There’s a simple bill that needs a hearing this legislative session: Senate Bill 6134. It requires the Employment Security Department (ESD) to notify striking workers — if they apply for unemployment benefits — that they could later receive an overpayment bill if they end up getting retroactive wages.
That warning matters because a worker could get paid twice for the same period of non-work: first through unemployment insurance (UI) benefits and later through a back-pay settlement or retroactive wages tied to the strike’s resolution. When that happens, ESD will assess an overpayment and try to recoup it.
This isn’t a theoretical risk. ESD told me that overpayments from the UI fund already happen in some cases, and they are a costly mess for everyone:
— Workers can spend benefits in good faith, then face a bill they didn’t budget for.
— ESD is stuck doing collections work in addition to administering benefits.
— Taxpayers ultimately fund the administrative load that comes with chasing money back.
— Employers finance unemployment insurance benefits and face rising costs with program use. Estimates show the state recoups less than 50 percent of overpayments.
In 2025, SB 5041 opened the door for striking workers in public and private sectors to receive UI benefits. This changed how strike-related disqualification works in state law. Before now, the UI fund has been for workers who lose work through no fault of their own, not for people choosing not to work. The policy change did unions a favor, turning the employer-provided UI fund into a strike fund. That’s something unions themselves should offer their dues-paying members in need.
SB 5041 also created a foreseeable administrative and financial consequence: the overpayment scenario when retroactive wages arrive later. SB 6134 is a practical cleanup for this priority labor policy that Washington state’s majority lawmakers adopted last year.
The legislative urge is needed
I’ve been in regular communication with ESD about exactly this risk in 2025, urging them to notify striking workers up front that they can’t accept UI benefits and regular pay for the same period. In December, weeks before the law officially changed for 2026 and beyond, ESD posted information online about the potential for overpayments. That was a responsible step. ESD acknowledged, however, that workers would have to look for the information supplied on their own.
When I’ve asked whether the online application could show an explicit warning, I’ve been told that won’t be happening. Striking workers will receive the standard determination letter. ESD implements what the Legislature requires.
That’s why Sen. Curtis King’s bill is so important. It brings a common-sense administrative safeguard I have urged into legislation that ESD would need to execute.
The bill’s approach is straightforward. It directs ESD to notify striking workers about the potential for an overpayment assessment and allows the notice to be delivered through an acknowledgment box in the online application, a letter or another reasonable method ESD determines will provide notice.
SB 6134 prevents some of the predictable harm from last year’s policy change.
