WA state troopers, workers sue Inslee over vaccine mandate. 3 are from Tri-Cities

Three state employees in the Tri-Cities are part of a new lawsuit that questions Gov. Jay Inslee’s authority and challenges the constitutionality of his vaccine mandate.

Inslee announced in early August that all state workers are required to be fully vaccinated against COVID-19 by Oct. 18, or are at risk of losing their jobs.

The 25-page lawsuit — filed Friday in Walla Walla County — says Inslee’s mandate violates state law “by resulting in certain protected political and religious classes being purged from civil service.”

It further says the governor “cannot suspend laws if ‘the waiver or suspension would conflict with the rights, under the First Amendment, of freedom of speech or of the people to peaceably assemble.”

Currently, there are 89 named plaintiffs on the suit, including Troopers Travis Brawdy and Brittany Crosby with the Washington State Patrol and Michele Vasquez, an employee of the Washington state Department of Revenue.

The document states that Crosby and Vasquez live in Benton County. Brawdy’s county is left blank on the document, but he is related to a Tri-City Herald employee and lives in Benton County.

There are no Franklin County residents in the suit, though several people are named without listing which county they live in.

Attorney Nathan J. Arnold of Seattle said he intends to amend the complaint in the near future to add 30 to 50,000 more people in a similar situation.

Mike Faulk, the governor’s deputy communications director, told the Tri-City Herald on Monday that Inslee’s office has not had a chance to review the complaint yet.

“These requirements are in full compliance with the law,” Faulk said. “We look forward to responding in court.”

Employers must verify

The proclamation issued by Inslee applies to all state employees, higher education, childcare and K-12 education employees, along with most health and long-term care providers, according to the governor’s website on “Frequently Asked Questions” about the vaccine mandate.

It includes most contractors, volunteers and other positions that have any onsite presence in a workplace setting, the site says.

Even if state employees are working remotely, they must be vaccinated because they can be called in to a worksite at any time to meet business needs.

The proclamation says that any employee who refuses “will be subject to non-disciplinary dismissal from employment for failing to meet the qualifications of the job.”

Qualifying employers are being instructed to verify vaccination status of all employees as a condition of employment.

The website states that Inslee is on legal grounds to impose the mandate as part of his state of emergency declared Feb. 29, 2020, at the outset of the coronavirus pandemic.

“Under an emergency such as this, the Governor’s paramount duty is to focus on the health and safety of our communities,” the site says. “In addition, the governor is also a large employer and needs to meet the obligation to provide a safe workplace for government employees. This proclamation answers both of those obligations.”

Washington’s largest labor union, the Washington Federation of State Employees, last week approved a tentative agreement with Inslee’s administration over the vaccine mandate.

The agreement defines the exceptions and religious and medical exemptions process for employees who can’t or won’t get their shots, according to a story by The Associated Press.

Workers will remain employed while waiting for a determination on their exemption request. If denied, they then will have 45 days on leave to get fully vaccinated, which can be done while on the clock, under the terms of the agreement.

If workers miss the October deadline, they can take leave for up to 30 days to get fully vaccinated.

Religious sincerity questioned

The lawsuit alleges: violation of separation of powers; deprivation of life, liberty or property; deprivation of privacy; deprivation of religious freedom; violation of freedom of speech and assembly; violation of the Washington Law Against Discrimination; and excessive and unconscionable penalties, lesser available means and balancing.

The lead plaintiffs on the case are a Catholic firefighter in King County and his pregnant wife, who is a healthcare worker.

The suit states that Sherra Rea Cleary previously declined the flu shot in her professional capacity, and now won’t be given an exemption even for the two months she has left in her pregnancy.

Her husband is William Cleary.

The other plaintiffs include additional firefighters, employees of the state Department of Corrections, state patrol and Washington State Ferries, and several workers in healthcare and education.

Some of them already have applied for religious exemptions, but the state or their agency “required the submission of a ‘religious questionnaire’ which improperly inquired into protected private affairs regarding health care decisions and religious sentiment, belief and worship.”

Arnold wrote that some people have had their religious sincerity questioned as a part of their exemption requests.

“The governor knows that different standards for different employees is possible,” he said.

Right now, these employees face termination unless they are vaccinated. Less restrictive means exist, like weekly COVID testing, Arnold said.

“The penalties for not taking affirmative action to comply with the Governor’s Mandate are overly severe, punitive, and unconscionable,” wrote Arnold. “The penalty is further arbitrary and capricious where not tailored to those state employees with natural immunity by virtue of prior infection and/or the ability to perform their duties from home.”

If these employees are terminated, suspended or separated from their employment for failing to comply with the vaccine mandate, they will suffer extensive financial loss and irreparable damages, he said.

This story was originally published September 13, 2021 at 2:08 PM.