Quick question. I have my concealed carry license in PA. My employer has a no weapons on company property policy. The problem is that depending on my shift, I have to walk a fairly long distance either to or from my car every day in the dark, without my weapon. Does my employer's no weapon policy override my right to carry concealed weapons?
Does employer's policy override CCW license?
- Thread starter DaveInPA
- Start date
From an Employer
I'm a committed CCW man, and I'm also an officer for a medium-size company (600+ employees). Since I cannot possibly know the experience, mental state, or level of firearms training of all employees, I have to enforce a strict "no weapons" policy for on-duty time. As the previous post stated, employees are free to ignore the company policy, but only if they no longer wish to work for us.
I'm a committed CCW man, and I'm also an officer for a medium-size company (600+ employees). Since I cannot possibly know the experience, mental state, or level of firearms training of all employees, I have to enforce a strict "no weapons" policy for on-duty time. As the previous post stated, employees are free to ignore the company policy, but only if they no longer wish to work for us.
Perldog007
New member
Check with a local licensed attorney - SERIOUSLY. Laws vary as does juris prudence.
Ferinstance - in Virginia it was illegal to carry your legally concealed weapon into an establishment that had a posted sign proscribing such. The juris prudence was that somebody representing the establishment would have to figure out you were armed, ask you to leave and you would have to refuse (and in some places probably argue with the cops too) and be arrested/issued a summons. That was in 1998 when I got my chl there.
Times may have changed.
Some states have harsh laws on the books about private property owners being able to determine what your RKBA is on their turf. Enforcement and what the courts actually do once the law is enforced can be a mixed bag. Me, I would find out from somebody who knows even if I had to shuck out a buck fifty or so.
I would think at a minimum you could be fired for cause.
Ferinstance - in Virginia it was illegal to carry your legally concealed weapon into an establishment that had a posted sign proscribing such. The juris prudence was that somebody representing the establishment would have to figure out you were armed, ask you to leave and you would have to refuse (and in some places probably argue with the cops too) and be arrested/issued a summons. That was in 1998 when I got my chl there.
Times may have changed.
Some states have harsh laws on the books about private property owners being able to determine what your RKBA is on their turf. Enforcement and what the courts actually do once the law is enforced can be a mixed bag. Me, I would find out from somebody who knows even if I had to shuck out a buck fifty or so.
I would think at a minimum you could be fired for cause.
Clarification...
Just to clarify, your question was concerning employer policy pertaining to weapons carry, not necessarily state laws (as I understood you). Unless you work for yourself, you will always be subject to your employer's policies during the work hours when you are representing the employer. In my case, we don't allow pepper spray to be carried while on duty either.
Just to clarify, your question was concerning employer policy pertaining to weapons carry, not necessarily state laws (as I understood you). Unless you work for yourself, you will always be subject to your employer's policies during the work hours when you are representing the employer. In my case, we don't allow pepper spray to be carried while on duty either.
Many states have an "employment at will" doctrine that says an employer can fire you for any reason or no reason subject to certain restrictions such as racial or sexual discrimination. The laws on right to carry or carry concealed do not normally apply to the extent the employer can still fire you (you just won't be charged criminally). I happen to be fortunate enough to live in a state that, by statute, overrides the employer and says employees can keep a gun in their car and the employer cannot fire them (but they can't take the gun into work). State laws will vary.
Perldog007
New member
Well you just lied to us or told us something pretty telling about your mental state. Allow me to explain:
This seems to be a CYA policy. I must respectfully object to this post and call it intellectually dishonest. A committed ccw person would know better than to try and pass this off in a serious RKBA forum IMHO. Sounds more like an elitist position or that of a hoplophobe.
Once you preclude persons who are licensed to be armed from doing so it seems to be common sense that you would then be responsible for their safety.
"Mental State"??? If they have a chl the state has said that their mental status is not in question. Same as for level of skill, etc. If they have a chl they have met the legal requirements.
Can you know the mental state, level of skill or experience of any criminals on or near your campus? How many times have licensed persons caused problems in the workplace in your state? How many crimes of violence have happened in unarmed "safe for criminals" workplaces in your state?
Do you provide competent personnel to protect your unarmed employees or are we just relying on 911 which results in a crime being stopped and an arrest being made 5% of the time?
How about cars? Do you let them drive cars onto company property? When you let them walk out to their cars do you know their mental state? Driving experience? Level of skill?
Which kills more people - guns or cars?
You are following the party line.
Trying to rationalize it here insults our intelligence. You work for anti gun idiots. You enforce their policies to keep your job. Don't have any beef with that , just say so.
EDIT - another thought - If you can't trust licensed people to carry tools of self defense, how can you possisbly entrust them with your business, your income, your clients interests, etc??? Also, do you really believe that a committed deranged sociopathic person either a) needs a gun to commit mass murder or b) would pay any attention to your policy if they chose to use a firearm?
chris in va
New member
I felt that was a little elitist as well. Pretty similar to what politicians or LEO's feel about CC.
Hey, it's your policy but don't include the statement
Having worked for a HUGE company as a temp worker last year with a 'NO FIREARMS' policy (even in the parking lot) I can verify what it feels like from the other end of the spectrum.
Hey, it's your policy but don't include the statement
in your post.
Having worked for a HUGE company as a temp worker last year with a 'NO FIREARMS' policy (even in the parking lot) I can verify what it feels like from the other end of the spectrum.
I agree. Sounds like Rosie O`Donnell. Last I checked, the 2nd Amendment listed no necessary qualifications.
I have to wonder how laws and policies interact in a state like Florida, where I was a resident for 32yrs. Because by state law, owners of private property that is open to the public, cannot preclude you from carrying. If you are licensed to carry, a sign in the window is meaningless and you are not compelled to comply. When I first started to work for a particular company, the policy was no "unauthorized" weapons. Well, the HR lady politely informed us that if you have a concealed weapons permit, then you are "authorized". An interesting interpretation to say the least. Not long after, the policy was reworded along with everything else. I was a field tech so while any homeowner could tell me to leave their premises because I was armed, as long as my weapon was concealed, how would they know??? They would not and I would not be in violation of any law. Since I value my own well being far more than any job, when I felt it necessary, I did carry while on duty. On one particular day, while working the shady side of town, an idiot with a rifle made me REALLY glad I ignored a stupid policy.
No, company policy may not override state law. However, depending on which state you live in, some clarification may be needed. Such as, what constitutes a "public place"? Seems to be a lot of ambiguity in this area.
txshootist
Inactive
Quote:
Well you just lied to us or told us something pretty telling about your mental state. Allow me to explain:
This seems to be a CYA policy. I must respectfully object to this post and call it intellectually dishonest. A committed ccw person would know better than to try and pass this off in a serious RKBA forum IMHO. Sounds more like an elitist position or that of a hoplophobe.
Once you preclude persons who are licensed to be armed from doing so it seems to be common sense that you would then be responsible for their safety.
"Mental State"??? If they have a chl the state has said that their mental status is not in question. Same as for level of skill, etc. If they have a chl they have met the legal requirements.
Can you know the mental state, level of skill or experience of any criminals on or near your campus? How many times have licensed persons caused problems in the workplace in your state? How many crimes of violence have happened in unarmed "safe for criminals" workplaces in your state?
Do you provide competent personnel to protect your unarmed employees or are we just relying on 911 which results in a crime being stopped and an arrest being made 5% of the time?
How about cars? Do you let them drive cars onto company property? When you let them walk out to their cars do you know their mental state? Driving experience? Level of skill?
Which kills more people - guns or cars?
You are following the party line.
Trying to rationalize it here insults our intelligence. You work for anti gun idiots. You enforce their policies to keep your job. Don't have any beef with that , just say so.
EDIT - another thought - If you can't trust licensed people to carry tools of self defense, how can you possisbly entrust them with your business, your income, your clients interests, etc??? Also, do you really believe that a committed deranged sociopathic person either a) needs a gun to commit mass murder or b) would pay any attention to your policy if they chose to use a firearm?
------------------
In just about any state in this country, an employer has the right to dictate the rules in his/her establishment. As was stated, He was forced to enforce the stated policy. He could, of course refuse, but he would just lose his job and nothing would change. We can rant and rave all we want about the "Rights of the people" vs the rights of the employer, but the sad fact is:
If you work for someone, they have the right to declare their premises a "no firearms area". We, as CHL holders can comply or find somewhere else to work.
Well you just lied to us or told us something pretty telling about your mental state. Allow me to explain:
This seems to be a CYA policy. I must respectfully object to this post and call it intellectually dishonest. A committed ccw person would know better than to try and pass this off in a serious RKBA forum IMHO. Sounds more like an elitist position or that of a hoplophobe.
Once you preclude persons who are licensed to be armed from doing so it seems to be common sense that you would then be responsible for their safety.
"Mental State"??? If they have a chl the state has said that their mental status is not in question. Same as for level of skill, etc. If they have a chl they have met the legal requirements.
Can you know the mental state, level of skill or experience of any criminals on or near your campus? How many times have licensed persons caused problems in the workplace in your state? How many crimes of violence have happened in unarmed "safe for criminals" workplaces in your state?
Do you provide competent personnel to protect your unarmed employees or are we just relying on 911 which results in a crime being stopped and an arrest being made 5% of the time?
How about cars? Do you let them drive cars onto company property? When you let them walk out to their cars do you know their mental state? Driving experience? Level of skill?
Which kills more people - guns or cars?
You are following the party line.
Trying to rationalize it here insults our intelligence. You work for anti gun idiots. You enforce their policies to keep your job. Don't have any beef with that , just say so.
EDIT - another thought - If you can't trust licensed people to carry tools of self defense, how can you possisbly entrust them with your business, your income, your clients interests, etc??? Also, do you really believe that a committed deranged sociopathic person either a) needs a gun to commit mass murder or b) would pay any attention to your policy if they chose to use a firearm?
------------------
In just about any state in this country, an employer has the right to dictate the rules in his/her establishment. As was stated, He was forced to enforce the stated policy. He could, of course refuse, but he would just lose his job and nothing would change. We can rant and rave all we want about the "Rights of the people" vs the rights of the employer, but the sad fact is:
If you work for someone, they have the right to declare their premises a "no firearms area". We, as CHL holders can comply or find somewhere else to work.
Perldog007
New member
Well if it was me I would ask a criminal defense attorney with experience defending against gun charges to consult for an hour or so, and pay him if you really want to be sure.
to quote a post type a square bracket "[" the word "quote" and another square bracket "]" going the opposite way. Paste in the quote and type another square bracket "[" a forward slash "/" the word "quote" and a closing square bracket "]"
Factor in that your average armed citizen CHL holder is likely more competent with their weapon than the average LEO. The citizen is less likely to shoot the wrong person due to the fact that a CHL holder is rarely a third party arriving at the scene looking for trouble, as the LEO properly is.
Sorry for the rant kids, but supporters like the one posting are not helping the cause IMO.
Perldog007
New member
I got no beef with the brother doing what he has to do. My beef is with the, in my estimation, elitist/anti-gun rationalization for doing what he has to do.
I accept the "rights of the employer". Every day I cross a state line to an anti-gun state and work for an anti-gun company to put beans on the table. Wish it weren't so, but for now it is.
I do it for the money, not because I think the state or my employer pre-empting self defense has any moral foundation.
As soon as I can make a positive change I will. In the process now
In PA, they can fire you for bringing the gun to work. They can demand that you leave their premises with your gun or face a trespass charge. Beyond that, no there's nothing else they can do. Your decision is do you feel lucky. Also, if they have a written rule that you signed that you read and understand then it is likely that you will be denied unemployment compensation if fired. Your choice is, do you feel lucky.
Charlie218
New member
Sort of sounds as though some of you should be asking some concealed carry questions during your employment interviews. You should know the company policy prior to accepting the position, if you don't agree with it then you have a choice of not accepting the job. I understand that we need 'a job' but it is all about choices.......I would look for something in the company hand book or employment manual before I would ask the employer or HR person....