This bill reenacts and amends RCW 41.80.200 to grant interest arbitration rights and a detailed arbitration procedure to employees covered by chapter 41.06 RCW who work for the Department of Corrections and the Parks and Recreation Commission. In legal terms, it creates a procedural change by adding and specifying interest arbitration as a dispute-resolution mechanism for those employees, while excluding confidential employees (as defined in RCW 41.80.005) and internal auditors. The amended section requires bargaining to begin at least five months before the state budget is submitted, sets timelines for declaring impasse and mediating, and establishes a biennial schedule and methods for selecting an arbitrator. It prescribes hearing procedures (informal hearing, recording required, parties may present evidence, arbitrator may subpoena and seek court enforcement), cost-sharing rules, and a requirement that existing terms not change during proceedings without consent. The arbitrator’s authority is limited to subjects bargaining lawfully covers, must consider specified factors (including employer ability to pay, statutory authority, and comparisons to similar state employers), and issues final and binding decisions enforceable in superior court, except that compensation or benefit awards are not binding on the state if the legislature does not appropriate funds. The statute also authorizes superior court orders and contempt for refusal to follow required mediation or arbitration procedures. The text relies on other RCW provisions for definitions and authority (for example, “the commission,” “director,” and “executive director” are referenced but not defined in this excerpt), and it does not reproduce those definitions or the legislature’s budget submission date. If additional sections of the bill modify other statutes, they are not included here.

If enacted, certain correctional and state park employees who are covered by chapter 41.06 RCW (but not confidential employees or internal auditors) would gain a new, formal route to resolve bargaining impasses through interest arbitration, which gives unions and agency management a binding decision-maker for wages and other negotiable terms. Agencies and exclusive bargaining representatives will need to follow specific timelines and procedural steps—start negotiations well before the state budget is submitted, go to mediation if impasse occurs after 60 days, pick an arbitrator on a biennial schedule, reserve hearing dates, and share arbitrator and hearing costs while each side pays its own legal and preparation expenses. The Department of Corrections and the Parks and Recreation Commission are most affected: they will face new scheduling and administrative responsibilities, potential arbitration awards that are final between parties and enforceable in court, and possible fiscal exposure if an award requires higher compensation; however the legislature must still appropriate money for compensation or fringe benefits, so agencies could receive binding awards they cannot implement without new funding, creating budget uncertainty. The text leaves unclear which specific “commission,” “director,” and exact budget submission date are intended, which could affect how the procedures are applied in practice.