The short version
- When it becomes your liability: harassment is imputed to the employer if an owner, manager, partner, or officer personally takes part, or if the employer knew or should have known of it and failed to take reasonably prompt and adequate corrective action (Glasgow v. Georgia-Pacific, 1985).
- Federal law adds a defense, with limits. Under Faragher and Ellerth (1998), an employer can defend a supervisor harassment claim with no tangible employment action by showing reasonable care to prevent and correct it and that the employee unreasonably failed to use complaint procedures.
- Isolated worker rules: hotels, motels, retail, security, and property services employers with isolated janitors, housekeepers, room service attendants, or security guards must adopt a sexual harassment policy, train, provide resource lists, and give each isolated employee a panic button (RCW 49.60.515).
- Silenced No More: agreements that bar disclosure of illegal harassment, discrimination, retaliation, wage violations, or sexual assault are void, with $10,000 or actual damages, whichever is more (RCW 49.44.211).
- EPLI covers harassment claims, including defense of agency charges; third-party EPLI covers harassment involving customers.
When harassment becomes the employer's liability
Washington courts use the Glasgow test, set out in a sexual harassment case. The employee must show the harassment was unwelcome, because of sex, sufficiently pervasive to alter the conditions of employment, and imputed to the employer. Imputation is the part employers control:
| Who harassed | When the employer is liable |
|---|---|
| Owner, manager, partner, or corporate officer | When they personally participate |
| Supervisor or co-worker | When the employer authorized, knew, or should have known of the harassment and failed to take reasonably prompt and adequate corrective action |
Under federal law, Faragher v. City of Boca Raton and Burlington Industries v. Ellerth (1998) let an employer defend a supervisor harassment claim when no tangible employment action (such as firing or demotion) was taken, by showing it exercised reasonable care to prevent and promptly correct harassment and the employee unreasonably failed to use the procedures provided. No such defense is available when the harassment ends in a tangible employment action.
Both standards reward the same things: a clear policy, a working complaint process, and a prompt, documented response.
The isolated worker law (RCW 49.60.515)
| Requirement | Detail |
|---|---|
| Who is covered | Hotels, motels, retail, and security guard entities, and property services contractors, that employ an isolated employee |
| Isolated employee | A janitor, security guard, hotel or motel housekeeper, or room service attendant who works where coworkers cannot immediately respond to an emergency, or who spends at least half of working hours without a supervisor or coworker present |
| Policy | Adopt a sexual harassment policy |
| Training | Mandatory training for managers, supervisors, and isolated employees, with documentation |
| Resources | A list of resources, including the EEOC, the Washington State Human Rights Commission, and local advocacy groups |
| Panic button | Provide a panic button to each isolated employee (not required for licensed contract security guard companies) |
| Reporting | Property services contractors report training and work-location information to L&I each year |
| Complaints | Since January 1, 2026, isolated employees can file complaints directly with L&I |
| Penalties | $1,000 for each willful violation; $2,000 to $10,000 for repeat willful violations |
This matters to cleaning, security, and hospitality businesses; see cleaning and janitorial insurance.
Settlements and the Silenced No More Act
| Rule | Detail |
|---|---|
| Void provisions | Any agreement provision barring a current, former, or prospective employee or independent contractor from disclosing conduct they reasonably believed was illegal discrimination, harassment, retaliation, a wage and hour violation, or sexual assault, or that is against a clear mandate of public policy |
| Violations | Requesting or requiring such a provision, or attempting to enforce one |
| Penalty | Actual damages or $10,000, whichever is more, plus attorneys' fees |
| What is allowed | Keeping the settlement amount confidential |
Washington's earlier 2018 law on sexual harassment nondisclosure agreements was repealed and replaced by this broader 2022 law. Review settlement and severance templates so they do not include prohibited terms.
Harassment involving customers
| Scenario | Coverage and law |
|---|---|
| A customer harasses your employee | General employer duties to respond to known harassment apply; we found no separate Washington statute on customer harassment of employees |
| Your employee harasses a customer | A potential public accommodation claim; Washington's Supreme Court addressed this in Floeting v. Group Health (2019) |
| Insurance | Third-party EPLI covers discrimination and harassment claims by customers; standard EPLI covers claims by employees |
A prevention program that also defends claims
- A written anti-harassment policy with multiple ways to complain, including someone other than the employee's supervisor.
- Training for managers and staff, documented; required for isolated workers in covered industries.
- Prompt investigation of every complaint, with findings and actions documented.
- No retaliation against anyone who complains or participates in an investigation.
- Clean settlement templates that comply with the Silenced No More Act.
- An HR hotline, often included with EPLI, for advice before decisions.
How EPLI covers harassment
| Claim | EPLI |
|---|---|
| Sexual or other harassment by a manager or coworker | Usually covered, including defense of agency charges |
| Claims against the individual harasser | Covered if they are an insured under the policy, until intentional misconduct is established |
| Retaliation after a complaint | Usually covered |
| Customer claims of harassment by your staff | Requires third-party EPLI |
| Silenced No More Act damages | Check the wording; may be treated as a statutory penalty |
See what EPLI covers and the complete EPLI guide.