Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 383814_pub.pdf

Citation: Wash. Court of Appeals published opinion — 383814_pub.pdf
Jurisdiction: Washington (state)
Source verification: official_capture_completeness_unverified
Original Source: https://www.courts.wa.gov/opinions/pdf/383814_pub.pdf ↗

Related Parts of This Source

Full Text

1,745 chars

2d 557, 579, 459 P.3d 371, review denied, 195 Wn.2d 1031, 468 P.3d 616 (2020)

(recognizing that WLAD provides a clear mandate of public policy). Specifically, in

RCW 49.60.010, the legislature declared that “practices of discrimination” on the basis of

creed are a matter of state concern.

Suarez contends that she was fired for practicing her religion, which is her legal

right. She contends that she has a bona fide religious belief that requires her to

participate in religious holidays, that the holidays conflicted with her work schedule, and

that she told the School about the conflict and was nonetheless fired for failing to comply

with a work schedule that conflicted with her religious practice. The School

characterizes Suarez’s argument as claiming an absolute privilege not to work on

religious holidays and argues that the WLAD prohibits discrimination but does not grant

an employee the absolute privilege of refusing to work a shift that conflicts with a

religious belief. The School contends that reading the WLAD and public policy to grant

such an absolute privilege would violate the establishment clause as noted by the

Supreme Court in In re Estate of Thornton v. Caldor, Inc., 472 U.S. 703, 710-11, 105 S.

Ct. 2914, 86 L. Ed. 2d 557 (1985).

In Thornton, the Court considered a Connecticut law that granted employees the

absolute privilege not to work on their Sabbath. Noting that the First Amendment to the

United States Constitution prohibits a state from advancing or inhibiting religion, the

27
For the current opinion, go to https://www.lexisnexis.com/clients/wareports/.

No. 38381-4-III
Suarez v. State

Court held that the statute in question violated the establishment clause because it granted