Workers with immigration hearings can use paid sick leave to attend under bill passed by WA House
Mar 6, 2025, 4:41 PM | Updated: Mar 7, 2025, 7:53 am
The Washington State Legislative Building on the Washington State Capitol Campus in Olympia, Washington. (Photo: Julia Dallas, MyNorthwest)
(Photo: Julia Dallas, MyNorthwest)
The State House has passed a bill that allows workers to use paid sick leave to attend or prepare for immigration proceedings. House Bill 1875 passed along party lines on Thursday with a 58-39 vote, with all Democrats voting in favor and all Republicans voting against it.
The vote comes at a time when the Trump administration is aggressively deporting undocumented immigrants. The bill applies not only to traditional employees but also to drivers working for transportation network companies like Uber and Lyft.
Supporters of the bill, including its prime sponsor, State Representative Osman Salahuddin (D-Bellevue), argue the legislation is crucial for immigrant workers facing complex legal proceedings that often span multiple appointments.
“No worker in our state should have to choose between their paycheck and their family’s future,” Salahuddin stated on the House floor just before the vote. “These proceedings are life-altering, with potential impacts on mental and physical well-being, beyond just a toll on their time,” he added. Salahuddin emphasized that the bill would help workers in his district, where over 43% of residents are immigrants.
What’s required
Employers and companies would be required to accept written statements as proof that a worker’s absence is due to immigration proceedings. These statements could come from advocates, attorneys, or even a member of the clergy.
The bill would also prohibit the disclosure of any personally identifiable information about the worker’s or their family member’s immigration status, ensuring privacy during the process.
“This bill is about protecting workers from retaliation, safeguarding their rights, and promoting economic stability for immigrants and their families,” Salahuddin said.
More from MyNorthwest: State Senate passes bill strengthening patient privacy from hostile out-of-state inquiries
Concerns over expanding sick leave
However, not everyone is on board with expanding sick leave. Representative Suzanne Schmidt (R-Spokane Valley) voiced her opposition, arguing that the bill represents an unnecessary broadening of a program meant for health-related absences.
“This is an expansion of paid sick leave, and that’s not what the program is about,” Schmidt stated.
She emphasized that the program was never intended for reasons other than health issues.
“We feel like this is an expansion of a program that was created to provide paid sick leave for employees in Washington.”
Representative Deb Manjarrez (R-Goldendale) shared similar concerns, arguing that the scope of sick leave is being misused.
“What about divorce proceedings, adoption proceedings, child custody? Employees need this for sick time. They need the hours they’re earning for sick leave,” she said.
Manjarrez questioned whether immigration proceedings should be handled through a separate paid time-off program.
Some retail groups have also raised concerns about the bill, arguing that it could create a burden on employers — particularly smaller ones — who might struggle with employees taking time off for legal proceedings.
Representative Joel McEntire (R-Cathlamet) expressed concerns about what he saw as a slippery slope.
“I guarantee you, Mr. Speaker, if we dug into the archives of debates from decades past when this policy was coming up, I promise you there was someone who stood in opposition and said, ‘I’m just afraid that it might start with sick leave, but I bet you all kinds of other things are gonna get added,'” he cautioned.
He further said that if the bill had been framed differently, he might have supported it: “Let’s just change the name from ‘sick leave’ to ‘whatever-I-feel-like-leave.'”
A question of consistency and equity
Despite concerns over expanding the scope of sick leave, some lawmakers framed their support as a matter of fairness and consistency. Representative Kristine Reeves (D-Federal Way) made the case for equity, pointing to a similar initiative that allowed veterans to use their sick leave for medical appointments, even if those appointments weren’t directly related to health care.
“In the interest of equity, fairness, and consistency, I’m encouraging you to join me in supporting this,” Reeves urged, drawing parallels between the needs of immigrant workers and military families.
More from MyNorthwest: Sen. Patty Murray reacts as Trump preps to dismantle Education Dept.
The national immigration debate
The debate surrounding HB 1875 takes on added significance within the broader context of national immigration policy, especially given the Trump administration’s aggressive stance on deporting undocumented immigrants.
As a sanctuary state, Washington has taken a strong position in protecting its immigrant residents from federal immigration enforcement. The state has enacted policies designed to limit cooperation with federal immigration authorities, including restricting local law enforcement’s involvement in immigration enforcement.
These policies have made Washington a haven for undocumented immigrants, providing them with some level of security in an otherwise hostile national climate.
House and Senate Democratic leaders have repeatedly stated that undocumented workers in the state with no criminal record should be protected.
The bill now heads to the Senate for another round of voting.
Matt Markovich is the KIRO Newsradio political analyst. Follow him on X.
