Washington State Patrol and off-duty employment

One request a year, and it goes to the Chief

No permit form, no captain, no chain of approvals. A trooper submits an annual written request to the Chief, and the work cannot begin until approval is granted.

The agreement constrains that decision rather than leaving it open: approval will not be unreasonably withheld, and it is judged against four stated criteria — that the work does not interfere with assigned duties, does not detract from the trooper's efficiency, is not a discredit to the agency, and does not create a conflict of interest or fall during a work shift.

That phrase matters. Where a policy says approval is at the agency's discretion, a bargained “not unreasonably withheld” gives a refusal something to be measured against — and a grievance procedure to measure it in.

There is an emergency route: short-notice work can be approved verbally, with a written report following within seven calendar days describing the work, the hours and the employer.

Probationers and undercover detectives

Newly commissioned probationary employees are barred from uniformed off-duty employment. The bar does not extend to agency contract overtime, or to re-commissioned troopers and sergeants.

Probationary sergeants are treated differently from probationary troopers: they may work uniformed off-duty jobs, but must tell their supervisor about any authorisation on receiving an assignment order during probation, and the chain of command can revoke, limit or suspend it case by case.

Detectives assigned undercover to a narcotics unit or to an organised crime intelligence unit are not approved for uniformed off-duty work at all — for obvious reasons. Other detectives are decided case by case, and a detective refused can appeal to the Assistant Chief over the Investigative Services Bureau for a review of the record.

An approval that travels

This is the provision we have not seen anywhere else, and it is a genuine convenience.

Where a trooper is approved to work uniformed off-duty for a company that the agency has approved and that already employs at least twenty-five other commissioned WSP officers, that approval extends to every company meeting the same criteria. No separate application for each one.

The trooper stays bound by the limitations on the original application when working for any of them. But the paperwork happens once rather than per employer, which is a meaningfully different arrangement from agencies where each job means a fresh form.

What the agreement demands of the employers

The flip side of that convenience is an obligation running the other way, and it is unusually specific.

Companies employing more than twenty-five WSP officers must file with the agency, by 15 January each year, a complete list of every WSP officer who worked for them during the previous year.

They must also provide, annually and on the issue date of each new policy, proof of liability insurance covering the officers working uniformed off-duty — at least one million dollars, for matters the agreement names directly, including false arrest and use of force.

Failure to maintain that cover results in immediate revocation of approval for any WSP officer to work off-duty for that company. Not a warning, not a review — immediate.

Using the patrol car

Where vehicle use is authorized, the charge is the prevailing state mileage rate plus five dollars an hour for every hour the vehicle is in use.

The clock is precise about where it starts. A trooper driving their own assigned vehicle is charged from the moment they leave their residence until they return to it. A trooper collecting a different vehicle is charged from the pick-up location — and has to reach that location in their personal car.

Written permission is required in advance, with specific details of when the vehicle will be used and why, and a statement of actual time and mileage with the reimbursement follows within two weeks.

Where the rest of it lives

The agreement does not try to cover everything. It states that a named WSP regulation, as in effect on the date of the agreement, governs off-duty employment — and that further changes to that regulation are subject to the normal bargaining rules under state law.

So the agency cannot simply rewrite the detail. The management-rights article makes the same point from the other direction: the employer's power to make rules about off-duty employment and conduct is expressly exercised in accordance with Article 26.

And where the two conflict, the agreement says plainly that it takes precedence over WSP regulations. That ordering is worth knowing before anyone quotes a regulation at you.