Washington's SB 5761, which took effect on January 1, 2023, is consistently ranked alongside Colorado as the most demanding pay transparency law in the United States. Unlike most other state laws that require only a salary range, Washington requires three distinct disclosures in every job posting: the wage scale or salary range, a description of all benefits, and a description of any bonuses or variable compensation. This guide covers exactly what each element requires and how Washington's law fits into a multi-state compliance strategy.
The three required disclosures
1. Wage scale or salary range
Washington requires disclosure of the "wage scale or salary range" for the position — a minimum and maximum base rate. For hourly positions, this is the hourly wage range. For salaried positions, it's the annual salary range. For positions with set rates (certain union roles, government pay schedules), the applicable wage scale may be referenced.
Washington's law has slightly more flexibility than Colorado for roles within formal wage classification systems. If your organisation uses job grades with associated pay bands, disclosing the applicable grade's pay band is compliant — you don't necessarily need to disclose a role-specific range if the grade band is publicly accessible or provided in the posting.
For most employers, the practical requirement is to disclose a genuine minimum and maximum. Washington L&I's guidance follows the good-faith standard: the range must reflect what the employer actually intends to pay.
2. Benefits description
Washington L&I's January 2026 enforcement guidance clarified that "competitive benefits" and similar vague phrases are not compliant. The benefits description must identify the types of benefits offered with enough specificity for candidates to understand the material compensation package. A compliant benefits disclosure names specific categories: health care (noting whether the employer pays premiums and at what percentage), retirement (type and employer contribution), paid time off (policy description), and any other notable benefits.
An example of a compliant Washington benefits disclosure: "Benefits include medical, dental, and vision insurance (employer covers 80% of employee premium), 401(k) retirement plan with 4% employer match, flexible PTO policy, $1,500 annual professional development budget, and remote work flexibility for eligible roles."
An example of non-compliant language: "Comprehensive benefits package including health, dental, and retirement." The word "including" implies the list is not exhaustive, and the lack of specificity about coverage, contributions, and other benefits doesn't satisfy the disclosure intent.
3. Bonus and variable compensation
Washington requires description of any bonuses, commissions, profit-sharing, or other forms of variable or incentive compensation. For roles eligible for performance bonuses, a typical compliant disclosure: "Eligible for annual performance bonus; bonus opportunity is 10–15% of base salary based on individual and company performance metrics." For commission-heavy roles: "Compensation includes base salary plus commission; OTE is $110,000–$145,000 with uncapped commission potential."
For roles with no variable compensation, you don't need to explicitly state this — the absence of bonus language is not itself non-compliant. But if any variable compensation is offered, it must be described.
Employee threshold and scope
SB 5761 applies to employers with 15 or more employees. The threshold counts all employees globally — a Seattle-based startup with 10 US employees and 6 international employees is covered. Remote roles accessible to Washington residents are covered regardless of where the employer is headquartered.
The law covers external postings (careers page, job boards), internal postings for promotions and transfers, and postings made by third-party agencies on behalf of covered employers. Agencies that post on your behalf must include the required disclosures — your agency contracts should require their compliance.
Enforcement and fines
Washington L&I enforces SB 5761 with fines of $500–$1,000 per violation for first offences. Repeat violations reach $5,000 per posting. The department has a graduated enforcement approach: initial notices with a cure period, followed by escalating fines for employers who fail to correct. Washington L&I has signalled it will be more aggressive in proactive enforcement as it builds audit capacity in 2026.
How Washington compares to other active states
Washington and Colorado are the two most demanding US states, but they have different emphases:
- Salary range: Both require a minimum/maximum. Washington has more flexibility for wage-scale roles.
- Benefits: Both require a description. Colorado's January 2026 guidance raised the specificity bar significantly; Washington's guidance has been similarly tightened.
- Bonus: Both require variable compensation disclosure. Washington's approach is similar to Colorado's.
- Employer threshold: Washington requires 15+ employees; Colorado has no threshold (all employers).
- Fine structure: Washington's fines are lower per posting ($500–$1,000 first offence vs. $500–$10,000 in Colorado), but both states are active enforcers.
Using Washington compliance as your baseline
For multi-state employers, the most efficient approach is to build a posting template that satisfies both Washington and Colorado — the two most demanding states. A template that satisfies both automatically satisfies every other active US state law, since all other laws require only a subset of what Washington and Colorado require.
See our salary range best practices guide for a complete posting template that satisfies Washington, Colorado, and all other active jurisdictions simultaneously. For context on how Washington fits into the full legislative landscape, see our 2025 state law roundup.
