Car Carry vs CHL Carry

[3dfxMM]

I struggle with the whole parking lot thing....
My employer parking lot is private property. Employee handbook is detailed around no firearms. Isn't that "effective notice"? I refuse to park where I'm supposed to, so I won't violate company policy.

There are two parts of parking lot carry; in the vehicle and out of the vehicle but on your person. There are two components to each of those, CRIMINAL LAW and POLICY.

In the vehicle

Criminal law; car carry is not carry under your CHL. 30.06 does not affect in your car.

Policy; Unless your employer meets listed exceptions, it is a violation of law for them to have a policy prohibiting employees from having lawfully possessed firearms or ammunition in private vehicles on company parking lots.

Out of the vehicle

Criminal law; 30.06 is in full effect.

Policy; if policy meets the language and other requirments of 30.06 you can be terminated or suffer other negative action.

There is no requirement that company policy use any particular language or meet any other requirements of 30.06 to be valid.

[jbarn]

I struggle with the whole parking lot thing....
My employer parking lot is private property. Employee handbook is detailed around no firearms. Isn't that "effective notice"? I refuse to park where I'm supposed to, so I won't violate company policy.

There are two parts of parking lot carry; in the vehicle and out of the vehicle but on your person. There are two components to each of those, CRIMINAL LAW and POLICY.

In the vehicle

Criminal law; car carry is not carry under your CHL. 30.06 does not affect in your car.

Policy; Unless your employer meets listed exceptions, it is a violation of law for them to have a policy prohibiting employees from having lawfully possessed firearms or ammunition in private vehicles on company parking lots.

Out of the vehicle

Criminal law; 30.06 is in full effect.

Policy; if policy meets the language and other requirments of 30.06 you can be terminated or suffer other negative action.

There is no requirement that company policy use any particular language or meet any other requirements of 30.06 to be valid.

Yep, I forgot to add the phrase, you could be criminally charged and be terminated or suffer other negatve action.

[Dirvin]

Keep in mind, fireable and criminially chargeable are not the same thing.

While it may be legal to store a firearm in the parking lot, they can still fire you for it.

[Keith B]

Keep in mind, fireable and criminially chargeable are not the same thing.

While it may be legal to store a firearm in the parking lot, they can still fire you for it.

Not legally. Unless they are one of the exceptions listed in 52.062 of the labor law, then if it is found they fired you for having a legally possessed firearm in your car they are in violation of the labor code and liable for wrongful termination of the employee.

Sec. 52.061. RESTRICTION ON PROHIBITING EMPLOYEE ACCESS TO OR STORAGE OF FIREARM OR AMMUNITION. A public or private employer may not prohibit an employee who holds a license to carry a concealed handgun under Subchapter H, Chapter 411, Government Code, who otherwise lawfully possesses a firearm, or who lawfully possesses ammunition from transporting or storing a firearm or ammunition the employee is authorized by law to possess in a locked, privately owned motor vehicle in a parking lot, parking garage, or other parking area the employer provides for employees.

Added by Acts 2011, 82nd Leg., R.S., Ch. 1058 (S.B. 321), Sec. 1, eff. September 1, 2011.

Sec. 52.062. EXCEPTIONS. (a) Section 52.061 does not:
(1) authorize a person who holds a license to carry a concealed handgun under Subchapter H, Chapter 411, Government Code, who otherwise lawfully possesses a firearm, or who lawfully possesses ammunition to possess a firearm or ammunition on any property where the possession of a firearm or ammunition is prohibited by state or federal law; or
(2) apply to:
(A) a vehicle owned or leased by a public or private employer and used by an employee in the course and scope of the employee's employment, unless the employee is required to transport or store a firearm in the official discharge of the employee's duties;
(B) a school district;
(C) an open-enrollment charter school, as defined by Section 5.001, Education Code;
(D) a private school, as defined by Section 22.081, Education Code;
(E) property owned or controlled by a person, other than the employer, that is subject to a valid, unexpired oil, gas, or other mineral lease that contains a provision prohibiting the possession of firearms on the property; or
(F) property owned or leased by a chemical manufacturer or oil and gas refiner with an air authorization under Chapter 382, Health and Safety Code, and on which the primary business conducted is the manufacture, use, storage, or transportation of hazardous, combustible, or explosive materials, except in regard to an employee who holds a license to carry a concealed handgun under Subchapter H, Chapter 411, Government Code, and who stores a firearm or ammunition the employee is authorized by law to possess in a locked, privately owned motor vehicle in a parking lot, parking garage, or other parking area the employer provides for employees that is outside of a secured and restricted area:
(i) that contains the physical plant;
(ii) that is not open to the public; and
(iii) the ingress into which is constantly monitored by security personnel.
(b) Section 52.061 does not prohibit an employer from prohibiting an employee who holds a license to carry a concealed handgun under Subchapter H, Chapter 411, Government Code, or who otherwise lawfully possesses a firearm, from possessing a firearm the employee is otherwise authorized by law to possess on the premises of the employer's business. In this subsection, "premises" has the meaning assigned by Section 46.035(f)(3), Penal Code.

Added by Acts 2011, 82nd Leg., R.S., Ch. 1058 (S.B. 321), Sec. 1, eff. September 1, 2011.

[NavyVet1959]

The law seems clear to me, and so is the AG's opinion on this topic.

I would put a bit of credence in the AG's official opinion on a topic, but not much credence in just some run of the mill attorney. If you ask the legal opinion of multiple attorneys, you will likely get multiple different answers. What matters is what the local DA believes (since he is the one that will charge you). The AG's official opinion also matters since if he says that it is legal, you're probably a bit less likely to have some uber-liberal DA try to push his anti-2nd-Amendment views.

[Txmarine2]

So what I have learned is...

1. Employers probably aren't supposed to post 30.06 in employee lots, but there is nothing anyone can do about it if they do.

2. If I drive past the sign, I will most likely get fired, probably go to jail and might get convicted.

Nice job on the "Employee Parking Lot Protection Act" Austin.

[Keith B]

So what I have learned is...

1. Employers probably aren't supposed to post 30.06 in employee lots, but there is nothing anyone can do about it if they do.

2. If I drive past the sign, I will most likely get fired, probably go to jail and might get convicted.

Nice job on the "Employee Parking Lot Protection Act" Austin.

Wrong. The employee parking lot bill was a major victory and gave us the freedom to have a firearm in the vehicle. Prior to that my company COULD fire me for having it. They even had to change the company firearms policy to reflect that parking lots were allowed.

Can they fire you? Yes, they can fire you for anything, but you will be able to beat them in court for wrongful termination.

Can you be arrested? Sure, you can be arrested for anything, but you will not be convicted because a 30.06 is not enforceable on the parking lot in your vehicle, and you will be able to sue the city for false arrest.

[Txmarine2]

So what I have learned is...

1. Employers probably aren't supposed to post 30.06 in employee lots, but there is nothing anyone can do about it if they do.

2. If I drive past the sign, I will most likely get fired, probably go to jail and might get convicted.

Nice job on the "Employee Parking Lot Protection Act" Austin.

Wrong. The employee parking lot bill was a major victory and gave us the freedom to have a firearm in the vehicle. Prior to that my company COULD fire me for having it. They even had to change the company firearms policy to reflect that parking lots were allowed.

Can they fire you? Yes, they can fire you for anything, but you will be able to beat them in court for wrongful termination.

Can you be arrested? Sure, you can be arrested for anything, but you will not be convicted because a 30.06 is not enforceable on the parking lot in your vehicle, and you will be able to sue the city for false arrest.

An unenforceable law, per the AG, that does not protect you from arrest if the employer breaks it by posting. You call that a major victory and freedom? We should expect more from our lawmakers. They will pass a law against individuals and throw us in jail for breaking it without a second thought. They pass a law telling business not to do something and no ramifications whatsoever.

We can agree to disagree, but I think you are DREAMING if you think you could win a wrongful termination one the basis of TLC 52.061. Remember, Texas is an at will employment state. I don't think that suit even flies here if you aren't suing based on protected class status.

SB 321 is a worthless bill that has no practical enforcement. A right with no remedy which means that we have no right to take our guns to work.

[Wodathunkit]

Keep in mind, fireable and criminially chargeable are not the same thing.

While it may be legal to store a firearm in the parking lot, they can still fire you for it.

Sec. 52.062. EXCEPTIONS. (a) Section 52.061 does not:
(1) authorize a person who holds a license to carry a concealed handgun under Subchapter H, Chapter 411, Government Code, who otherwise lawfully possesses a firearm, or who lawfully possesses ammunition to possess a firearm or ammunition on any property where the possession of a firearm or ammunition is prohibited by state or federal law; or
(2) apply to:
(A) a vehicle owned or leased by a public or private employer and used by an employee in the course and scope of the employee's employment, unless the employee is required to transport or store a firearm in the official discharge of the employee's duties;
(B) a school district;
(C) an open-enrollment charter school, as defined by Section 5.001, Education Code;
(D) a private school, as defined by Section 22.081, Education Code;
(E) property owned or controlled by a person, other than the employer, that is subject to a valid, unexpired oil, gas, or other mineral lease that contains a provision prohibiting the possession of firearms on the property; or
(F) property owned or leased by a chemical manufacturer or oil and gas refiner with an air authorization under Chapter 382, Health and Safety Code, and on which the primary business conducted is the manufacture, use, storage, or transportation of hazardous, combustible, or explosive materials, except in regard to an employee who holds a license to carry a concealed handgun under Subchapter H, Chapter 411, Government Code, and who stores a firearm or ammunition the employee is authorized by law to possess in a locked, privately owned motor vehicle in a parking lot, parking garage, or other parking area the employer provides for employees that is outside of a secured and restricted area:
(i) that contains the physical plant;
(ii) that is not open to the public; and
(iii) the ingress into which is constantly monitored by security personnel.
(b) Section 52.061 does not prohibit an employer from prohibiting an employee who holds a license to carry a concealed handgun under Subchapter H, Chapter 411, Government Code, or who otherwise lawfully possesses a firearm, from possessing a firearm the employee is otherwise authorized by law to possess on the premises of the employer's business. In this subsection, "premises" has the meaning assigned by Section 46.035(f)(3), Penal Code.

Added by Acts 2011, 82nd Leg., R.S., Ch. 1058 (S.B. 321), Sec. 1, eff. September 1, 2011.

[/quote]

That's mine

[Keith B]

An unenforceable law, per the AG, that does not protect you from arrest if the employer breaks it by posting. You call that a major victory and freedom? We should expect more from our lawmakers. They will pass a law against individuals and throw us in jail for breaking it without a second thought. They pass a law telling business not to do something and no ramifications whatsoever.

We can agree to disagree, but I think you are DREAMING if you think you could win a wrongful termination one the basis of TLC 52.061. Remember, Texas is an at will employment state. I don't think that suit even flies here if you aren't suing based on protected class status.

SB 321 is a worthless bill that has no practical enforcement. A right with no remedy which means that we have no right to take our guns to work.

You can think what you want, but it does protect you. A 30.06 is not enforceable in the parking lot IF you keep the gun concealed in the vehicle. And as I said already they can fire you because you look cross-eyed at them.

However, don't dis the fact that we actually gained ground with a bill that allows this. Any gain is a step in the right direction. If you don't think it's enough protection for you, then fine, don't keep a gun in your vehicle. But I know it DID force a change in our firearms policy that states our company cannot prohibit a gun in the car due to state law.

[poppo]

Can they fire you? Yes, they can fire you for anything, but you will be able to beat them in court for wrongful termination.

Good luck with that since Texas is a "at will" State. They can simply say your services were no longer required and not even mention the gun as the reason.

[Keith B]

Can they fire you? Yes, they can fire you for anything, but you will be able to beat them in court for wrongful termination.

Good luck with that since Texas is a "at will" State. They can simply say your services were no longer required and not even mention the gun as the reason.

Well, yes it is. However, there are many companies that have written contracts, and there are 'implied' contracts. The state has ruled in the past that implied contracts DO modify any 'at will' employment and so they cannot fire without just cause if it violates the implied contract. It goes back to documentation and proving why they fired the employee as well as the employee proving they fired them for an illegal reason.

[baron]

Anybody volunteered to be the test case yet?

[Texas_Blaze]

Can they fire you? Yes, they can fire you for anything, but you will be able to beat them in court for wrongful termination.

Good luck with that since Texas is a "at will" State. They can simply say your services were no longer required and not even mention the gun as the reason.

Well, yes it is. However, there are many companies that have written contracts, and there are 'implied' contracts. The state has ruled in the past that implied contracts DO modify any 'at will' employment and so they cannot fire without just cause if it violates the implied contract. It goes back to documentation and proving why they fired the employee as well as the employee proving they fired them for an illegal reason.

just went through 12 wks of recording documentation so I could fire an employee w/ cause. Having cause removes the employees ability to file unemployment claim. The more unemployment claims a corp has, the higher the unemployment insurance they pay to the state. Having cause is good for the corp & the manager. You will be required to testify in case of a lawsuit. I have seen it. At will, yes... fire willy nilly, better not do it.

[Keith B]

just went through 12 wks of recording documentation so I could fire an employee w/ cause. Having cause removes the employees ability to file unemployment claim. The more unemployment claims a corp has, the higher the unemployment insurance they pay to the state. Having cause is good for the corp & the manager. You will be required to testify in case of a lawsuit. I have seen it. At will, yes... fire willy nilly, better not do it.

Everyone claims 'At will, they can fire you over nothing'. Well, yeah, they can, but they will usually lose in court if they can't truly justify why they did it with a good documentation trail.