Weekly Legislative Update
February 20, 2009

Lawmakers target manufacturers
Massive liability expansion for WA businesses

Trial lawyers and their legislative allies are now targeting Washington manufacturers for a massive liability expansion which will have a chilling effect on jobs and the economy. If approved, SB 5964/HB 2054, would impose on manufacturers a retroactive duty to have investigated and warned decades ago of the hazards of products they never manufactured or sold. It would unfairly create liability on manufacturers for conduct that occurred as early as the 1940s for injuries caused NOT by their own products, but by products designed, manufactured and sold by others.

These measures apply to the builders of products such as aircraft, ships, autos, and homes into which asbestos-containing products were incorporated after the original manufacturing or construction. For example, if a homebuilder sold a home with an uninsulated water heater, the builder would be liable if the homeowner of someone else then put an asbestos-containing jacket around it. It’s an endless search for more defendants in the lucrative asbestos-lawsuit scheme devised by trial lawyers.

This level of liability has been rejected twice in the last three months by the Washington Supreme Court*. That hasn’t stopped the trial lawyers. Because they lost in court, they’re taking their political agenda to the legislature. The win for trial lawyers would be tremendous. The loss for Washington manufacturers and contractors would be devastating.

Senate Bill 5964 will be heard in the Senate Labor and Commerce and Consumer Protection Committee on Monday.

* Simonetta v. Viad Corp ___ Wn. ___, 197 P.3d 127 (December 11, 2008) and Braaten v. Saberhagen Holdings ___ Wn. ___, 198 P.3d 493 (December 11, 2008)

Some good news for employers
Wage and hour legislation being considered

This week, the House Commerce and Labor Committee and the Senate Labor and Commerce and Consumer Protection Committee heard HB 2176 and SB 5463, respectively.  These are good little bills for any organization that has employees. The legislation creates a defense in wage and hour lawsuits brought under our state’s Minimum Wage Act when an employer in a lawsuit is able to establish good faith reliance on an administrative policy, interpretation, written guidance or statement from the Department of Labor and Industries.  It borrows from existing language that provides the same defense against civil penalty in L&I’s administrative authority under the Wage Payment Act.

The intent behind this proposal is clear: given Washington’s differing legal requirements on wage payment obligations, employers need clear guidance from L&I, and need to be able to rely on the guidance they receive without the threat of legal liability.

The first major legislative cut-off is Feb. 25, when all bills need to be out of their policy committee.  For a complete list of all liability bills, see the LRC’s bill tracker. 

Another recession victim:
State courts

A number of state courts are being forced by the recession’s negative toll on tax revenues to make dramatic cuts in their operating budgets. New Hampshire, for example, has postponed all criminal and civil trials for a month to save juror per diems.

For the complete story, see The National Law Journal story from Feb. 16. 

Among the ironic quotes is one from a California plaintiffs attorney who specializes in wage-and-hour class-actions.  He grouses about court delays in one of his multimillion-dollar cases, failing to see the direct linear connection between a barrage of lawsuits against employers now fleeing the state, the sharp falloff in tax revenues and ensuing budget cuts.