Wage Complaints and Overtime Compliance Issues
In Washington, the Department of Labor and Industries enforces wage complaints and overtime compliance issues under the Minimum Wage Act (MWA), but the Courts have also implied a private right of action exists for alleged violations. See Wingert v. Yellow Freight Sys., Inc., 146 Wn.2d 841, 850, 50 P.3d 256 (2002) (citing Cameron v. Neon Sky, Inc., 41 Wn. App. 219, 223, 703 P.2d 315 (1985)). Thus, an employee does not need to wait for the state to enforce the statute—they can do it themselves.
The MWA establishes “minimum standards for wages, paid sick leave, and working conditions of all employees in this state, unless exempted herefrom, and is in addition to and supplementary to any other federal, state, or local law or ordinance.” RCW 49.46.120. It is based upon the federal Fair Labor Standards Act (FLSA) of 1938 and Washington Courts may consider interpretations of the FLSA as persuasive authority when interpreting the MWA. Hisle v. Todd Pac. Shipyards Corp., 113 Wn. App. 401, 422, 54 P.3d 687 (Div. 1 2002), aff'd, 151 Wn.2d 853, 93 P.3d 108 (2004) (citing Inniss v. Tandy Corp., 141 Wn.2d 517, 523-24, 7 P.3d 807 (2000)). “However, the MWA and FLSA are not identical and [Courts] are not bound by such authority.” Drinkwitz v. Alliant Techsystems, Inc., 140 Wn.2d 291, 298, 996 P.2d 582 (2000) (citing Chelan County Deputy Sheriffs' Ass'n v. Chelan County, 109 Wn.2d 282, 291, 745 P.2d 1 (1987); Weeks v. Chief of Wash. State Patrol, 96 Wn.2d 893, 897, 639 P.2d 732 (1982)).
To show an employer is liable for a violation of the act, an employee must show “the employer either knew or showed reckless disregard for the matter of whether its conduct was prohibited by the statute.” McLaughlin v. Richland Shoe Co., 486 U.S. 128, 133, 108 S. Ct. 1677, 1681, 100 L. Ed. 2d 115 (1988). If, however, the employer “establishes that the conduct giving rise to the action was in good faith and that he or she had reasonable grounds for believing the act was not a violation of the [Act], the court may, in its discretion, deny liquidated damages.” Winans v. W.A.S., Inc., 52 Wn. App. 89, 99, 758 P.2d 503 (Div. 1 1988), aff'd, 112 Wn.2d 529, 772 P.2d 1001 (1989) (citing 29 U.S.C. § 260).