This story has gotten a little more interesting, I think. Originally it was reported that he had applied for a religious exemption and it was denied. The original story included that WSU was using a double blind method for religious exemption applications (which is a very good thing). The staffers who decide if an religious exemption request was "sincerely held" or whatever terminology they use to say if it was a real reason or a made-up-reason-because-I-don't-want-the-vaccine, do not know the names or jobs of the people applying for the exemption. This allows them to decide on the merits. The original story reported the ratio of exemptions that were approved of the ones applied for, it was over half but not close to all. So it sounded like they were actually considering and deciding on all these applications. And Rolovich's was denied. So that seemed like a thorough and honest way to have judged his request, and then they could fire him for not getting vaccinated and not having an exemption.
But Rolovich's appeal against WSU says that his request for religious exemption was in fact approved by the impartial, blind review board. But afterwards the AD Chun superceded and denied the request after-the-fact, because he said that Rolovich had been telling him all along he wasn't going to get the vaccine, which to him meant that his religious exemption request wasn't sincere.
That, to me, seems like BS. You can't have an independent review board that determines the sincerity of someone's religious beliefs, and then have someone high up reverse those decisions (in either direction).
I think they have to pay this guy to go away. They can't fire him for cause if his request for religious exemption was approved. Unless he outright refuses to abide by the accommodations they would have to set in place to allow an unvaccinated employee be around other employees and students. But he must have been meeting those accommodations all along, right? Masks and stuff when coaching, remote meetings, etc etc.
If we're being truly sincere here, the overwhelming majority of religious exemptions are complete cop outs in the first place.
That said, I do agree with your overall point here. You can't have that process, and then not stick to it.