Mark Harmsworth believes that until the definition of ‘reasonably expects’ is clarified, House Bill 1402 should not be passed
Mark Harmsworth
Washington Policy Center
House Bill 1402 (HB 1402), introduced by Representative Scott (D), would prohibit an employer from requiring a driver license unless the employer reasonably expects driving to be an essential part of the job function and alternate, cost and travel time equivalent methods of performing a job function are not available.
In principle HB 1402 is not a bad policy and could open up more opportunities for job applicants. However, the language of the bill is ambiguous, particularly the definition of ‘reasonably expects’. This is the term used to define if the license requirement is valid. Failure to comply opens up employers to potential litigation. An employer may inadvertently or unintentionally include a driver’s license requirement for a job, particularly in retail or hospitality jobs. HB 1402 currently will create more problems than it solves.
The bill would put into law;
It is an unfair practice under the Washington Law Against Discrimination for an employer to include a statement in a job advertisement, posting, application, or other material that an applicant must have a valid driver’s license, unless:
- the employer reasonably expects driving to be an essential job function;
- and the employer reasonably believes it would not be comparable in travel time or cost to use an alternative form of transportation, including a ride hailing service, using a taxi, carpooling, bicycling, walking, or transit.
The definition of ‘reasonably expects’ needs a much clearer definition, with no ambiguity, so business owners can advertise jobs to attract the widest set of qualified applicants without fear of litigation.
Until the definition of ‘reasonably expects’ is clarified, House Bill 1402 should not be passed.
Mark Harmsworth is the director of the Small Business Center at the Washington Policy Center.
Also read:
- Opinion: Inviting courts into health care policy discussion
Elizabeth New (Hovde) warns that Senate Joint Resolution 8206 could invite lawsuits by placing vague health care mandates into Washington’s Constitution. - Opinion: 24 States In. Washington Out? $732 Million Lost?
Vicki Murray argues Washington risks forfeiting $732 million in federal education funding if state leaders do not opt into the federal tax-credit scholarship program. - Opinion: Nationwide strike in support of illegals and opposing the rule of law?
Lars Larson argues that a reported nationwide strike reflects opposition to immigration enforcement and the rule of law, criticizing political leaders and media coverage. - POLL: Should councilors serving on boards be required to vote the way the full council decides?
A new poll asks whether Clark County councilors serving on boards should be required to vote in line with the full council’s position or retain independent judgment. - Opinion: Olympia wants a 4-day work week. It won’t work out as the politicians think it will
Mark Harmsworth argues that House Bill 2611’s proposed 32-hour workweek would raise costs, strain small businesses, and undermine Washington’s economic competitiveness.
