Sorry if this sounds like a stupid question but I'm genuinely interested to know what your thoughts are.

My workplace rules specifically state that carrying a weapon at work is a terminable offense. Or more appropriately, getting CAUGHT with a weapon at work is terminable.

Given that, do you still carry while at work?

Rules are rules.
If you get caught, you will be fired- I think that is clear enough.

If the rules of your workplace aren't to your liking, I most thoroughly suggest to prepare and make haste to find thyself another abode in whence to toil for script.

In other words, if you don't like the way the hash slinger runs the joint, beat it and get a new pad to earn some bread.
Heavy, man.

__________________
Lost it all in a boat accident

Well, I make the rules where I work, so it is a non-issue. However, I would not work anywhere with such a rule, if I could get a job elsewhere. Before I got to make the rules, I often broke the silly ones, so there you go...

Thank God I am self employed.

__________________
NRA Pistol,PPITH,PPOTH&TASER

Well, I work on a Government Installation. So simple answer...No.

This is a valid question that, I believe, many people have to deal with.
Do you carry secretly, risk getting caught, and possibly survive an incident at your workplace?
Or do you leave the gun in your car and risk being unarmed?
Not an easy question.
The scarcity of jobs these days makes the decision even tougher...

We don't have any formal restrictions to concealed carry, so its not an issue. I would think long and hard about breaking the rules.
You'll have to weigh the risks and benefits of carrying. Are you in a high risk situation where you are likely to encounter criminal or dangerous individuals? Or, are there people that are likely to become angry and fly off the handle? Versus - are you in a place where the likelihood of encountering a life and death situation extremely remote? If the former, you may have to take the risk of termination, but if the latter, then it would probably be very unwise to carry. Plus, if you did carry and get into a shooting situation, you'll increase you legal headaches/risks.

You also have to worry about vengeful coworkers who may know you carry, and also a pissed off wife/ex-wife/girlfriend calling your work and ratting you out. I heard a story while doing some work at a Toyota plant in southern Indiana that a worker there had his ex-wife call the plant and inform them that he generally carried concealed, or at least had a firearm in his vehicle. The way their policy went was that guns were not even allowed ON THE PROPERTY and thus not in his vehicle. He was immediately terminated...

Moral: if your carrying where your technically not supposed to be - do so at your own risk... and keep it secret.

Currently, I've got a part time gig at a gun shop. Open carry is required. I like it.

The last full time job I had involved changing into clean-room garb several times a day. Company policy forbade weapons on the premises. It would have been nearly impossible to carry under those conditions.

I worked there for the high wage and very good medical benefits. Similar wages and benefits are tough to find. My wife had a very expensive chronic illness, to the tune of $200K/year. It would have been very short sighted to take a big cut in pay and benfits so I could carry on the job.

__________________
It's around here somewhere!

How in the world did Toyota get away with that? They have no legal authority to search a vehicle that is privately owned by an employee nor to search the body of an employee. They would have had to fire him based off of hearsay which certainly could have led to a wrongful termination suit. Unless the guy admitted to carrying or somehow brandished or failed to keep it concealed, I don't really think there is much they could have done about it.

__________________
NRA Pistol,PPITH,PPOTH&TASER

My work has a written policy which states that "the unlawful carrying of weapons is prohibited." Notice the word "UNLAWFUL?" I did. I have a permit so I figure it is allowed, and if I ever get diciplined for doing so I figure I might have a legal case.

I only have once, and it was under very special circumstances.

I was the facility security officer (personnel, document and physical security) for a cleared NASA contractor.

When the first Gulf War started, I went to my ignoramus, Klansman boss and told him we needed to program the access control system so that it didn't unlock the employee door automatically every morning. Being the drooling simpleton he was, he refused.

Shortly afterward, I was in the john in the basement around the corner from my office and across the hall from the space instrument assembly facilities. Somebody came in and said that everybody should immediately leave the basement and come to the lobby. I figured that there'd been some kind of hazmat spill in one of the labs.

When I got to the lobby, I found a bunch of people milling around aimlessly. Jokingly I asked somebody if there was a bomb threat. They said, "Yes".

Apparently one of the engineers in the basement got a bomb threat on his phone, telling him that the bomb was in his desk somewhere. He reported this to my moron boss, who told him to search his desk. Smarter than the average engineer, he told my boss to go **** himself and search the area himself. Rather than evacuate the building, this imbecile just collected everybody in the lobby without telling them why. Having at least several braincells to rub together, it immediately occurred to me that this was a fine way to get a bunch of people together so that you could shoot as many of them as possible, probably achieving as many casualties by trampling and crushing as by shooting.

The next day, I started carrying a brief case to work. Inside of the briefcase were a Safariland ballistic vest, my Series 70 Colt and a couple of extra magazines. I kept this up until the end of the war. I later found out that this was just one in a series of bomb threats which that jackass had neglected to tell me about. I had two bosses, the other for computer work. I called the non-stupid boss down to my office, told him what was going on, and told him that if anything happened, he should come straight to my office (behind a vault door), since I wouldn't give a plugged nickle for his chances with "David Duke" calling the shots.

There was no concealed carry in Ohio at the time. Bombings and mass shootings weren't authorized either. I figured that the penalties for getting caught unarmed in a terrorist massacre were much higher than those for carrying a concealed weapon.

I believe in obeying the law... just not at the cost of my own life.

cshoff,

Depends on whether there's a law in that state that protects workers from such things. Oklahoma has one now, Florida's is in limbo at least as to part of it.

It's not a Fourth Amendment violation, so unless there's a law involved the employer gets to make the rules.

If one doesn't like the rules, one doesn't have to work there. If one violates the rules, one doesn't get to work there.

An employer does not have the authority to conduct a search of a privately owned vehicle in ANY state, period. Even law enforcement requires probable cause or a search warrant. There is no getting around that. The only exception would be if a vehicle is on the premises of a government facility where all vehicles were subject to search upon admittance to the premises or if said employee signed some kind of legally binding agreement that authorized such a search to take place.

The laws you are talking about are laws that make it unlawful for an employer to prohibit employees from keeping a lawfully possessed handgun locked in their vehicle on employer property. They do nothing to change the fact that an employer cannot legally search a privately owned vehicle that is parked on their lot.

__________________
NRA Pistol,PPITH,PPOTH&TASER

I've addressed this issue many times in quite a few states. Basically, if your state statutes DOES NOT list your place of business as a specific exclusion (as in "place of nuisance", schools, government buildings etc.) then CCW prohibitions can be classified as "private property exclusions" to your carry authorization.

Violating these rules can and may result in Trespass issues and may establish cause for termination by your employer. The critical issue is that if you do not argue the point, there is usually no grounds for criminal prosecution or loss of your CCW privilege. It's your call.

Personally, I feel concealed carry is just that, and if there are no metal detectors no one should ever no you are armed UNLESS THEY NEED TO! You "pays your money" and "takes your chances".

It is interesting to note that due to a total media blackout of almost anything "firearm positive", a number of serious civil actions have been filed by employees who have become victims of violent crime while being unarmed due to company policies. Parking lot prohibitions in a few states have been specifically overuled by some state and local courts.

Nayth

MY Boss is a great guy let's me carry all the time (ME) : )

__________________
GOD/GUNS/GUTS>GET EM ALL

If I felt I needed to I would but most places I've worked I saw no reason to carry. I'm self employed now and carry 99.9% of the time. Noone else ever notices I carry and I never disclose the fact. Conceal carry is what it is "conceal carry". Keep it that way.

It's done all the time and is perfectly legal except in a few states. Most often it comes down like the famous Weyerhauser deal in Oklahoma. They use a drug/firearms dog who sniffs employee vehicles parked on company property. If the employee denies permission to search after the dog "hits" they're fired. If they okay a search and a gun is found they're fired.

Like in the Weyerhauser case, this has been tried and upheld on appeal all over the country many, many times.

Bob

cshoff,

I'm surprised you are not familiar with this. Remember all that Constitutional stuff only applies to the government. Probable cause, etc., relates to the government.

Some of the "department" stores used to routinely search employees' lockers for drugs, stolen property, etc., even cutting the employees' locks.

Cars can be "searched" in the manner posted by bk43 unless there's some law to prevent it.Since the courts seemed to uphold these things, the NRA went to bat, in various states, to get laws prohibiting this passed or laws saying guns on employers' property were legal.

You can see both sides of this-the gun owners say The Second Amendment says...," while the property owners say, "It's my property and...."

So, you have two competing rights. We, of course, want the Second Amendment to trump, but, the Supremes haven't got a case yet.

Bob

NAYTH speaks well.

When I went to work for my last employer, their rulebook had nothing on firearms. Later, it did, although somehow I never got around to acknowledging receipt of the new rules. Regardless, I had at least one firearm available every single day I worked there (about five years). MA law says nothing against my practice (or theirs). I regarded both the likelihood of my needing a firearm and the likelihood of their discovering my firearm(s) as minimal. Apparently, I was correct on both counts. However, the potential difference in consequences of making one kind of wrong choice versus the opposite wrong choice was tremendous. I chose the safe route.

Interestingly, our company went through several "downsizings" and a blanket outsourcing (that ended my employment). On one of those occasions, the last, as I recall, an anti-gun fellow employee commented on what he considered a failure to provide proper security against adverse action by a disgruntled employee. This was after the killings in Wakefield. Of course, I made no mention to him of what I considered his inconsistency in wanting to deny me what I, in fact, had, namely my own provision for defense against just what he was worried about. As usually happens, the entire process proceeded to a peaceful conclusion.

There's a lot under the surface that people who don't need to don't know about.

Sniffing a car with a dog is entirely different than entering said car and administering a physical search. I've yet to see a case where a private employer has legal authority to search an employees privately owned vehicle. The employer certainly has the power to terminate your employment for whatever reason they deem necessary, but they CANNOT perform a physical search of your vehicle OR your person without your consent. And I challenge you to find a precedent ruling that they can.

It would be the same thing if I came to your property and you forbid me access unless I authorized you to search my vehicle. You cannot compel me to comply, but likewise, I cannot compel you to allow me access if I refuse to comply.

A search of your private property requires a search warrant issued by a judge and must be performed by someone authorized by law to enforce said warrant. The typical employer does NOT qualify.

__________________
NRA Pistol,PPITH,PPOTH&TASER

You are talking apples and oranges here.

The dog sniffs and gets a hit and they ask to search (or the boss asks to search) and either you say "yes, sir, help yourself!" or you get fired.

Look up the case bk43 posted about and see what the courts said.

Bob

If a property owner OWNS the property, such as a locker or a company owned vehicle, then of course he/she can search it as he or she sees fit. That said, sniffing with a drug dog does not a physical search make. Heck, even you or I could walk past a vehicle and smell something suspicious and report it to authorities, but even if said vehicle is on our property, we have no legal authority to physically search it unless it is abandoned or some other such extenuating circumstances.

If you come to my house or my business and I enter your vehicle without your consent to perform a search, you had better believe that I have unlawfully entered your vehicle. The same would apply if you were my employee and your vehicle was parked on my lot. I simply could not enter your vehicle without your consent, no matter what a dog did. Sure, I could threaten to fire you if you didn't consent, and I could even follow through with that threat if need be, but there is nothing I could do to compel you to comply.

__________________
NRA Pistol,PPITH,PPOTH&TASER

Okay, I think I see what you are saying.

I don't know of any cases where the employer forced anyone to open their car without consent. Or, went out to the parking lot and broke open cars to search while the employee was inside at his desk.

But, the point is, if they don't consent, they get fired. if they consent, and a gun is found, they get fired. Either way they lose.

Bob

My original statement to you was: "An employer does not have the authority to conduct a search of a privately owned vehicle in ANY state, period."

That is a fact. The case bk43 mentioned doesn't change that at all.

Apple and oranges is what you are compaing when trying to equate sniffing a car with a dog to a physical search performed by an employer. They are not even similar. As I have said before, and I will say again, the typical employer CANNOT compel you to allow him/her to search your privately owned vehicle or your person. They can threaten you with disciplinary action, and they can even follow through on disciplinary action if you don't comply, but they still CANNOT compel you to allow them to search your vehicle or your person. Also, as I said before, there are a few exception depending on who your employer is (hint: Toyota is NOT one of those exceptions).

__________________
NRA Pistol,PPITH,PPOTH&TASER

That is no show stopper.

Yes, and with that, I would agree. What it amounts to is all of us have basic rights regarding our own private property, and even if we park that private property on the property of another, we never give up that right.

Doesn't mean we are imune from some sort of consequences by said property owner, but we can not be made to give up those rights without intervention from a court.

I'm glad we better understand each other now, straightshooter!

__________________
NRA Pistol,PPITH,PPOTH&TASER

Me,too.

Our state's law in kind of a mess, now. An employee with, and only with, a CWP can bring a firearm to work, parking on company property, but must leave the firearm in the locked car. The employer can not ask about the gun, sniff the car with a dog for a gun, enter the car to get a gun and can't condition employment on the worker not having a CWP.

The rest of the statute, dealing with a customer having the gun on someone else's property being okay, was struck down by the Federal Court and is still on appeal to the 11th Circuit.

The Court found there was NO RIGHT to bear arms on SOMEONE ELSE's property.

Bob

I've said many times that when someone steps foot on my property, their Constitutional protections no longer exist. Since I am the property owner, I decide who can be here, what they can do while they are here, and what they can possess while they are here. I have no problem with an employer having those same rights as a private property owner. That said, I know that the the extent of my rights ends at the personal property of another, such as in the case of a privately owned vehicle.

It would be nice to have some uniformity with the laws in your state, for sure. Here in Missouri, our laws clearly state that it is NOT an unlawful use of a weapon to have a loaded and concealed firearm in a vehicle, even on a posted premises, so long as such weapon is not removed from the vehicle or brandished. However, we don't have a law that prohibits an employer from firing an employee who he/she suspects may have a concealed firearm in the employee owned car on the employer owned parking lot. That was one of our legislative priorities this year that we were unable to get straightened out.

__________________
NRA Pistol,PPITH,PPOTH&TASER

All this talk about legalities and courts and such just made me think of the most logical answer for me: I'd rather be judged by twelve than carried by six. I realize jobs are tough these days, but pushing up daisies due to some kook who decides for whatever reason to shoot up my workplace just ain't worth the chance. Naysayers say you wouldn't have a chance anyway, but with a gun I've got at least 50%. Without it, I have none. Therefore, I understand written policy, but they need to be able to guarantee my safety 100% of the time that I am on their premises. In other words, don't ask, don't tell.

__________________
MARK

It is here. Everyday when I drive in the gate, guard asks "Weapons, cameras, or alcohol?" They can and will search cars at random when they come in. I'm pretty sure you don't want to get caught with any of the above, but I wouldn't say that it never happens.

Other than breaking the rules and taking your chances, how is this not a show stopper.

"I heard a story while doing some work at a Toyota plant in southern Indiana "

This doesn't make it gospel. "How did Toyota get away with it?" you ask, well maybe they did and maybe they didn't. But if they posted their property no firearms with the appropriate language, such as ...."the right to pass being subject to search" or some other sort of legalese then they can search as it is your choice whether or not you enter their property.

My boss didn't ask, I don't tell. He knows I have a concealed carry permit and own a lot of guns but we leave it at that. Technically it's not on me during work, it's in my locker.

__________________
NRA Endowment Member

It boils down to a personal decission.
Is it worth getting fired if caught?
Do you feel the need to carry at work?
If so, why work there?

Only you can make the choice.

Guys, getting back to my original question, it's pretty much a moot point.

Cooincidentally, today I received in the mail, my copy of Understanding Oregon's Gun Laws by Kevin Starrett of the Oregon Firearms Federation. Per Oregon law, "Private property is private property, and if the owner of that property says no guns are allowed, then they are not."

My employer owns the building in which I work, so they're well within their rights to state that guns are not allowed. I'm cool with that. I'm not risking my job just to exercise my 2nd Amendment rights.

Precisely. I do not know the final outcome, and the conversation was made in passing while doing a quality sort with one of the members of the sorting company we hired. I don't even know how the conversation started, but instead of starting some sort of gun rights argument while trying to get a lot of work done in a short time... I didn't push the issue.

I don't know what kind of contracts these workers signed when starting their employment, who knows what kind of **** they consented to upon hiring. I do know, for a fact, that the facility I was at made it a point to drive home the NO FIREARMS... anywhere policy. It didn't mean leave it in your locker, or in your car, they didn't want them on the property. So, to answer the OP's question - if your gonna carry concealed make sure its concealed, and as few people know about it as possible. In these times of a tough job market, someone could move up the chain by ratting you out and creating a new vacant position.

That is nonsense. Toyota can't exercise authorities and powers it never had simply because they posted some sign at their entrance. That would be like thinking the "No Tresspassing, Violators Will Be Shot" signs possess some kind of validity. The posting of a sign on your property does not in any way entitle you to exercise authorities you never had in the first place. A signed agreement, on the other hand, would probably be upheld in court.

__________________
NRA Pistol,PPITH,PPOTH&TASER

Well since my current boss is my father... there is no rule against carrying. However, since my current job is HVAC installation / repair.. no I don't carry while working. First of all it would be difficult for the line of work.. even my 642 in the most comfortable location would cause issues. More importantly.. I work in people's homes. Would you want your contractor coming into your house with a loaded handgun?

I took advice from some posters recently though. I bought a lock box and bolted it to the floor of my truck. I keep my gun in there while I'm working. I don't like the thought of leaving the gun anywhere other than on my side, but I'm comfortable with this since there's no way it's getting out of the box. Also, I'm never very far from the truck.

__________________
- The Federalist #46 -

I carry everywhere, all the time, including work. I am a respiratory therapist and a LEO. The hospital where I work has a no weapons policy for employees, although, interestingly, they don't post "no gun" signs for the public. However, because I am also an LEO, which they are aware of, we have sort of a "don't ask, don't tell" agreement. It is a very small facility in the country with no security, other than the maintenance guys, so I am often asked to respond to unruly patients and family members, to provide security for hospital functions, and to assist other LEO's that bring prisoners into the facility for treatment. I guess they see bending that rule in my case as a benefit to them.

Of course, even if they told me not to I'd do it anyway. That's what P3AT's are for!

They do have a right to search your car.
It is a Federal Trade Zone and they do have that right. I worked at such a place and they
had the same rules. [NO GUNS ON THE PROPERTY] I thought the biggest danger for me
was something happening going to and from work so I left the gun in the car.
[AND KEPT MY MOUTH SHUT] Don

__________________
"Don't worry be happy"

Fortunately for me it is a non-issue. I am paid to carry a gun. If it ever became an issue, (IE: working a different job) I would weigh the total circumstances and make a risk/benefit assessment.

__________________
Formerly know as Lucky Derby

cshoff-I thought we were (back) on the same page, but maybe not given your reply about Toyota.

I don't know anything about Toyota, but the situation is common enough. I post a sign at the gate saying "All vehicles entering are subject to search!"

You want to come in, you gotta let me search if I want to. You don't want me to search, all you have to do is not come in.

Simple! And that same idea was just upheld by the Federal Courts with respect to the Tampa Bay's own BUCs. At the Football Stadium, they instituted a policy that anyone entering would be patted down.

Somebody objected, and sued and, in the end, lost. You don't want to be patted down? Don't go to the Football game.

Are you sure we aren't still on the same page?

Bob

Yes, we are still on the same page. All that I am saying is that you can't hang a sign up declaring you have legal authority that you do not have and expect that authority to be valid. All that you can do is deny entrance to the premises if someone does not want to comply, just like we talked about earlier. There is no "magic sign" you can post or special words you can say that grant you extra Constitutional powers.

If a company posts a sign at their gate that reads "All vehicles entering premises are subject to search", then said company has to make a choice. They either search your vehicle at the gate with your consent, or they allow you in without a search. If they allow you in without a search and then later decide they want to search your vehicle, they cannot do it without your consent, regardless of what the sign says. If you don't consent, the most they can do is ask you to leave. They CANNOT take it upon themselves to search your car without your consent no matter what, and there is no sign that changes that.

In a nutshell, the sign doesn't provide them with any more rights or authority than they had without the sign. All that it does is announce their policy to people entering the premises and saves them from having to verbally communicate said policy to each guest as they approach the gate.

__________________
NRA Pistol,PPITH,PPOTH&TASER

If that is the case, then every business in the United State could be considered a "Federal Trade Zone", at least any of them engaged in interstate commerce. Even then, Toyota would not have any legal authority to search your vehicle. It would have to be performed by the Federal agency tasked with carrying out said orders, or their deputies.

__________________
NRA Pistol,PPITH,PPOTH&TASER

I carry at church every Sunday I am there.
I work there during the service in a technical capacity, and sit above most of the congregation. Gun free zones may attract the wrong type of person, and sitting above the rest could make me the first target.
I am permitted, and carry concealed, but follow "Don't ask, don't tell" as I don't really want others to know I'm armed.
My partner is the only other person I have discussed this subject with, and he is good with it. The Pastor would be the final word, but I feel better knowing another of the staff is aware.
Remember, you are only trespassing if asked to leave, and you don't...

Mrwildroot

To clarify, what straightshooter1 is refering to in Florida is very different from the older type law that Missouri has. Florida is one of the early adaptors of a new level of employee/visitor rights and as such we are going through the usual legal challenges and fine tuning of the statute's text. It is, as he says, messy for now.

Florida went through the same dog and pony show with "Stand Your Ground" law a few years ago and the original CCW law many years before that. It's just part of the process. It also benefits other states that follow later as they have a proven template to use.

Bob

If you work in an office environment... and are willing to take the chance, Dillon Precision, I beleive still makes the "Plan B" which appears to be a "day planner" that has a hidden compartment for a pistol. If you carry a bag or briefcase, this may be your "out" to carry your weapon with you but not on your person. At least in this respect it is accessible in an emergency. search for Dillon Precision Plan B and take a look.

__________________
Those of you who hammer your guns into plows will plow for those who do not.

The employer must only have "reasonable suspicion" to terminate an employee for violating company policy, i.e., no firearms or other dangerous weapons, on company property, to include vehicles, not probable cause, preponderance of evidence, or guilt beyond a reasonable doubt. The employee normally has to acknowledge that they have read and understand the rules of the employer, which may include written consent to search as a condition of employment.

As the person who had to draft this type of policy for an organization, it is not easy to limit what I consider an abuse of constitutional rights, however, every employee is informed of their obligation to follow company policy, IF they want to stay employed.

The firearms prohibition that I wrote was in the organizations's workplace violence policy. Our intent was not to limit the individual's right to own a firearm, but to restrict firearms in the workplace. This may sound a bit alturistic from a retired LEO, but like every other employee, I knew the limits of what the leadership would accept. With a significant workplace violence episode in the state that made national news (Lockheed-Martin plant in Meridian), there was pressure, primarily from the insurance carrier, to insure there was a policy in-place to prohibit such activity, i.e., limit liability.

If an anonymous call is received that an employee has a firearm in their vehicle, and there are no other indicators of violent or erratic behavior, a single report may not rise to the level of reasonable suspicision. However, if the employee is asked if they have a firearm, and admit they do, it's an automatic termination. Likewise, if they deny it, and later it is determined that they lied, it's an automatic termination.

Like others have said, if you can't abide by these rules, then you should find somewhere else to work.

I am self employed, so for me, it's really not an issue. What you have said changes nothing. An employer can have a rule that an employee must follow as a condition of employment. That has already be discussed and acknowledged ad nauseum here. What an employer CANNOT do is make an arbitrary search of private property (a vehicle) that belongs to an employee. There is no rule, no sign, and no employee handbook that can change that. That right is reserved for a court of law or to a law enforcement agency that has probable cause and the legal authority to conduct said search of the vehicle. If you were in law enforcement as you have said, than you should know that this is correct.

Having said all of that, there is nothing that says the employer can't terminate the employee if he/she fails to consent to a search. The employer is within his/her rights to employ who he/she sees fit. But the employer cannot exercise authority it does not have and perform a search without consent and they cannot place you under arrest or detain you for failing to consent either.

Also, as was mentioned earlier, there are exceptions that can apply here as would be the case if the Federal Government, or a political subdivision thereof, was your employer. Can also apply with certain state agencies. If you work on a military base, for example, your car can be subject to search at any time, and it would be legal under our current laws.

__________________
NRA Pistol,PPITH,PPOTH&TASER

I respond to the disasters in the SE area(not saying who for) and they have a strong " no weapons" rule. A large percentage of the calls are to the lower income areas in any given area, and these people almost demand responce(money). Even had one not happy with what he got and call and threathen me.
Yes I'm packin, most of the others that do it are armed in some way or other. It is an adventure to go in one of these situations and it has a good side to it, but I don't advice that the meek go alone.
Other wise I'm packin or got one near...