This bill reenacts and amends RCW 1.16.050 to list the state's legal holidays and to add a separate list of days the legislature "recognizes" but does not make legal holidays. The statute as amended names state legal holidays (including New Year's Day, Martin Luther King, Jr. Day, Presidents' Day, Memorial Day, Juneteenth, Independence Day, Labor Day, Veterans Day, Thanksgiving Day, Native American Heritage Day (day after Thanksgiving), and Christmas Day) and lists recognized observances such as Diwali and Bandi Chhor Divas. The bill also defines certain named religious days in calendar terms (for example, Eid al‑Fitr and Eid al‑Adha by their positions in the Islamic lunar calendar and Diwali/Bandi Chhor Divas by the Hindu lunisolar month). The bill creates procedural entitlements for employees of the state and its political subdivisions: one additional paid holiday per calendar year (chosen by the employee after consultation with the employer under guidelines to be issued by the appropriate personnel authority or by local ordinance/resolution) and two unpaid holidays per calendar year for reasons of faith or conscience or for organized religious activities (also chosen after consultation). Employers must permit the two unpaid faith-or-conscience days on the specific dates requested unless doing so would impose an "undue hardship" or the employee is necessary for public safety. The bill requires that "undue hardship" be defined by rule by the Office of Financial Management under RCW 43.41.109. It also specifies weekend observance rules (Sunday holiday observed Monday; Saturday observed Friday) and resolves conflicts between state and federal holiday dates for pay purposes (state employees get the state date; certain port and municipal public-safety/transit employees may recognize either the federal or state date, but not both). Affected parties identified in the text include state employees, employees of political subdivisions (including school districts), certain nonclassified higher education employees with less-than-12-month appointments, all employees of public institutions of higher education, appropriate personnel authorities, the Office of Financial Management, port districts, municipal law enforcement and public transit employees, and local legislative authorities. The extracted text is limited to the amended RCW 1.16.050 and referenced rulemaking; it does not show whether the bill contains additional sections, the content of the personnel or OFM rules, or any timelines for promulgating those rules.

If enacted, the bill would add a specific list of state legal holidays and require state and most local government employers (including school districts and many public higher education employees) to give each employee one extra paid holiday per year of the employee’s choosing after consulting with the employer, and to allow two unpaid days per year for reasons of faith or conscience or organized religious activities unless granting them would cause an “undue hardship” or the employee is needed for public safety. Employers will have to apply weekend-observance rules (Monday if the holiday falls on Sunday, Friday if it falls on Saturday) and, when state and federal holidays fall on different observed dates, port districts and municipal law enforcement and transit employers may recognize either the federal or state date as the paid holiday but not both; the bill also lists several culturally significant days (including Diwali and Bandi Chhor Divas) as recognized but not legal holidays. The people most affected are state and local government employers and their budgets, human resources staff, and the covered employees who will gain the extra paid day and two unpaid religious/conscience days; employers are likely to face modest additional payroll or scheduling costs from the extra paid holiday and more routine scheduling and potential overtime or staffing trade-offs to cover unpaid absences. The law leaves important implementation details open: the timelines and content of the personnel guidelines and the Office of Financial Management’s rule defining “undue hardship” are not in the provided text, so how easily employees can schedule these days and how often employers can lawfully refuse them is uncertain.