Optimistic on new 30.06 sign at work

[tamc9395]

Our HR policy is very clear that I cannot carry while on the clock or even to work. Recently they posted compliant signs, so trying to be optimistic, I hope that the state laws change next time to at least allow me to travel outside of the office.

Speculation questions:

Curious #1... IF they change the law, would that overrule any HR policy?

Curious #2 ... If I am still during normal business hours and "carrying" my gun in my vehichle(although HR says I cannot), would #1 apply?

Part of where this is heading, what lobbying do we need to be prepared to do?

Scott

[marksiwel]

Our HR policy is very clear that I cannot carry while on the clock or even to work. Recently they posted compliant signs, so trying to be optimistic, I hope that the state laws change next time to at least allow me to travel outside of the office.

Speculation questions:

Curious #1... IF they change the law, would that overrule any HR policy?

Curious #2 ... If I am still during normal business hours and "carrying" my gun in my vehichle(although HR says I cannot), would #1 apply?

Part of where this is heading, what lobbying do we need to be prepared to do?

Scott

So you are saying you want the State to Over Rule the ability of people to ban firearms on PRIVATE Property? Never,going, to, happen.
If your work says you cant carry AT work, or while working, then no state law is going to change that. If your Vehicle is your own, and they do not own the parking lot, than you can carry there just dont tell work.

[cbr600]

Curious #1... IF they change the law, would that overrule any HR policy?

Define what "change the law" means to you.

They could make it an exception to 30.06 to have a handgun in your car, without addressing whether an employer can fire you.

They could make legal possession of a handgun as protected as legal possession of a bible or prescription medicine, although that seems highly unlikely.

[Dragonfighter]

Curious #1... IF they change the law, would that overrule any HR policy?

The parking lot bill will prevent companies posting their parking lots as 30.06, which I have never seen but understand it happens. But Texas is and will be an at will state as far as employments and though you could not be prosecuted for the weapon in your vehicle, they could still fire you for whatever reason they wish, protected classes excepted. Short answer is no.

Curious #2 ... If I am still during normal business hours and "carrying" my gun in my vehichle(although HR says I cannot), would #1 apply?

See #1. I would like to see some kind of employee protection as to self defense while at work, but that is not even on the horizon right now. As much as I think we should not restrict carry by circumstance (IE CC or OC, in and out of publicly accessible properties, etc.) the reality is the laws are what they are and have to be changed incrementally. Boy, it pained me to say that.

[Sewer_Ice]

My advice: Park on an adjacent parking lot to your own if you can, so there is nothing your employer can do about it.

[marksiwel]

My advice: Park on an adjacent parking lot to your own if you can, so there is nothing your employer can do about it.

DO they search your car?

[jimlongley]

Curious #1... IF they change the law, would that overrule any HR policy?

The parking lot bill will prevent companies posting their parking lots as 30.06, which I have never seen but understand it happens. But Texas is and will be an at will state as far as employments and though you could not be prosecuted for the weapon in your vehicle, they could still fire you for whatever reason they wish, protected classes excepted. Short answer is no.

The parking lot bill would NOT prevent companies from posting 30.06, but would overrule some, if not all, HR polices. My company even has it written into the "no weapons, even in the parking lot" policy.

So the company could post 30.06 on the parking lot, but that would include their customers too, and they could fire you for any reason they wanted to, even if the parking lot law existed. I got fired for breaking my finger and putting in for Workman's Comp, but just try proving that. It's not hard to imagine a company deciding to fire you for bringing your gun onto company property, and using some other excuse.

[Dragonfighter]

Curious #1... IF they change the law, would that overrule any HR policy?

The parking lot bill will prevent companies ... <SNIP>

The parking lot bill would NOT prevent companies from posting 30.06, but would overrule some, if not all, HR polices. My company even has it written into the "no weapons, even in the parking lot" policy.

So the company could post 30.06 on the parking lot, but that would include their customers too, and they could fire you for any reason they wanted to, even if the parking lot law existed. I got fired for breaking my finger and putting in for Workman's Comp, but just try proving that. It's not hard to imagine a company deciding to fire you for bringing your gun onto company property, and using some other excuse.

I mijsunderstood then, I thought the bill was to eliminate 30.06 in parking lots. So it would overrule HR rules...to parking lots I assume, not bldgs?

[camlott]

If you violate a company policy and are caught, you should expect to be disciplined or fired regardless of whether they post a 30.06 or not.

Whether or not you are carrying there "legally" is an entirely separate issue.

In other words... assuming you worked in a place that had a policy of no guns but did not post a 30.06. You could be fired for violating company policy, but you would have a "defense to prosecution" (no law was broken).

Likewise, if your company posted a valid 30.06 and you were caught. You would likely be fired and you would NOT have a defense to prosecution (you broke the law).

IANAL!!!

[Keith B]

The Parking Lot bill as written last session would override 30.06 in a parking lot for employees and prevent the employer from firing you for having one in the vehicle. Some of the the other states that have these laws also override the employer from asking about a firearm in the vehicle. When some of the sates passed their laws last year, we received an updated HR notice that stated it was against the law to question an employee in those states about being in possession of a firearm unless it was in the building or outside of their vehicle on company property.

[tamc9395]

Thanks for the responses and clarifications. I did not know how far a the proposed new law would go, but I guess regardless I am stuck with an HR policy that is not CHL friendly. Strange enough several folks never even noticed the sign.

[Dutch]

Texas is an at will state. They can fire you for any cause at any time. They would not have any problem with firing you over carrying on premises if they wanted to.

[camlott]

Texas is an at will state. They can fire you for any cause at any time. They would not have any problem with firing you over carrying on premises if they wanted to.

Even if the parking lot bill passed, they could always find other reasons to fire you, or eliminate your position etc.

[Keith B]

Texas is an at will state. They can fire you for any cause at any time. They would not have any problem with firing you over carrying on premises if they wanted to.

Even if the parking lot bill passed, they could always find other reasons to fire you, or eliminate your position etc.

Yes, but if you can link it back to the fact they knew you had a gun in your car, then you could sue for them firing you. Work history, previous spotless record, longevity in the workforce, etc all play into cases and arbitrations for a person being fired under false pretenses.

[shootthesheet]

Depends on what is in the "Parking Lot Bill" when they pass it. Other states have taken away the ability of an employer to fire over breaking this kind of company policy. However, like was posted, an employer does not have to have a reason to fire in this state. I hope this is corrected in 2011.

I think this can be worked out by simply giving some kind of civil protections for concealed firearms inside the vehicle. Limiting payouts to employee families in a wrongful death case or what it may be called may help. That satisfies their "Insurance Company" excuse and allows for the employee to at least be satisfied with being able to transport their firearms. Our main opponents, as I remember, are companies and not any grass roots kind of group. That tells me they are concerned about the money and the whole employee safety line will be forgotten. If they were concerned with safety and not money they would either let employees carry or have armed security. Promoting the "Parking Lot Bill" as protections for the companys may be what they most want anyway.