What would you do?

[Tennessee Gentleman]

I think this one is about done. What do you guys think -- is it time for a close?

I vote to close it. This issue has been hashed out a lot and no one is likely to profit from it continuing. As Glenn said in another thread; Morality is something that is open to debate amoung gentle folk. Or something like that

 

[LoneWolf22056]

The right to carry at work really depends on the work that you're doing.

If, say, you're an Electrical Engineer working on a program that provides certain electronic devices per government contract, chances are that's a "need to know basis" environment and all things going on in the area need to be watched closely. Most times they won't even let you bring a cell phone, pager, or any electronic device. Could you imagine bringing a gun into a place like that? There are spies who would love to get ahold of some of this stuff and report back to their host countries with their findings. This is stuff you would NOT want any other nation to have. Do you think they're going to take a chance and let YOU carry a gun to work? Nope. Even though you'd need a very thorough background check before you could work, there are rules and limitations for security reasons. Let's say somebody slipped through the background check and DID bring a gun. They can steal whatever they like and escape. This is unlikely because of all the screening you go through just to enter the building, but still. Imagine that.

Top secret projects aside, I don't think that you have a real need to carry a weapon in the workplace unless you're a cop or security contractor. Workplace violence is a real dangerous things. I'm sure you've all had days where your co-workers did things that just irritated you to no end. If somebody got pushed "over the edge" and started shooting up the place, what then? I know that you feel slighted because it's your 2nd amendment right, but try to think in terms of the big picture. Why not keep a strongbox in your vehicle and leave your gun there? You can go to work, and, should your perceived imminent hostile takeover actually happen, MORE THAN LIKELY you will be able to go out a window or a door and escape.

You have to think about it this way. If you're allowed to carry a gun, then everyone else is going to be allowed to as well. Do you really want your co-workers or new co-workers you've never met before walking around with a gun? You don't know how they behave. Look at all the school shooters. Most times it's someone that nobody really knows, and they're bottling up all this rage until one day they just go and shoot everyone.

If you really feel the need to keep your gun on you 24/7 in a workplace that won't allow it, keep it in your car. As long as you don't announce it to everyone that you have it, nobody will know and nobody will care.

 

[cerberus65]

I wasn't going to add anything else to this thread but LoneWolf has "inspired" me.

I'm sure you've all had days where your co-workers did things that just irritated you to no end. If somebody got pushed "over the edge" and started shooting up the place, what then?

Yes, I've had days like that. But I don't care how annoyed I get, I would quit long before I would ever even consider going anywhere close to "the edge". Arguments or disagreements aren't settled with guns. Period.

Now if someone else went "postal", that's a case where I'd definitely want to have the means to defend myself. Wouldn't you?

When I started keeping a gun in my car I noticed that I practically overnight became much more careful not to provoke anyone while driving. I think most folks recognize the immense responsibility involved in carrying a gun (in car, on person, whatever). I would actually feel safer if I knew others here in our "safe" little cube-farm were carrying.

I currently park across the street from my employer and leave my gun in my car. The building I work in is next to some pretty bad neighborhoods but you wouldn't realize that unless you went driving around back behind us. I would love to have my gun on me when I walk to and from the building (especially after dark - and even from the closest parking spaces) but my employer cares more about their liability than any of our safety. This is, of course, in conflict with the responsibility I have to go home to my family each night. I'm still struggling with what my final answer will be to this situation. But it's great to have a place to kick ideas and opinions around. I appreciate all of you and your opinions.

 

[OldMarksman]

Top secret projects aside, I don't think that you have a real need to carry a weapon in the workplace unless you're a cop or security contractor.

So, the lady who works at the Stop and Rob, the jeweler, and the pharmacist have no "real need", in spite of their vulnerability.....

If you're allowed to carry a gun, then everyone else is going to be allowed to as well. Do you really want your co-workers or new co-workers you've never met before walking around with a gun?

Very similar, I think, to the usual ant-CCW argument. Those who are "allowed" to carry will be dangerous, and those who are not "allowed" will not be armed and will not do anything untoward. Mmmmm....

Look at all the school shooters. Most times it's someone that nobody really knows, and they're bottling up all this rage until one day they just go and shoot everyone.

And all of them do so where they are not "allowed" to have a weapon.

If you really feel the need to keep your gun on you 24/7 in a workplace that won't allow it, keep it in your car.

It will certainly come in handy on the parking lot.

 

[David Armstrong]

I'm getting tired of lectures David, and Peezakiller.

As peetza said, how is it that us expressing our opinions on a subject whre we disagree with you are lectures while those that offer opinions you agree with are not? Are you lecturing us? Why is it that some expressions of philosophy are OK, but others are not?

What what you have done in my case?

First I think you have narrowed it down to only two options while it is quite possible there are others available, so you have created a false choice issue. But I can tell you that if my job was that important, I would quit carrying, just like probably the majority of your co-workers do. I've never bought into this concept of "I carry a gun, I'm special and don't have to do what everyone else is expected to do."

 

[David Armstrong]

He stated in post #1 he is an independent contractor, as an independent contractor his work can not be "directed"
He has every right to refuse to follow this rule, as this company can not direct his work.

Sorry, but I've done (and still do) a fair amount of independent contractor work, and that is not correct. A company can specify to the contractor how a job is to be done and what standards are to be met during the perfromance of the job. Yes, he has every right to refuse to follow the rule, but he does not have the right to pretend to be following the rule while he is not doing so.

 

[Hard Ball]

How much is yor life worth to you?

 

[Tennessee Gentleman]

Well, since the thread is still open here are a few more comments

I notice some seem to be very defensive of the employer as a paragon of virtue. In fact, employers often engage in legal subterfuge, let's look at that.

They honestly tell you what the job is.

Actually many times they don't tell you such. Especially when it involves risk aside from the infamous "other duties as assigned".
Take for example 7-11. Go into a store and ask the manager how many times the store has been robbed and employees injured and he will not tell you. Company Policy. They don't tell those they hire either. Think Pizza Hut warns employees not to go into certain neighborhoods for fear of robbery? Not likely they want the sales. Sounds honest to me

They honestly pay you what they agreed to pay you based on you doing the job as you have both agreed to. Seems like the company is being pretty honest and straightforward.

Umm, not really. In many companies if you reveal your salary to another co-worker it is grounds for immediate termination. Why? Because the company doesn't want you to know what they are paying others doing the same work as you who might be making more or less based on unethical reasons (though perhaps not illegal). More honesty from the employer

So, the lady who works at the Stop and Rob, the jeweler, and the pharmacist have no "real need", in spite of their vulnerability.....

Great point! And so a moral ethical employer if he bans the carry of firearms for self defense will take reasonable measures to protect employees from harm. That could include several items like bullet proof cashier "cages" and other types of protection.

 

[cerberus65]

In the same vein as what Tennessee Gentleman is saying...

Most states are right to work. So if your employer decides to pay you less all he/she has to do is give you the choice of "accepting" a lower salary or taking a pink slip. So much for having a contract and abiding by it.

I'm not mentioning this to assert that since corporate behavior is not always moral that we don't need to be moral. I only mention it to assert that things are not always as starkly black and white as we would sometimes like to make them.

 

[David Armstrong]

Take for example 7-11. Go into a store and ask the manager how many times the store has been robbed and employees injured and he will not tell you.

So what? That has nothing to do with the employer honestly telling you what the job is.

Think Pizza Hut warns employees not to go into certain neighborhoods for fear of robbery? Not likely they want the sales.

Commenting on things one knows nothing about is a rather silly thing to do. Many delivery companies, including Pizza Hut, tell employees not to go into certain areas, and won't accept orders from those areas.

Umm, not really. In many companies if you reveal your salary to another co-worker it is grounds for immediate termination.

Umm, yes, really. Telling somebody else your salary has nothing to do with whether or not the company is honest with you in telling you what your salary is. Once again you try to tie something totally irrelevent into the issue under discussion.

Why? Because the company doesn't want you to know what they are paying others doing the same work as you who might be making more or less based on unethical reasons (though perhaps not illegal).

Nothing unethical about the company paying you a salary that is different from somebody else as long as they have told you in advance what your salary would be and you have agreed that is an appropriate salary for the job you have agreed to do (barring EEOC or other legal requirements). And that is the difference. The company is being open and honest about what they are doing, giving the employee the choice of whether or not to accept the position and the pay. The employee is being dishonest when they secretly violate the rules they have agreed to follow and still take the money. Let's face it, if folks didn't think it was wrong they woldn't have this need to hide it from the employer.

 

[David Armstrong]

So if your employer decides to pay you less all he/she has to do is give you the choice of "accepting" a lower salary or taking a pink slip. So much for having a contract and abiding by it.

Even in a right to work state if there is a contract it is binding through the duration of the contract unless there is a bankruptcy or such. And again, that is not quite the same. The employer is being honest about it, saying "here is what I am goin gto do, you may participate or not." As opposed to what many here are suggesting, which would be "I decided to cut your pay in half at the first of the month but thought I would keep it a secret from you until payday."

 

[cerberus65]

Even in a right to work state if there is a contract ...

That's the point of "right to work", there is no contract. They can dismiss you for any reason at any time.

 

[kgpcr]

Where do you live and work? Is it a bad area? I will agree you by taking the job agreed to THEIR rules not yours. They are not to blame as you had the choice of not taking the job.

 

[David Armstrong]

That's the point of "right to work", there is no contract. They can dismiss you for any reason at any time.

Yes, they can dismiss you. But they cannot change the terms of the contract, which is what is being discussed. Lots of contracts in right to work states.

 

[skydiver3346]

David Armstrong:

Look David, you make some cogent points and defend your arguments well to a certain degree. But I believe that your are too hard lined in your thinking and take other people's comments too personal. There are other opinions out there and that is what this site is all about. We all learn from it.

Bottom line is this: As you say, being honest is important and has merit as you suggest. But it just can't always be a black and white situation. The employer may be honest and then again, maybe they aren't. They may have had a hard prior experience with employees "getting into trouble" with late night delivery of drugs. They are worried that something may go south and do not want to responsibility, etc.

When its all said and done, he needs to go home to his family. Nobody should tell you that you can't carry a gun in your personal vehicle, period... Carrying on your person and/or in a nursing home may be a little different, NOT IN YOUR VEHICLE. Please try and understand. Let's all try and be a little open minded. Thank you.

 

[Tennessee Gentleman]

So what? That has nothing to do with the employer honestly telling you what the job is.

Yes it is. The known working conditions and the hazards are part of what the job is. Failing to disclose that fully is deception.

Even in a right to work state if there is a contract it is binding through the duration of the contract unless there is a bankruptcy or such.

You are confusing right to work with at will employment; they are different. There is no contract with at will employment. The employer in an at will employment condition can do just Kerberos said they could.

Commenting on things one knows nothing about is a rather silly thing to do.

I agree

Telling somebody else your salary has nothing to do with whether or not the company is honest with you in telling you what your salary is.

No, but the company wanting to keep it secret and threatening to fire you for revealing it for their own selfish reasons is. Just because a company tells you what they will pay you has nothing to do with honesty. Others who do the same work as you but get more or less than you without good reason is not honest. Using an argument you have posited before:

Let's face it, if folks didn't think it was wrong they woldn't have this need to hide it

I only mention it to assert that things are not always as starkly black and white as we would sometimes like to make them.

Which is the real nub of the issue. Dogmatic and unthoughtful judgments of others is what the problem is. The same people who at the Nuremberg Trials used the "I was only following orders" defense had the same black and white mindset. Rules are rules regardless of their morality or impact on others and look at where that went.

 

[David Armstrong]

But I believe that your are too hard lined in your thinking and take other people's comments too personal.

No more hard lined than those who think that unless there is a law they should be able to do whatever they want, no more hard line than those who feel lyhing is OK, no more hard lined than those that suggest being dishonest for money is OK, and so on.

Nobody should tell you that you can't carry a gun in your personal vehicle, period

True, but that doesn't matter. There are lots of things that people tell you to do that they probably shouldn't. What matters is that a person has made an agreement..."I will do X, Y, and Z in exchange for you providing me with 1, 2, and 3." If the perosn then still accepts 1, 2, and 3 while only doing X and Y AND INTENTIONALLY violating Z and hiding it, that person is acting dishonestly. If one doesn't like the rule, one should have the intestinal fortitude to violate it openly and inform the other that it is being violated. Doing otherwise indicates a severe lack of character.

 

[David Armstrong]

Yes it is. The known working conditions and the hazards are part of what the job is. Failing to disclose that fully is deception.

As we have seen so many times, you have a tendency to try to discuss things that you obviously know nothing about, and then try to change the subject when you get caught. Known working conditions and hazards are very different from your initial claim, that the store owner had an obligation to tell you how many times the store has been robbed and employees injured.

You are confusing right to work with at will employment; they are different. There is no contract with at will employment. The employer in an at will employment condition can do just Kerberos said they could.

As mentioned before, try to learn something about a topic if you want to talk about it. First, you are the one confused, as Keberos was discussing right to work, not at will. From Kerberos: "Most states are right to work. So if your employer decides to pay you less all he/she has to do is give you the choice of "accepting" a lower salary or taking a pink slip. So much for having a contract and abiding by it." -AND-That's the point of "right to work", there is no contract. They can dismiss you for any reason at any time. Second, even with at-will employment, if there is a contract the contract is considered enforceable for the duration of the contract, barring certain events. For example, the Texas workforce Commission points out, "the basic rule of Texas employment law is employment at will, which applies to all phases of the employment relationship - it means that absent a statute or an express agreement (such as an employment contract) to the contrary, either party in an employment relationship may modify any of the terms or conditions of employment, or terminate the relationship altogether, for any reason, or no particular reason at all, with or without advance notice." Such contractual conditions are normal for at-will employment.

No, but the company wanting to keep it secret and threatening to fire you for revealing it for their own selfish reasons is.

So what? I know this is really hard for you sometimes, but try to stay on the topic, which is honesty between employer and employee.

Which is the real nub of the issue.

No, the nub of the issue is whether it is ethical and honest to accept money by pretending to be doing something that one is intentionally not doing.
Again, it is really simple here: Let's face it, if folks didn't think it was wrong they wouldn't have this need to hide it.

 

[TridentOne]

What would I do?

I'd carry it in the car if that were legal. As a contractor doing business in your own vehicle I think is a very different situation then carrying in the nursing homes where your liberty is at stake. Being unincarcerated is much more precious than money.

No, the nub of the issue is whether it is ethical and honest to accept money by pretending to be doing something that one is intentionally not doing.
Again, it is really simple here: Let's face it, if folks didn't think it was wrong they wouldn't have this need to hide it.

A rule, or a law, against carrying a gun is completly arbitrary. It is based on the opinion of the lawmakers, based on the assumption that that's what the voters want. The OP's customer has an opinion on carrying guns and made a rule that the OP disagrees with. Disagreeing is not wrong. Law breakers are "guilty" or "Not guilty" not right or wrong. And hiding ones opinion does not make it wrong or the person wrong or the idea wrong. I have opinions on all kinds of topics but I am not always comfortable discussing those opinions with some people, and I assure you, I am not wrong about any of those topics. One of them being, to carry my gun.

 

[Ricklin]

One more time

Go to WWW.IRS.Gov
Look at the IRS rules that determine whether an individual is a contractor or an employee.

If the company dictates how the work is to be done, you are NOT AN IC.

While the company might SAY you can't carry while performing this work, I can almost guarantee that it is NOT in writing. The company cannot direct the work, only the result.

Many Many companies want to have it both ways, they don't want the liabilities of employees, yet want to dictate very specific rules on how the work is to be done. That does not fly, the company is basically being dishonest with this "rule"

If it's not in writing, it never happened. The OP has a contract, if the contract states "no concealed carry" he should not carry, he would be violating his contract.

I'll bet a dozen donut holes that this is not in the contract, but that he was told verbally that this is a rule.

OP: Is the ban on concealed carry in your contract?

I bet not, as that would constitute directing the work.

Being an employee and being an independent contractor are very different things.