Example A: An agency determines that an agency wide retirement lunch will enhance organizational effectiveness. The retirement lunch will last a half hour longer than the normal one hour lunch break. An employee uses his or her office computer to compose a flyer about the lunch, send a few reminder e-mails, and collect for a retirement present. This is not an ethical violation. The use supports organizational effectiveness and was approved by the agency. Since most of the activity takes place outside of normal working hours, it will not interfere with the performance of each employee's official duties. In addition, the employees use of the office computer and printer will result in little or no cost to the state.

Example B: An agency decides that attending a specific sporting event or going to a local amusement park as a group will promote organizational effectiveness. In order to organize the event the agency uses a very limited amount of state paid time and agency resources to send one email notifying employees of the event and to post flyers and discount coupons in a break room so that employees who attend can take advantage of the discounts available. The flyers and coupons promote a commercial organization, such as a local amusement park, or promote a specific event, such as a state employee appreciation day at a sporting event. This is not an ethical violation. Attending the sporting event or going to an amusement park may improve employee morale, which supports organizational effectiveness. The agency approved this very limited use of resources and the activity falls within the de minimis use guidelines.

Example C: An agency decides that attending a specific sporting event or going to a local amusement park as a group will promote organizational effectiveness. The agency uses state paid time and agency resources to distribute multiple flyers or multiple discount coupons to all agency employees. The flyers and coupons promote a commercial organization, such as a local amusement park, or promote a specific event, such as a state employee appreciation day at a sporting event. This is an ethical violation. While attending the sporting event or going to the amusement park may improve employee morale, the use of state resources exceeds the de minimis use guidelines. When there is no statutory authority for the use of state resources to support a private commercial product or organization, the extensive use of state resources for that activity undermines public confidence in state government.

Example A: The head of a state agency purchasing office sends a letter requesting gifts or donations for use at CFD kick off luncheon to several vendors who provide goods and services to the agency. This is an ethical violation. While the purchasing supervisor will not personally benefit from the gifts, the CFD charities and the gift recipients would benefit from them. In addition, it would be reasonably expected that vendors who respond favorably to the solicitation did so with the intent to influence the vote, action, or judgment of the purchasing supervisor. (See RCW 42.52.070 and RCW 42.52.140)

Example B: The head of a state agency sends a letter to local businesses, including several vendors who provide goods and services to the agency, requesting gifts or donations for a use that will benefit agency employees and a private charity. This is an ethical violation. While the agency head will not personally benefit from the gifts, the private charity would benefit from them. In addition, it would be reasonably expected that vendors who respond favorably to the solicitation did so with the intent to influence the vote, action, or judgment of the agency head. This expectation in the vendors would be true even if the agency head did not routinely participate in such decisions. (See RCW 42.52.070 and RCW 42.52.140)

Example C: On their lunch break a group of agency employees who work for an agency that regulates or administers benefits for private business, but who are not personally involved in regulating or administering benefits for their agency, solicit holiday gifts on behalf of a family sponsored by Adopt-a-Family. When soliciting the gifts they voluntarily inform the businesses that they are employed by their state agency but are soliciting on behalf of the sponsored family or Adopt-a-Family. This is an ethical violation. By stating that they are employed by an agency that regulates or administers benefits for the private businesses they are using their state positions to influence the private businesses and support the private charity. (See RCW 42.52.070)

Example D: On their lunch break or after work a group of agency employees who are involved in regulating or contracting on behalf of their agency solicit holiday gifts on behalf of a family sponsored by Adopt-a-Family. They do not solicit from agency vendors or other individuals with whom they conduct state business. When soliciting the gifts they tell the businesses that they are soliciting on behalf of the sponsored family or Adopt-a-Family. This is not an ethical violation. By soliciting on behalf of the private charity and not a state agency they are not using their state positions to influence the private businesses. In addition, the employees are not using state paid time or resources for the solicitation.

Example E: After work or on the weekend a group of state employees solicit holiday gifts on behalf of a family sponsored by Adopt-a-Family or their local private school. They solicit door to door in their neighborhood and do not solicit from agency vendors or other individuals with whom they conduct state business. When soliciting the gifts they indicate that they are soliciting on behalf of the private school, the sponsored family, or Adopt-a-Family. This is not an ethical violation. The employees are not using their state positions to influence the private businesses and are not using state resources to support the private charities.