Or. Rev. Stat. » Oregon Revised Statutes
Oregon Revised Statutes

Or. Rev. Stat. § 659A.206 (2026)

Effects of ORS 659A.200 to 659A.224 on employees

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section ORSoregonlegislature.gov JustiaChapter on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

      659A.206 Effects of ORS 659A.200 to 659A.224 on employees. ORS 659A.200 to 659A.224 are not intended to:

      (1) Prohibit a supervisor or appointing authority from requiring that an employee inform the supervisor or appointing authority as to official requests for information to the agency or subdivision or the substance of testimony made, or to be made, by the employee to legislators or members of the elected governing body of a political subdivision on behalf of the agency or subdivision;

      (2) Permit an employee to leave the employee’s assigned work areas during normal work hours without following applicable rules and policies pertaining to leaves, unless the employee is requested by:

      (a) A member of the Legislative Assembly or a legislative committee to appear before a legislative committee;

      (b) A member of the elected governing body of a political subdivision to appear before the governing body of the political subdivision; or

      (c) An elected auditor of a city, county or metropolitan service district to participate in an investigation or audit;

      (3) Authorize an employee to represent the employee’s personal opinions as the opinions of the agency or subdivision;

      (4) Except as specified in ORS 659A.212 (2), authorize an employee to disclose information required to be kept confidential under state or federal law, rule or regulation;

      (5) Restrict or preclude disciplinary action against an employee if the information disclosed by the employee is known by the employee to be false, if the employee discloses the information with reckless disregard for its truth or falsity, or if the information disclosed relates to the employee’s own violations, mismanagement, gross waste of funds, abuse of authority or endangerment of the public health or safety; or

      (6) Restrict or impair any judicial right of action an employee or an employer has under existing law. [Formerly 659.515; 2010 c.24 §2]

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 2 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 2019–2021 · leading case: Walker v. Oregon Travel Info. Council, 450 P.3d 19 (Or. Ct. App. 2019).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Walker v. Oregon Travel Info. Council, 450 P.3d 19 (Or. Ct. App. 2019). “203(1) provides, in part: “Subject to ORS 659A.206, except as provided in ORS 659A.”
Walker v. Oregon Travel Info. Council, 499 P.3d 160 (Or. Ct. App. 2021). “” The court found that plaintiff’s report to the DAS director concerning the alleged public meetings law violation was misleading and, effectively, false, and did not trigger the whistleblower protection of ORS 659A.206(5), because plain- tiff did not disclose in the report her…”
— Or. Rev. Stat. § 659A.206(5) — 1 case
Walker v. Oregon Travel Info. Council, 499 P.3d 160 (Or. Ct. App. 2021). “” The court found that plaintiff’s report to the DAS director concerning the alleged public meetings law violation was misleading and, effectively, false, and did not trigger the whistleblower protection of ORS 659A.206(5), because plain- tiff did not disclose in the report her…”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.