This bill modifies existing law (amends RCW 49.45.010 and RCW 49.45.030) to add a new procedural exception to the mass layoff and business closing notice requirements for agricultural labor. The exception applies when affected employees were hired under a written agreement at hire that their employment was limited to a specific agricultural season or harvest period and an estimated end date was disclosed in advance based on anticipated completion of harvest or related seasonal activities. The bill leaves other existing exceptions in place (for example, active efforts to obtain capital or business, unforeseeable business circumstances, natural disasters, and certain construction-project hires), and it specifies that if an exception applies for only part of the statutory 60-day notice window, the employer must give notice once the exception no longer applies. The bill also provides that the Employment Security Department cannot determine the exception applies unless the employer meets documentation and other requirements the department establishes under RCW 49.45.070, and it references daily liability for failure to provide required notice under RCW 49.45.040 and RCW 49.45.050. The bill restates or references key definitions in RCW 49.45.010 relevant to these rules, including affected employee; aggrieved employee; bargaining representative; business closing (shutdown causing employment loss for 50 or more employees, excluding part-time employees); commissioner and department (Employment Security Department); employee and employer (threshold of 50 or more employees, excluding part-time employees); employment loss (termination except for cause, voluntary separation, or retirement; layoff exceeding six months; or a >50% hours reduction each month for six months); the transfer-offer exception (transfer within a reasonable commuting distance with no more than a six-month break); mass layoff; part-time employee (averaging fewer than 20 hours per week or employed fewer than six of the prior 12 months); single site of employment; and a two-part definition of agricultural labor covering farm services and related packing/processing activities. The Employment Security Department, the commissioner, employers with 50+ employees, employees (including agricultural laborers), and bargaining representatives are identified as affected parties. The provided material does not include the full text of RCW 49.45.020 (the specific notice provisions), the full contents of RCW 49.45.040, RCW 49.45.050, or RCW 49.45.070 (liability and department documentation requirements), the definition of “reasonable commuting distance,” or the text of chapter 277, Laws of 2025, so those details are uncertain from the extracted facts alone.

If this law passes, employers who hire agricultural workers on a written, time-limited seasonal or harvest contract with a disclosed estimated end date would generally not have to give the 60-day advance notice that normally applies to mass layoffs or plant closings for those workers. That will reduce administrative work and the cost of giving extended notices for many farms and packing operations, but employers must meet documentation and other requirements the Employment Security Department will establish; if the exception stops applying during the 60-day window the employer must then give notice, and failing to give required notice can create daily liability. The biggest effects will fall on larger employers who use seasonal agricultural labor, the seasonal workers themselves (who may get less advance warning), and the Employment Security Department, which must create and enforce documentation standards. Exact impacts and enforcement details are unclear from the provided text because the specific notice rules, the department’s documentation requirements, and the definition of “reasonable commuting distance” are not included.