Warning

 

Close

Confirm Action

Are you sure you wish to do this?

Confirm Cancel
Member Login
Site Notices
9/22/2017 12:11:25 AM
Posted: 4/4/2002 5:58:21 PM EDT
I work in a "bad part of town". Often work 50-60 hours plus, and have keys to our warehouse/office. Company policy dictates that firearms are not allowed on premises by employees (we have no signs that states concealed weapons are prohibited, so who knows with our customers). I always carry, and have my gun on my possesion after hours in our building. Say a guy decides to come in and "rob" the building and put my life in danger. If, god forbid I have to use my weapon, do I have legal recourse to sue my company if they decide to fire me? I'm not going to hold anybody to any answers of course, but just wondering on the opinions of the legal minded on this board. On a side note, the manager carrys a glock after hours and our drive carrys a ruger .44 redhawk. Thks
Link Posted: 4/4/2002 6:08:08 PM EDT
Wow, You sound just like a good friend of mine. He has the same problem that you have. The only thing that I can say is that you can always find another job, but not another life. Vulcan94
Link Posted: 4/4/2002 6:13:27 PM EDT
Link Posted: 4/4/2002 6:22:15 PM EDT
If you are located in a "work at will" jurisdiction you have no legal recourse to keep your job in violation of your employer's policy. Your only protection would be under some type of descrimination theory, but unless you can sucessfully argue gun carriers are a protected class you are out of luck. If you can't aford to lose your job be careful. Having spent a career as an leo, I think the chance of your having to actually use the weapon is remote, but I don't wish to diminish your need for security.
Link Posted: 4/4/2002 6:26:52 PM EDT
Link Posted: 4/4/2002 6:31:53 PM EDT
Link Posted: 4/4/2002 6:39:45 PM EDT
I'd carry. With or without government sanction I'd have immediate access to a handgun. Period.
Link Posted: 4/4/2002 7:25:44 PM EDT
VA-gunnut, I could be wrong, but from my ccw class, in N.C you cannot carry on private property with a cw if it is posted (in my case, no such signs are evident at work), and I doubt my company would raise a "stink" if a customer who spends 500k/year with us actually "carried" on our property. Its also somewhat a unique situation becuase I am management, the person who I report to is in another state, and the "home" office is about 400 miles away. Robertesq1, you're point is well taken. I did have to laugh to an extent though, because a friend who is also an leo stopped by the office to see me at night (he saw my car in the parking lot and wanted to make sure everything was allright). He came in and we caught up on some "gun talk", and before he left, he asked me in a serious tone "you do have you're weapon with don't you?" (nice to know he at least cares about me!) Seriously though, we are located right behind the city bus station, and somtimes we get some "strange people" looking for money. I guess I'm thinking about the guy from 7/11 who fought off his robber and then was dismissed from the company becasue he didn't follow company procedure to submit (he stated he feared for his life and thought he would die if he didn't fight (what actually became of that case? anybody know?) Guess I'm lucky. I do need the job (money), but I would survive easily without it.
Link Posted: 4/4/2002 7:32:30 PM EDT
Link Posted: 4/4/2002 9:21:20 PM EDT
I forget what company fired like 4 people for having rifles and pistols in their cars in the company parking lot. They were avid shooters and were off to the range after work. The Security camera caught them as they looked over each others weapons in the lot and they were canned the next day. It was company policy that no Firearms were allowed on Company property. I think it was AOL, but I'm not sure.
Link Posted: 4/4/2002 10:38:44 PM EDT
Right, AOL fired a bunch of people, from a Utah location, who had guns in their cars in the parking lot. 13f, you would probably lose your job, and you probably would not be successful in suing them. However, you might make a case by claiming that the manager and driver both carry as well -- you might be able to claim that the policy wasn't being enforced properly. You might get them fired if you "out" them, though, and that still might not help you at all.
Link Posted: 4/5/2002 10:47:58 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 4/5/2002 10:52:32 AM EDT by tbone]
I am in the same boat, I work for the university where I live. I was accused of carrying a weapon which they could not prove, but was told that I was now made aware of the policy and if caught violating the rule I would be fired. I talked to my lawyer, and his answer was that I was not in violation of any law since I have a permit to carry. But he said that when I accepted the job I agreed to follow company policy. I was told I could raise a stink and carry a piece and fight it,but I would lose my job and their would be no legal recourse open to me. [rolleyes]
Link Posted: 4/5/2002 10:59:22 AM EDT
[Last Edit: 4/5/2002 2:35:01 PM EDT by CHUCK6419]
We can't Make employers violate the Enviormental ACts... We can't Make employers Violate the Sherman Anti-trust act... We Can't make employers violate an equal-oppourtunity employer status... WHY THE HELL CAN EMPLOYERS VIOLATE THE SECOND ADMENDMENT? Just asking...[uzi] [soapbox]
Link Posted: 4/5/2002 11:19:25 AM EDT
Link Posted: 4/5/2002 2:38:03 PM EDT
Aimless I was just making a point at how businesses can pick and choose which laws they want to obey and which not... I do think you have a point, in the fact that you stated it is unfair for a business to deny a constitutional right and then not provide any security... for this reason if some employee were attacked while on the Job, I think there could be a reasonable tort liability for the denial of a right, then no security... I am no legal expert. -Chuck
Link Posted: 4/5/2002 3:03:28 PM EDT
[Last Edit: 4/5/2002 3:05:20 PM EDT by Avtomat]
Originally Posted By CHUCK6419: I do think you have a point, in the fact that you stated it is unfair for a business to deny a constitutional right and then not provide any security... for this reason if some employee were attacked while on the Job, I think there could be a reasonable tort liability for the denial of a right, then no security... I am no legal expert. -Chuck
View Quote
The second amendment is what is called a "negative right," it is a restriction on government power, nothing more. Contrast this with an "affirmative right," which requires the government to give you something (some countries have a right to health care, they have to give it to you when you ask). The 2nd has no relevance outside of the realm of delineating government power. Insofar as tort liability is concerned, how can someone be held liable for the intervening criminal acts of third parties? (I assume the employer has not voluntarily undertaken a duty to protect him). you wouldn't allow gun makers to also be held liable for the criminal acts of thugs who use guns, would you? An employer has property rights. For the government to tell an employer he has to allow people to carry guns on his property (which a court [the government] would be doing if it held the employer liable) would be a violation of the employer's property rights.
Top Top