EnglishEspañol
Washington flag

Washington

Leyes de Protección al Denunciante de Washington: Protecciones y Cómo Reportar

Por Equipo Editorial de Recording LawRevisado 9 de agosto de 202611 min de lectura
Leyes de Protección al Denunciante de Washington: Protecciones y Cómo Reportar

Preguntas frecuentes

¿Quién puede presentar una queja de denunciante ante el Auditor del Estado de Washington?

Cualquier empleado estatal puede reportar acciones gubernamentales indebidas al Auditor del Estado bajo el RCW 42.40. El reporte debe hacerse por escrito y presentarse dentro de un año a partir de la acción indebida. La ley preserva la confidencialidad de los denunciantes y de las personas que proporcionan información durante las investigaciones.

¿Puedo presentar una demanda qui tam por fraude a Medicaid en Washington?

Sí. La Ley de Reclamaciones Falsas por Fraude a Medicaid de Washington (RCW 74.66) permite a los ciudadanos particulares presentar demandas qui tam en nombre del estado. Si tiene éxito, los denunciantes reciben entre el 15% y el 30% de los fondos recuperados, dependiendo de la participación del Fiscal General y de la contribución del denunciante al caso.

¿Cuánto tiempo tengo para presentar una reclamación por represalias contra un denunciante en Washington?

Los plazos varían según el estatuto. Las quejas de seguridad laboral de WISHA deben presentarse dentro de 90 días, mientras que las quejas de sustancias peligrosas deben presentarse dentro de 30 días. Las quejas de antidiscriminación tienen un plazo de seis meses. Las reclamaciones por represalias de compensación laboral deben presentarse dentro de 90 días. La mayoría de las demás reclamaciones estatutarias tienen un plazo de tres años.

¿Washington protege a los denunciantes del sector privado?

Sí, mediante una combinación de derecho consuetudinario y estatutos específicos. La excepción de política pública de derecho consuetudinario de Washington protege a los empleados que se niegan a realizar actividades ilegales, ejercen derechos legales, reportan mala conducta del empleador o cumplen deberes públicos. Estatutos adicionales cubren discriminación, seguridad laboral, salarios y atención médica.

¿Qué daños están disponibles por represalias contra un denunciante en Washington?

Los remedios varían según el estatuto. Los remedios comunes incluyen reincorporación, salarios atrasados con intereses, restitución de beneficios y honorarios de abogados. Bajo el estatuto de antidiscriminación, pueden otorgarse daños por humillación y sufrimiento mental de hasta $20,000. Bajo la Ley de Reclamaciones Falsas por Fraude a Medicaid, los empleados pueden recuperar el doble del salario atrasado.

Actualizaciones

Se corrigió el plazo de presentación de quejas de represalias bajo WISHA (RCW 49.17.160) de 30 días a los 90 días reales del estatuto en todos los lugares donde aparecía en el gemelo en español (KeyTakeaways, la sección de WISHA, la sección de instrucciones para presentar quejas, Consejos Prácticos y las Preguntas Frecuentes), manteniendo intacto el plazo separado de 30 días para quejas de sustancias peligrosas.

La ley detrás de este artículo

Este artículo se apoya en 13 disposiciones legales conservadas en nuestro propio registro jurídico, cada una obtenida de la fuente oficial. Toque una sección para leer el texto vigente.

Revised Code of Washington

§ 18.51.220Retaliation or discrimination against complainant prohibited, penalty—Presumption.Vigente
(1) No licensee shall discriminate or retaliate in any manner against a patient or employee in its nursing home on the basis or for the reason that such patient or employee or any other person has initiated or participated in any proceeding specified in this chapter. A licensee who violates this section is subject to a civil penalty of not more than three thousand dollars. (2) Any attempt to expel a patient from a nursing home, or any type of discriminatory treatment of a patient by whom, or upon whose behalf, a complaint has been submitted to the department or any proceeding instituted under or related to this chapter within one year of the filing of the complaint or the institution of such action, shall raise a rebuttable presumption that such action was taken by the licensee in retaliation for the filing of the complaint.

Texto oficial (extracto) · al 2026-07-29 · Lea la sección completa en app.leg.wa.gov

Citada en 1 opiniones judicialesAplicada por un tribunal por última vez: 2023

Casos destacados: Taylor v. Metropolitan Development Council (District Court, W.D. Washington 2023)

Identificado automáticamente a partir de las opiniones judiciales que citan esta sección; no es un ranking de qué caso prevalece.

§ 19.30.190Retaliation against employee prohibited.Vigente
No farm labor contractor or agricultural employer may discharge or in any other manner discriminate against any employee because: (1) The employee has made a claim against the farm labor contractor or agricultural employer for compensation for the employee's personal services. (2) The employee has caused to be instituted any proceedings under or related to RCW 19.30.180. (3) The employee has testified or is about to testify in any such proceedings. (4) The employee has discussed or consulted with anyone concerning the employee's rights under this chapter.

Texto oficial (extracto) · al 2026-07-29 · Lea la sección completa en app.leg.wa.gov

Citada en 1 opiniones judicialesAplicada por un tribunal por última vez: 1999

Casos destacados: Lins v. Children's Discovery Centers of America, Inc. (Court of Appeals of Washington 1999, 95 Wash. App. 486)

Identificado automáticamente a partir de las opiniones judiciales que citan esta sección; no es un ranking de qué caso prevalece.

§ 42.40.030Right to disclose improper governmental actions—Interference prohibited.Vigente
(1) An employee shall not directly or indirectly use or attempt to use the employee's official authority or influence for the purpose of intimidating, threatening, coercing, commanding, influencing, or attempting to intimidate, threaten, coerce, command, or influence any individual for the purpose of interfering with the right of the individual to: (a) Disclose to the auditor (or representative thereof) or other public official, as defined in RCW 42.40.020, information concerning improper governmental action; or (b) identify rules warranting review or provide information to the rules review committee. (2) Nothing in this section authorizes an individual to disclose information otherwise prohibited by law, except to the extent that information is necessary to substantiate the whistleblower complaint, in which case information may be disclosed to the auditor or public official, as defined in RCW 42.40.020, by the whistleblower for the limited purpose of providing information related to the complaint. Any information provided to the auditor or public official under the authority of this subsection may not be further disclosed.

Texto oficial (extracto) · al 2026-07-29 · Lea la sección completa en app.leg.wa.gov

Citada en 2 opiniones judicialesAplicada por un tribunal por última vez: 2023

Casos destacados: Gillian Marshall, V. University Of Washington (Court of Appeals of Washington 2023) · Snell v. State of Washington (District Court, W.D. Washington 2023)

Identificado automáticamente a partir de las opiniones judiciales que citan esta sección; no es un ranking de qué caso prevalece.

§ 49.17.160Discrimination against employee filing complaint, instituting proceedings, or testifying prohibited—Procedure—Remedy.Vigente
(1) No person shall discharge or in any manner discriminate against any employee because such employee has filed any complaint or instituted or caused to be instituted any proceeding under or related to this chapter, or has testified or is about to testify in any such proceeding or because of the exercise by such employee on behalf of himself or herself or others of any right afforded by this chapter. Prohibited discrimination includes an action that would deter a reasonable employee from exercising their rights under this chapter. (2) Any employee who believes that he or she has been discharged or otherwise discriminated against by any person in violation of this section may, within 90 days after such violation occurs, file a complaint with the director alleging such discrimination. The department may, at its discretion, extend the time period on recognized equitable principles or due to extenuating circumstances. (3) Within 90 days of the receipt of the complaint filed under this section, the director shall notify the complainant and the employer of his or her determination under subsections (4) and (5) of this section unless the matter is otherwise resolved.

Texto oficial (extracto) · al 2026-07-29 · Lea la sección completa en app.leg.wa.gov

Citada en 42 opiniones judiciales1980s: 31990s: 52000s: 102010s: 162020s: 8Aplicada por un tribunal por última vez: 2026

Casos destacados: Ellis v. City of Seattle (Washington Supreme Court 2000, 142 Wash. 2d 450) · Wilson v. City of Monroe (Court of Appeals of Washington 1997, 88 Wash. App. 113) · Cudney v. ALSCO, INC. (Washington Supreme Court 2011, 259 P.3d 244)

Identificado automáticamente a partir de las opiniones judiciales que citan esta sección; no es un ranking de qué caso prevalece.

§ 49.46.100Prohibited acts of employer—Penalty.Vigente
(1) Any employer who hinders or delays the director or his or her authorized representatives in the performance of his or her duties in the enforcement of this chapter, or refuses to admit the director or his or her authorized representatives to any place of employment, or fails to make, keep, and preserve any records as required under the provisions of this chapter, or falsifies any such record, or refuses to make any record accessible to the director or his or her authorized representatives upon demand, or refuses to furnish a sworn statement of such record or any other information required for the proper enforcement of this chapter to the director or his or her authorized representatives upon demand, or pays or agrees to pay an employee less than the employee is entitled to under this chapter, or otherwise violates any provision of this chapter or of any regulation issued under this chapter shall be deemed in violation of this chapter and shall, upon conviction therefor, be guilty of a gross misdemeanor.

Texto oficial (extracto) · al 2026-07-29 · Lea la sección completa en app.leg.wa.gov

Citada en 22 opiniones judiciales1980s: 21990s: 82000s: 22010s: 32020s: 7Aplicada por un tribunal por última vez: 2023

Casos destacados: Hume v. American Disposal Co. (Washington Supreme Court 1994, 124 Wash. 2d 656) · Hayes v. Trulock (Court of Appeals of Washington 1988, 51 Wash. App. 795) · Thompson v. St. Regis Paper Company (Washington Supreme Court 1984, 102 Wash. 2d 219)

Identificado automáticamente a partir de las opiniones judiciales que citan esta sección; no es un ranking de qué caso prevalece.

§ 49.60.210Unfair practices—Discrimination against person opposing unfair practice—Retaliation against whistleblower.Vigentecitada en 2 de nuestros artículos
(1) It is an unfair practice for any employer, employment agency, labor union, or other person to discharge, expel, or otherwise discriminate against any person because he or she has opposed any practices forbidden by this chapter, or because he or she has filed a charge, testified, or assisted in any proceeding under this chapter. (2) It is an unfair practice for a government agency or government manager or supervisor to retaliate against a whistleblower as defined in chapter 42.40 RCW. (3) It is an unfair practice for any employer, employment agency, labor union, government agency, government manager, or government supervisor to discharge, expel, discriminate, or otherwise retaliate against an individual assisting with an office of fraud and accountability investigation under RCW 74.04.012, unless the individual has willfully disregarded the truth in providing information to the office.

Texto oficial (extracto) · al 2026-07-29 · Lea la sección completa en app.leg.wa.gov

Citada en 199 opiniones judiciales1970s: 31980s: 41990s: 242000s: 352010s: 642020s: 69Aplicada por un tribunal por última vez: 2026

Casos destacados: Allison v. Housing Authority of City of Seattle (Washington Supreme Court 1991, 118 Wash. 2d 79) · Washington Water Power Co. v. Washington State Human Rights Commission (Washington Supreme Court 1978, 91 Wash. 2d 62) · Lodis v. Corbis Holdings, Inc. (Court of Appeals of Washington 2013, 172 Wash. App. 835)

Identificado automáticamente a partir de las opiniones judiciales que citan esta sección; no es un ranking de qué caso prevalece.

§ 49.60.250Hearing of complaint by administrative law judge—Limitation of relief—Penalties—Order—Arbitration.Vigente
(1) In case of failure to reach an agreement for the elimination of such unfair practice, and upon the entry of findings to that effect, the entire file, including the complaint and any and all findings made, shall be certified to the chairperson of the commission. The chairperson of the commission shall thereupon request the appointment of an administrative law judge under Title 34 RCW to hear the complaint and shall cause to be issued and served in the name of the commission a written notice, together with a copy of the complaint, as the same may have been amended, requiring the respondent to answer the charges of the complaint at a hearing before the administrative law judge, at a time and place to be specified in such notice. (2) The place of any such hearing may be the office of the commission or another place designated by it. The case in support of the complaint shall be presented at the hearing by counsel for the commission: PROVIDED, That the complainant may retain independent counsel and submit testimony and be fully heard.

Texto oficial (extracto) · al 2026-07-29 · Lea la sección completa en app.leg.wa.gov

Citada en 26 opiniones judiciales1960s: 51970s: 41980s: 71990s: 32000s: 52010s: 12020s: 1Aplicada por un tribunal por última vez: 2023

Casos destacados: Human Rights Commission v. Cheney School District No. 30 (Washington Supreme Court 1982, 97 Wash. 2d 118) · Marine Power & Equipment Co. v. Human Rights Commission Hearing Tribunal (Court of Appeals of Washington 1985, 39 Wash. App. 609) · Rody v. Hollis (Washington Supreme Court 1972, 81 Wash. 2d 88)

Identificado automáticamente a partir de las opiniones judiciales que citan esta sección; no es un ranking de qué caso prevalece.

§ 49.70.110Discharge or discipline of employee prohibited—Application of discrimination statutes.Vigente
No employer may discharge, cause to be discharged, or otherwise discipline, penalize, or discriminate against any employee because the employee or the employee's representative has exercised any right established in this chapter. The discrimination provisions of chapter 49.17 RCW apply to this chapter.

Texto oficial (extracto) · al 2026-07-29 · Lea la sección completa en app.leg.wa.gov

Citada en 1 opiniones judicialesAplicada por un tribunal por última vez: 1999

Casos destacados: Lins v. Children's Discovery Centers of America, Inc. (Court of Appeals of Washington 1999, 95 Wash. App. 486)

Identificado automáticamente a partir de las opiniones judiciales que citan esta sección; no es un ranking de qué caso prevalece.

§ 49.76.120Retaliation against employee.Vigente
No employer may discharge, threaten to discharge, demote, deny a promotion to, sanction, discipline, retaliate against, harass, or otherwise discriminate against an employee with respect to compensation, terms, conditions, or privileges of employment because the employee: (1) Exercised rights under RCW 49.76.030 or 49.76.115; (2) Filed or communicated to the employer an intent to file a complaint under RCW 49.76.070 or 49.76.100; or (3) Participated or assisted, as a witness or otherwise, in another employee's attempt to exercise rights under RCW 49.76.030, 49.76.115, 49.76.070, or 49.76.100.

Texto oficial (extracto) · al 2026-07-29 · Lea la sección completa en app.leg.wa.gov

§ 51.48.025Retaliation by employer prohibited—Investigation—Remedies.Vigente
(1) No employer may discharge or in any manner discriminate against any employee because such employee has filed or communicated to the employer an intent to file a claim for compensation or exercises any rights provided under this title. However, nothing in this section prevents an employer from taking any action against a worker for other reasons including, but not limited to, the worker's failure to observe health or safety standards adopted by the employer, or the frequency or nature of the worker's job-related accidents. (2) Any employee who believes that he or she has been discharged or otherwise discriminated against by an employer in violation of this section may file a complaint with the director alleging discrimination within ninety days of the date of the alleged violation. Upon receipt of such complaint, the director shall cause an investigation to be made as the director deems appropriate. Within ninety days of the receipt of a complaint filed under this section, the director shall notify the complainant of his or her determination.

Texto oficial (extracto) · al 2026-07-29 · Lea la sección completa en app.leg.wa.gov

Citada en 46 opiniones judiciales1990s: 132000s: 132010s: 152020s: 5Aplicada por un tribunal por última vez: 2022

Casos destacados: Wilmot v. Kaiser Aluminum & Chemical Corp. (Washington Supreme Court 1991, 118 Wash. 2d 46) · Robel v. Roundup Corp. (Washington Supreme Court 2002, 148 Wash. 2d 35) · Kirby v. City of Tacoma (Court of Appeals of Washington 2004, 98 P.3d 827)

Identificado automáticamente a partir de las opiniones judiciales que citan esta sección; no es un ranking de qué caso prevalece.

§ 70.124.060Liability of persons making reports.Vigente
(1) A person other than a person alleged to have committed the abuse or neglect participating in good faith in the making of a report pursuant to this chapter, or testifying as to alleged patient abuse or neglect in a judicial proceeding, is, in so doing, immune from any liability, civil or criminal, arising out of such reporting or testifying under any law of this state or its political subdivisions, and if such person is an employee of a state hospital it is an unfair practice under chapter 49.60 RCW for the employer to discharge, expel, or otherwise discriminate against the employee for such reporting activity. (2) Conduct conforming with the reporting requirements of this chapter is not a violation of the confidential communication privilege of RCW 5.60.060 (3) or (4) or 18.83.110. Nothing in this chapter supersedes or abridges remedies provided in chapter 4.92 RCW.

Texto oficial (extracto) · al 2026-07-29 · Lea la sección completa en app.leg.wa.gov

Citada en 3 opiniones judicialesAplicada por un tribunal por última vez: 1999

Casos destacados: White v. State (Court of Appeals of Washington 1995, 78 Wash. App. 824) · Farnam v. Crista Ministries (Washington Supreme Court 1991, 116 Wash. 2d 659) · Lins v. Children's Discovery Centers of America, Inc. (Court of Appeals of Washington 1999, 95 Wash. App. 486)

Identificado automáticamente a partir de las opiniones judiciales que citan esta sección; no es un ranking de qué caso prevalece.

§ 74.34.180Retaliation against whistleblowers and residents—Remedies—Rules.Vigente
(1) An employee or contractor who is a whistleblower and who as a result of being a whistleblower has been subjected to workplace reprisal or retaliatory action, has the remedies provided under chapter 49.60 RCW. RCW 4.24.500 through 4.24.520, providing certain protection to persons who communicate to government agencies, apply to complaints made under this section. The identity of a whistleblower who complains, in good faith, to the department or the department of health about suspected abandonment, abuse, financial exploitation, or neglect by any person in a facility, licensed or required to be licensed, or care provided in a facility or in a home setting, by any person associated with a hospice, home care, or home health agency licensed under chapter 70.127 RCW or other in-home provider, may remain confidential if requested. The identity of the whistleblower shall subsequently remain confidential unless the department determines that the complaint was not made in good faith.

Texto oficial (extracto) · al 2026-07-29 · Lea la sección completa en app.leg.wa.gov

Citada en 2 opiniones judicialesAplicada por un tribunal por última vez: 2020

Casos destacados: Calhoun v. State (Court of Appeals of Washington 2008, 146 Wash. App. 877) · Leanne Levno v. Addus Healthcare, Inc. (Court of Appeals of Washington 2020)

Identificado automáticamente a partir de las opiniones judiciales que citan esta sección; no es un ranking de qué caso prevalece.

§ 74.66.090Whistleblower relief.Vigente
(1) Any employee, contractor, or agent is entitled to all relief necessary to make that employee, contractor, or agent whole, if that employee, contractor, or agent , is discharged, demoted, suspended, threatened, harassed, or in any other manner discriminated against in the terms and conditions of employment because of lawful acts done by the employee, contractor, agent, or associated others in furtherance of an action under this chapter or other efforts to stop one or more violations of this chapter. (2) Relief under subsection (1) of this section must include reinstatement with the same seniority status that employee, contractor, or agent would have had but for the discrimination, two times the amount of back pay, interest on the back pay, and compensation for any special damages sustained as a result of the discrimination, including litigation costs and reasonable attorneys' fees, and any and all relief available under RCW 49.60.030(2). An action under this subsection may be brought in the appropriate superior court of the state of Washington for the relief provided in this subsection.

Texto oficial (extracto) · al 2026-07-29 · Lea la sección completa en app.leg.wa.gov

Citada en 1 opiniones judicialesAplicada por un tribunal por última vez: 2019

Casos destacados: United States of America, Ex rel. Raju A.T. Dahlstrom v. Sauk-Suiattle Indian Tribe of Washington (District Court, W.D. Washington 2019)

Identificado automáticamente a partir de las opiniones judiciales que citan esta sección; no es un ranking de qué caso prevalece.

Explore la ley

Este artículo también se apoya en estas leyes y capítulos (abriendo en su primera sección): Revised Code of Washington § 74.66.005 (Short title.) · Revised Code of Washington § 42.40.010 (Policy.)

Leyes relacionadas para lectura adicional; no forman parte de las citas de este artículo.

Busque en nuestro registro completo de la ley de EE. UU.: 2.1 millones de secciones, todos los estados y la ley federal

Fuentes y referencias

  1. RCW Capítulo 42.40 - Protección al Denunciante para Empleados Estatales(app.leg.wa.gov).gov
  2. RCW 42.40.030 - Interferencia prohibida(app.leg.wa.gov).gov
  3. RCW Capítulo 74.66 - Ley de Reclamaciones Falsas por Fraude a Medicaid(app.leg.wa.gov).gov
  4. RCW 74.66.090 - Protecciones contra represalias(app.leg.wa.gov).gov
  5. RCW 49.60.210 - Prácticas injustas y protecciones antidiscriminación(app.leg.wa.gov).gov
  6. RCW 49.17.160 - Ley de Seguridad y Salud Industrial de Washington(app.leg.wa.gov).gov
  7. RCW 51.48.025 - Protecciones contra represalias de compensación laboral(app.leg.wa.gov).gov
  8. RCW 49.60.250 - Remedios y sanciones(app.leg.wa.gov).gov
  9. Oficina del Auditor del Estado de Washington(sao.wa.gov).gov
  10. RCW 74.34.180 - Protección de adultos vulnerables(app.leg.wa.gov).gov
Compartir: