Question about CC at the workplace

[kauboy]

Sorry I keep coming up with these, but I am just a curious bugger and there are so many informed and knowledgable sources available here.

A policy at my place of business states that nobody may carry a weapon on their person or in their car in the parking lot even if they have a valid concealed carry permit. My question is, is it against the law if someone does, or just a violation of policy? Could they be arrested? Since there is no 30.06 signage anywhere, only this policy, how would it be enforced? Would it just be a company reprimand or firing, or would it actually be breaking a law and an arrestable offense to carry there?

Since its not exactly a notice, and just a "find on your own" kind of thing, is it legaly binding or just something to be handled internally?

[seamusTX]

If you have been given oral or written notice by your employer, it is a criminal violation, the same as if you carried past a 30.06 sign.

As a practical matter, if you were found out but otherwise had not done something illegal, you would probably just be fired.

I would be very surprised if you hadn't been given a printed copy of all the company policies when you were hired, and made to sign a form saying so. At least that's what my employer did. We also have to reconfirm our recognition of the policies periodically, when something changes.

- Jim

[barres]

If you were orally warned of this policy, then you would be in violation of PC30.06 by carrying and you will likely get fired. If you were given a written notice ala an employee handbook, then the notice must conform to PC30.06 wording specifications to be legally binding. If the employee handbook only states that "Employees may not bring a weapon/firearm on the premises, even if they have a valid CHL," (or something worded other than as prescribed by PC30.06) then PC30.06 would not be violated by carrying, but the employee would likely still be fired for violating company policy.

Either way, your job would be on the line.

[seamusTX]

This is another one of those gray areas:

(b) For purposes of this section, a person receives notice if the
owner of the property or someone with apparent authority to act for the
owner provides notice to the person by oral or written communication.
(c) In this section:
...
(3) "Written communication" means:

followed by the required 30.06 verbiage.

The problem is that the form of oral communication is not defined. I don't know of anyone being prosecuted on these terms.

Two related points that ought to be mentioned:

• "Company property" usually includes company-owned vehicles when these policies exist.
• "Weapons" usually means all weapons. I know people have been fired for having things like martial arts weapons.

- Jim

[kauboy]

Thanks for the replies. In response to the handbook issue, no we were never given a handbook with the company's policies. To tell you the truth, we are such a large International company that to put all of our thousands of policies into a book would take half of the rainforest to produce.

The main thing I'm getting at is, even though it is written notice (but not per the proper 30.06 wording) since it was up to me to look it up, would it be a legal issue? Its buried deep in one of our security policies but it was never mandatory that we read all of them and sign an agreement. It just wouldn't be feasable.

[KBCraig]

Here's the thing about verbal notice: if they tell me something and don't put it in writing, especially if it can involve jail, then they never said it. If they put it in writing, then unless they have a receipt with my signature on it, then they never gave it to me.

They would apply the same standard if you warned them about something that later bit them in the butt, and they wanted to pin the blame on you.

Kevin

[seamusTX]

It's easy to get lost parsing legal language. Let's look at some scenarios:

• Someone sees your pistol in the office, says nothing to you, and tells the boss. The boss calls the cops. The cops arrive and question you. The boss says he wants you arrested. You are.

• I suspect in this case you would be fired but charges would be dropped. They just want you out of the office.

• A coworker sees your pistol and asks you about it. You leave the office. He tells the boss.

• This is the best case for getting a warning, little basis for an arrest.

• You pull into the company parking lot, and for the first time in history, they are searching cars. You turn around and leave. You're fired for refusing the search.

• In this case there would be no basis for charging you with a crime.

- Jim

[txinvestigator]

Someone sees your pistol in the office, says nothing to you, and tells the boss. The boss calls the cops. The cops arrive and question you. The boss says he wants you arrested. You are Jim

I do not think that would hold up for probable cause to arrest. Unless 30.06 signs are present, there were be no way to establish PC that you actually had been made aware of the policy.

[seamusTX]

It's pretty much the officer's call whether or not to arrest, isn't it? (That's not a rhetorical question.)

I don't think a solid case for criminal trespass would exist, and that's why I said charges would be dropped.

This kind of thing is apparently quite rare. I've never heard of a CHL holder in Texas being arrested simply for being armed in a prohibited place. The DPS statistics (http://www.txdps.state.tx.us/administra ... vrates.htm) aren't broken down in that much detail.

- Jim

[TxBlonde]

Just a thought....But can't we all get another job?

I was asked if I could get a new job?
and I said yes, why?

then he asked, Can you get a new life?
I said no.

That made me think.

I will always have my gun or pepper spray on me. I do not want to take a chance.

[jimlongley]

Just a thought....But can't we all get another job?

Not that easily

[TxBlonde]

I guess sometimes I do not think that employer should beable to regulate weather or not you can have a gun in your vehicle. In the building yes. But I do not think they should put peoples safety at risk.

[kauboy]

Well since we have guards posted all around the complex with shotguns and fully automatic machine guns and a ten foot wall surrounding us, safety in the parking lot is not a big issue. Maybe I should have mentioned that we are a government contractor.

[texag06]

Well since we have guards posted all around the complex with shotguns and fully automatic machine guns and a ten foot wall surrounding us, safety in the parking lot is not a big issue. Maybe I should have mentioned that we are a government contractor.

Well now I can understand how you might not need a gun at work.... but that still leaves the drive to and from work.

[kauboy]

BINGO!!! And thats my concern. Once I leave work, I may not be going straight home, but now I'm unarmed!!!