The State Security Guards Industry Standards Board (Board) is established within L&I.  The Board is composed of nine members appointed by the Governor representing specified interests.  The Board members serve four-year terms, except initial appointees serve staggered terms.  Initial appointments must be made by September 1, 2026. 

Minimum Employment Standards.

By January 1, 2028, the Board must adopt rules establishing minimum employment standards for security guards, including standards for minimum compensation, paid leave, employment benefits, and training. 

The Board must investigate market conditions and the existing wages, benefits, and working conditions of security guards in all relevant geographic areas in the state.  Based on this information, the Board must seek to adopt minimum employment standards that meet or exceed existing industry conditions for a majority of security guards in each relevant geographic area.  The Board must review and update the minimum standards at least once every four years. 

Training. 

Every security guard employer must ensure that its security guards complete training provided by a certified worker organization at least once every two years.  The Board must certify worker organizations to provide the training in accordance with certain standards.  The training curriculum must include information on applicable employment standards and how to enforce those standards.

Enforcement.

It is unlawful for a security guard employer to violate any employment standard established by the Board.  L&I must enforce the minimum wage requirements as a wage payment requirement under the WPA.  For all other violations, L&I may investigate if a complaint is filed or if L&I has reason to believe that an employer has committed a violation.  If L&I finds a violation has occurred, it may order the employer to pay a civil penalty of $1,000 for each willful violation or $2,000 for each repeat willful violation. 

Any security guard injured by a violation also has a civil action in a court of competent jurisdiction to enjoin further violations and recover actual damages, plus reasonable attorneys' fees and costs.

Fees.

The DOL must remit $25 from each private security guard license fee, armed private security guard license fee, and private security company license fee to a dedicated account to support the costs of the Board. 

(In support) The bill will establish the State Security Guards Industry Standards Board with the goal of protecting workers in these high risk professions.  These workers work alone and at night, and often without support.  They handle confrontations, theft, and other emergencies, and they are exposed to violence without law enforcement backup.  From January 2021 through August 2025, the average turnover rate was over 113 percent.  This reflects a workforce that feels under-trained, unsupported, and unsafe, and the constant churn undermines public safety.  Establishing a Board is an important step.  The Board brings together workers, employers, and stakeholders to establish clear, consistent, and meaningful training and professional standards.  Current training requirements are minimal.  Security guards receive just eight hours of training.  However, the Board can establish standardized training hours and recommend de-escalation and bias training.  This is about professionalizing the field.  The Board will establish minimum pay floors, differential pay for high-risk job sites, and retention standards.  Responsible employers are already making these investments, but the Board will create a fair baseline by setting minimum industry specific standards.  The state should encourage competition through quality services, not exploitation of workers.  The state should not wait for tragedy to take action to protect this workforce and the people they serve.

(Opposed) The DOL already regulates security guards and sets standards for the industry.  There are already training requirements for security guards generally, and the Criminal Justice Training Commission already does specialized training for armed security guards.  At best, this bill is duplicating what already exists at the DOL.  If there is a need for greater training, it should be achieved through the DOL, not L&I.  The training in the bill is about employment standards, not safety.  Workplace safety is also covered through the Washington Industrial Safety and Health Act, and discrimination is covered through the Washington Law Against Discrimination.  The private right of action established through the bill is particularly concerning, as it will impact due process for employers and create additional and duplicative sources of litigation.  Security guards are very expensive, and the bill will create affordability pressures across the industry.  While there is a high turnover rate, the same can be said in other public safety fields.  There are concerns with delegating the authority to set wages and other employment standards to an unelected Board appointed by the Governor.  If separate wage standards are necessary, the conversation should be taking place amongst elected officials.  The Board will be a costly and unnecessary exercise.  This is going to increase licensing costs and wage costs.  It will put security companies out of business and reduce the number of security guards in the industry.  Businesses will hire security guards in-house who are not subject to licensing requirements. 

(Other) The timing for implementation should be adjusted to give L&I more time for convening meetings, and for adopting rules.  There should be a technical amendment to the account; it is not necessary for L&I to make the deposits. 

(In support) Representative Edwin Obras, prime sponsor; Khalil Hamiduddin, SEIU Local 6; Lauri Hooks, SEIU Local 6; Demetrus Dugar; and Nathaniel Fernandez.