of Washington staff may fall below the state threshold while still being covered federally. Employers operating in several states need to run the count separately for each applicable law rather than assuming one answer covers all of them. This is general information, not legal advice.
Does the Washington WARN Act apply to layoffs across multiple locations?
Yes, and this is the most consequential difference from federal law. The Washington definition of a mass layoff is not limited to a single site of employment, so employment losses at several locations within a 30-day period are added together toward the 50-employee trigger. Under federal WARN, the same separations spread across three sites might not trigger anything, because each site is assessed on its own. A Washington employer reducing 20 people in Seattle, 18 in Spokane, and 15 in Tacoma within the same month reaches 53 and has a state notice obligation, even though no individual site comes close to the federal threshold. Run the Washington count statewide before concluding that a distributed reduction avoids the law.
Can you lay off an employee on paid family and medical leave in Washington?
Generally no. The Washington law prohibits an employer from including in a mass layoff any employee who is currently on leave under the state Paid Family and Medical Leave program, unless one of the statutory exceptions to the notice requirement applies. No other state layoff notice law contains a comparable restriction, and federal WARN has nothing like it. The practical effect is that the selection list for a Washington reduction has to be checked against current PFML leave status before it is finalized, not after. Because the interaction between this restriction and other employment decisions can be fact-specific, confirm the position with employment counsel before proceeding with a reduction that would otherwise include someone on leave.
What are the penalties under the Washington WARN Act?
An employer that fails to give the required notice is liable to each affected employee for back pay and the value of benefits the employee would have received, for each day of the violation, up to a maximum of 60 days. Separately, the Employment Security Department may assess a civil penalty of up to $500 for each day of the violation for failure to notify the department. That civil penalty is avoided if the employer pays each affected employee in full within three weeks of ordering the closing, mass layoff, or reduction of hours. The law also provides a private right of action, and a prevailing party may recover reasonable attorney fees and costs, which means the realistic exposure includes litigation cost on top of the statutory amounts.
Where do you file a Washington WARN notice?
With the Washington State Employment Security Department, which serves as the state dislocated worker unit, alongside notice to the affected employees or their bargaining representative. The department publishes guidance for employers on its layoffs and employee notifications pages and maintains a public database of filed layoff and closure notices. Following the March 2026 amendment, employee names and addresses appear only on the notices provided to the bargaining representative and to the department, and those details are exempt from public disclosure under the Public Records Act, so the version of a notice that becomes publicly visible does not carry individual employee data. Confirm the current filing method and contact address with the department before submitting, as the department has been actively updating its rules.