[SG27]

Reading the threads regarding carrying at work made me reread my company's policy. See below. My question is this, can a company set such regulations when the property is not private and by state regulations you could carry at the location (it is not govt property, etc)?


The purpose of this policy is to ensure the safety and protection of our employees and the public. This policy applies to all employees, officers, Directors, visitors and any other person who may step onto Company premises. Employees are required to conduct themselves in a proper and orderly manner on Company premises, at Company sanctioned activities, inside or outside of the Company premises, to avoid incidents of intentional or unintentional injury to themselves or
others. To better aid the prevention of workplace violence or unintentional injury, the Company strictly prohibits any and all employees, as well as any other person entering our premises from possessing any instrument or object considered a weapon on any Company-owned or leased premises or properties including but not limited to buildings, sidewalks, walkways, parking facilities regularly utilized for parking Company and employee vehicles, at Company sanctioned activities, and during the performance of Company-related activities, inside or outside of the Company premises. As applied to Company property and activities, this policy supersedes any state law provisions authorizing the carrying of concealed weapons. Employees who engage in violent acts or engage in behavior that threatens the safety of employees or visitors on or off the premises will be subject to immediate and appropriate discipline, up to, and including, termination of employment and/or notification of appropriate law enforcement authorities. If employees believe they are entitled to possess a weapon on Company property, or in a vehicle on Company property, under State law, please consult with HR.

 

[AdoptedTexan]

Personal opinion: yes, they can get away with it, at least to a point. Check state law, but termination of employment with or without cause is pretty much universal. They should legally post their property, if there is an applicable state law. If they own the parking lots, that's probably theirs to control as well. What they didn't clearly state was whether you could store a weapon in your car in the parking lot if it wasn't in your immediate possession. I work for a large, multinational company that has a strict no-handgun policy, and I'm pretty sure if an employee were found to have one at work, he or she would be disciplined the first time or, depending on circumstances, fired outright. A second offense would likely result in immediate termination for cause, which would mean no unemployment insurance while you're looking for that next job. Now, all of the above is my opinion only; I'm not a lawyer, and I don't even play one on TV, and I did not spend the night in a Holiday Inn.

 

[Madcap_Magician]

They may or may not have that right.

In MN employers cannot legally prevent you from having lawfully owned firearms in your locked vehicle on their property.

 

[keboostman]

I don't understand your comment about company premises not being private. If the company owns or leases the property it's private. Can they get away with such a prohibition? I would say yes they can.

 

[KG4ZRC]

The company has the right to restrict firearms off of it's property, the same as you and I can restrict firearms on our property.

 

[Majorlk]

Employees who engage in violent acts or engage in behavior that threatens the safety of employees or visitors on or off the premises will be subject to immediate and appropriate discipline, up to, and including, termination of employment and/or notification of appropriate law enforcement authorities.

In Maryland, they'll have a difficult time firing someone for off-premises conduct, unless the conduct is criminally actionable. Company opinion doesn't count in the situation and companies cannot control off-premises conduct.

In Maryland, you can't fire "for cause" past the probation period, usually 90 days.

We had an employee that was strongly suspected committing a felony. We couldn't fire him because his work record was spotless.

 

[Cycler]

If the company owns or leases the property it's private. Can they get away with such a prohibition? I would say yes they can.

What if it's a public company? Who's the "property owner" in that case?

I think we check too many of our rights at the door when we go to work for so called public companies. We should pass legislation to prevent public companies from doing so.

 

[Majorlk]

What if it's a public company? Who's the "property owner" in that case?

I think we check too many of our rights at the door when we go to work for so called public companies. We should pass legislation to prevent public companies from doing so.

What's a "public" company in your mind?

 

[tmizzi]

Yes ... they have the right. MD is an "at will" state (like most others) so they can pretty much do anything they want even to the extent of firing your because the day in question ends in a "y".

Quote from http://www.dllr.state.md.us/labor/wagepay/wpatwill.htm:

In Maryland, employees work "at the will" of their employers. This means, in the absence of an express contract, agreement or policy to the contrary, an employee may be hired or fired for almost any reason -- whether fair or not -- or for no reason at all.

There are certain exceptions to this general rule which provide some protection to employees from illegal discrimination based on such categories as race, color, gender, national origin, religion, age, disability or marital status. Examples of other employment at-will exceptions include laws which protect employees from termination or retaliation for filing workers' compensation claims, for attempting to enforce rights to receive overtime or the minimum wage, for asserting rights to work in a safe and healthy workplace, for refusing to commit criminal acts, for reporting for jury duty or military service, or for being subject to a wage attachment for any one indebtedness. Terminating an employee for any of these specific reasons may constitute a violation under the applicable State or federal law.

Also, don't get caught up in the public or private company debate going on in this thread. It simply doesn't matter.

 

[Cycler]

What's a "public" company in your mind?

The generally accepted definition can be found Here.

i.e. a company that issues publicly traded stocks.

 

[Ram Rod]

Company Weapon's Policy - Do they have the right?

Yes and no, and it depends. How's that for a good answer? "The right"? You and I have rights..the individual. Corporate entities have never been entitled certain 'rights' under the US constitution like you or I have. Without elaborating a whole lot (and I mean volumes), I've tried to keep this simple. besides....I'm no lawyer.

 

[PHB]

Most employers have an employee hand book and in this rules are stated and they usually have you sign that you have read and agree if this is the case yes they have the right.

 

[Paymeister]

They certainly have the right to fire you. For no reason at all. If they give you a list of reasons you can be fired, that suggests that if you don't step over those lines, you're likely to have continued employment. That may be a wiser move from a protect-the-family perspective than carrying in defiance of their policy. I know that's my decision; others who I honestly respect have come to different conclusions.

Consider your rights at home: if a guy is on your property and you don't want him to carry, you can tell him to get off your land. Pretty much the same with your company.

And regarding 'publicly traded' - all you need to do is buy half their stock and you can change the policy.

 

[Dakota97]

They certainly have the right to fire you. For no reason at all. If they give you a list of reasons you can be fired, that suggests that if you don't step over those lines, you're likely to have continued employment. That may be a wiser move from a protect-the-family perspective than carrying in defiance of their policy. I know that's my decision; others who I honestly respect have come to different conclusions.

Consider your rights at home: if a guy is on your property and you don't want him to carry, you can tell him to get off your land. Pretty much the same with your company.

And regarding 'publicly traded' - all you need to do is buy half their stock and you can change the policy.

Half PLUS 1 share:icon_neutral:

 

[rljohns]

On the parking lot, it depends on state law. In Colorado if the employer has a fenced facility and employees must show a badge to enter in their cars, they can search your car without a warrent and consent is implied by entering. If any person can drive up and park in the lot, it is considered public parking for the purpose of searching a car.

A lot of places you can park on the street and walk onto property. That is the best option. Where I work the company that owns the buildings have stated they have no intention of searching cars. However, cameras are everywhere and I would suggest be discrete. In others words don't be seen transferring weapons during a range trip, hunting trip, or sales event. This is what gets a lot of ppl in trouble.

 

[nedrgr21]

A public company is a legal entity in and of itself - pays taxes, file lawsuits, etc. The board of directors and officers set policy on behalf of the public shareholders, so yeah, a public company can prohibit carrying on their premises. I believe a fed law was passed that companies cannot prohibit weapons in locked vehicles in parking lots.

 

[Precision]

you are mistaking public and private companies with public and private LAND

Companies have owners or at least those who act in the lieu of owners (CEO etc)
The differences with companies is if it is a corporation (owned by shareholders that is publicly traded) or some other ownership style that is not publicly traded.
Regardless of the company's ownership structure, the owners (or their decision making representatives) have the task of making rules. One of these is whether or not firearms may be brought onto property they control (own, rent, lease). Barring laws against it, they certainly can ban guns just like they can enforce a dress code.

Public land is government owned -- city park, federal building, National Monument...
Private land is any land NOT owned by a government or agency

 

[Majorlk]

The generally accepted definition can be found Here.

i.e. a company that issues publicly traded stocks.

That's my definition, too. Just wanted to make sure we were discussing the same thing.

Doesn't matter if it's a publicly traded company or not. If the company owns/rents/leases or otherwise controls the property, it is still considered private property and the company controls what happens on it.

 

[FlyboyLDB]

Reading the threads regarding carrying at work made me reread my company's policy. See below. My question is this, can a company set such regulations when the property is not private and by state regulations you could carry at the location (it is not govt property, etc)?

Yes. And rightly so. My business, my lease, my rules. There are certain people (employees) I do not want carrying in my business. Blanket rule covers any legal issues. I would terminate on the spot anyone that violated this rule. If you feel like looking for another job at the drop of a hat - then by all means carry away. There are no loop holes to CYA in the event you are discovered. I would not carry on any property or business where I have been requested not to. It is the right of the business, property owner, renter or home owner, etc not to have a firearm on their property. We want our rights - but it should not be at the expense of other's rights - right? Does not mean they will earn the right for my business - but hey, this is America.

 

[Cycler]

Doesn't matter if it's a publicly traded company or not. If the company owns/rents/leases or otherwise controls the property, it is still considered private property and the company controls what happens on it.

Yes, I know. I'm just not o.k. with that and wish things were different - especially with the way CEO's behave these days.