Can My Employer Search My Car

[Commander Guineapig]

In New Mexico your vehicle is an extension of your home.

This is true in Colorado as well...I happen to live here also.
I recently asked my fav dealer here what the rules were on handguns in the
car...he is very well versed on the Law, as well as having an ex-cop in his employ.
You MAY in the state of Colorado carry a handgun in your car WITHOUT a concealed permit, and I do believe the "Make my Day" law applies to your vehicle as well. The very vague and tricky clause is that you must be "traveling" in some fashion with the handgun in your car.
This is what I understand to be true from: the shop owner, an ex-cop, and a currently serving LEO.
If your company rules prohibit this you are most likely hosed. But there may be the little words "on company property" in there as well.
"Invasion of Privacy" and "discrimination" are also dirty little words in your favor. What I'd do is contact the NRA and find out about a good lawyer in your area and see what will fly or not fly.
Heck, even if they do fire you, maybe you can sue 'em.
GP

 

[TX1911fan]

I think this could be an interesting 2A test case. Let's use a different example. You tell your friend that you have Barack Obama campaign literature in your car, parked off company property. They want to search to confirm, and if you indeed do have such literature in your car, you will be fired. Do you think it would be a good case of violation of your 1A rights to be fired because of who you support as a potential presidential candidate? So how would this be different? I know gun owners are not a protected class, and I certainly understand at-will employment, but I am wondering if this would be a constitutional law issue. I also agree that the Constitution does not govern private acts, only acts by the government, but I think we have seen before where actions of private parties have been deemed to violate the 1A. I'm just wondering if it would work for the 2A too (not saying the OP should be the test case, though).

 

[Nitrogen]

All the legal mumbo jumbo is just a distraction.

Here's the reality: Do you want to work for a company that wants to search your car?

No, I don't. This is why I'm looking for a new job ASAP, and the OP should, too.

 

[PennsyPlinker]

Why not just leave your gun at home for a while, prime your very good friend to get the company to search your car, find nothing, and then see what happens to her when you file a harrassment charge?

 

[zxcvbob]

Look them square in the eye and say, "I walked to work today; what are you going to next, search my house?"

(This is a true statement, you did walk to work from the lot across the street, assuming they do not own that lot across the street)

If you are particularly bold, suggest that we go inspect *their* house and see if there's anything there the company would not approve of.

IANAL, but this whole situation might be actionable as a "hostile work enviroment"

 

[rrruuunnn]

i agree that legal resonse is probably an overreaction. our weapons policy is to make our employees feel safe.

 

[TacoMalo]

Get your bike and put it on a rack on your car then park the 100 plus yards from work and ride the bike to work, when they ask to search your vehicle unlock the bike and hand it over to them. Technically you rode your bike to work whether you parked your car 10 feet from home or in a supermarket parking lot you still arrived at work on your bike.

 

[bruss01]

Yes, I would make no changes in where I park, make no comment on the issue - but secretly, leave the "heat" at home for a while until the issue is forgotten. In the meantime, get a bright plastic squirt gun and put it in whatever part of the car you normally carry your firearm. Then if a search happens, you can get all righteously indignant and the tattle-tale is left with egg on her face.

In the future (lesson to all of us) keep it real quiet about what you do with firearms outside your home. It isn't always well-received and often (as you have observed) comes back to haunt you.

 

[rmmoore]

Folks, I can attest to this from "personal" experience shall we say. In many States, it can be a legal condition of employment, and you have to sign a waiver stating that you give understand and give permission to search your vehicle on Company property. Even in those States where it is not, if the vehicle is on Company property, they can either search it, or force you to leave. And if they have to force you to move it, as an employee, you can bet the next letter you get WILL NOT be congratulatory.
If it is a Company vehicle, they have legal access to it 24/7, whether it's at the office or in your garage; because it does not BELONG to you. They are "allowing" you to use it, but they maintain legal control and title. There are variations to this, depending on how you particular Company has structured their "benefit" of using a Company vehicle. But this is how most Company's operate. Someone else said something earlier about "wanting" to work for a Company that does not "trust" or would willfully endanger it's employees. That's true, and all well and good. But I was "almost" (and I mean 'almost' by the tiniest of margins) fired over a firearm that was locked in a container, in the bed of my truck, left there from a hunting trip I had returned from at 1am, and was at work at 7am. Someone dropped a dime, and I was lucky to "only" get a weeklong unpaid vacation. I cost me and my Manager A LOT of favors to be called in!!!! It's not always so easy just to say f.. them and walk away when you have a family. Been there, experienced that. I don't work for THAT Company any longer, but the one I work for now with the exact rules, and now I have a Company car as well. Just my .02!!!!!!

 

[junyo]

They CAN fire you for not liking your hair color. But if you're terminated without what the state considers valid cause you're usually compensated. That they're looking for cause says either they don't want to fire you or that they're trying to avoid an unwinnable unemployment claim.

Your employer only has a hold on your actions while you are on/in their property or are acting as their agent.

As others have said, review the manual. Also any signage. You were under the assumption that you were parking in a public lot. The proper way for the company to handle a "No weapons" policy is to have signage at every entry point that indicates that passing beyond that point constitutes an agreement to be bound by their policy and to submit to a search. I'm guessing that your employer doesn't have that. So even if they have a published policy against having a weapon on company property, if you can demonstrate that company property isn't clearly marked and delineated you can argue that there was no way for you to know that you were violating policy. And start documenting EVERY communication you have with the company, even if it's asking to have a witness present for any conversations.

Or you could be proactive, go to HR and say "I've heard that there may be a concern over certain - completely legal - pieces of sporting equipment that might or might not be in my vehicle. Is that the case, and if so, how can we address this before it becomes a bigger issue?"

 

[Treo]

A Little Background

To clarify, I work in a residential treatment center for troubled kids.Company policy ( and I agree) is no weapons on campus, I don't need a weapon for what I do & if one of the kids got there hands on it the results could be tragic. I technically travel to and from work because I work in a different town than I live in. Somehow the whole campus (including kids) knows (or suspects) that I have a weapon in my car,which would make my car a prime target should one of the kids go off ( hence the lock box) Finally, do I want to work for people that want to search my car not particularlly, but I don't want bail on the kids either ( the company has had a 90% turn over rate since I started 2 months ago and the kids are devestated when someone leaves) PS to the poster that wants me to go to HR I went to the director of the facility last night, told her I had heard some concerns & told her I had no weapons. I even denied having a weapon in my car ( Yes I am aware that this was perhaps dishonorable but at this point I consider her to be the enemy & I felt that I made a legitimate tactical decison for the next little while I will be parking far away from work where they'd have no cause to search my vehicle

 

[rrruuunnn]

you do have a car alarm?

 

[Ed Ames]

Based on what you said, my advice is pretty simple: leave the gun at home.

The search issue is only incidental to the real reason.

 

[Treo]

My concern W/ leaving the gun at home is that I drive home alone late at night

 

[Ed Ames]

Sometimes you've got to choose the lesser of many evils.

On the one hand you have the random threats involved in driving home alone at night.

On the second hand you have the known threat of a bunch of potentially troubled people who know/strongly suspect there is a gun in your car.

On the third hand you have the risk to your continued employement if your vehicle is searched, with the associated risks involved in unemployment (and they aren't inconsiderable -- no job + needs money = bad security).

It's natural to concentrate on unknown/strange risks because you haven't experienced, internalized, and accepted them, but when you get to cold hard facts you realize that there are bigger security/safety risks at play here. The US murder rate is somewhere around 6 per 100,000 and the medically preventable deaths due to insufficient health care (in other words not having health insurance because you've lost your job) run closer to 80 per 100,000.

Personally I'd leave the gun at home at least until I figured out how the information leaked. Once I figured that out I'd correct the leak and re-approach the problem.

Or I'd take a completely different tact. I've historically been very closed mouthed about firearms ownership. I decided a few years ago that was probably as much of a mistake as blabbing to everyone though. So now I don't hide arms.... but that's a personal choice too. But that is an embrace of risk to accomplish some other goal (specifically I think firearms ownership needs some "normal faces" in the community and, well, it's a stretch but I come closer to qualifying that some people).

 

[Robert Hairless]

If you search this forum you will find past messages from many members who defend the right of employers to do what worries you now, and anything else they want to do while you are in their employ.

Where those members are concerned employers have rights but you don't, except for what limited rights are extended by laws, and that's the way those members like it.

They live employee but they think employer. In time we may see the end of the 40-hour-work week, workers compensation, unemployment compensation, overtime pay, child labor laws, and other measures for which employees fought hard in the 19th and 20th centuries.

Live with it. It's what the people want.

 

[brassdog]

A gun should only be one of your many tools

IMHO, I'd leave the gun at home for awhile. Your "friend" has marked you to others as a pontential troublemaker. It time to start using the most important weapon you have. Your head! Since your stated that you've already talked to HR, let's take the high road and keep what you said as the truth. Some sports equipment in your truck shouldn't raise any alarms.

Use this as a lesson. Most people at work will rat out other coworkers in a heartbeat for a chance at a perceived promotion. Problem is, most employers HATE disloyal individuals. Prove her to be a liar by staying aboveboard for the next couple of months.

 

[Ed Ames]

I agree with the second paragraph of Robert's post. And I think it's good. We should all think employer instead of employee.

I think employment... the fixed "come to work every day have a boss and no independence" form of employement most of us accept and expect as normal, is a scourge of modern society. I'm honest enough to admit I've been playing that game for the last 13+ years (before that I mostly did freelance and consulting work) but I have done both and I recognize the problems with fixed employement. I count the days until my current "extended project" is completed and I can go back to a better, though riskier, way of life.

If you want to be a free person you must have the ability to operate independently. Not just the right to operate independently... the ability. If you are dependent on an employer for a paycheck every week or twice a month -- especially if you are living paycheck to paycheck and can't afford unemployement -- you aren't able. You are a dependent and with dependence comes submission to control. There are worse words, beginning with 'S', that describe what you are at that point.

Frankly, the idea of all these dependent people being allowed to vote scares me and I think it's the single worst thing about the USA right now. Right up there with the "wars" against the population.

In order to avoid that dependence, in order to have a chance at your own freedom, you must give others their freedom. That includes giving employers the right to include employment conditions we'd rather they didn't have.

Beyond the obvious fact that we must accept the rights of others if we wish for them to accept ours, you get the more practical consideration: If excessive HR policies drive more people out of dependency... that sounds good to me.

 

[Treo]

My Decision

I want to thank all the people who have given input, after reading it all this is how I see the situation; Risk assesment the biggest risk right now is to my job in this instance the gun is a liability. the second biggest risk is that one of the kids will get ahold of the gun and hurt themselves the gun is no longer concealed it is a liability in this instance. Ultimately at this point the gun is causing more problems than it solves, so I'm gonna leave it at home for a while (be cool if they decide to search my vehicle now wouldn't it) and avoid all contact W/ my "freind" again thanks for the input.
P.S if these people are THAT serious about getting rid of me they'll find a reason sooner or later anyway. Why should I hand them one?

 

[Robert Hairless]

I wouldn't disagree with you, Ed. The greatest threat to this country is employment. Everyone should be an individual entrepreneur. The fewer people who are employed the stronger we will be. No one should be employed. Our goal must be full unemployment.

 

[TexasSkyhawk]

Your 4th amendment rights do not apply. Your 4th amendment rights only apply against actions by the government, not by an employer.

Absolutely not true.

Federal case right here in Texas back in the late 80's. A food & beverage maker who makes and markets a very famous soft drink brand ordered a mid-level manager to submit his apartment to a search because he had been accused of purchasing and keeping the competitor's brand of beverage in his home.

Was given the ultimatum of "we take a look in your apartment and refrigerator, you're terminated."

He gave in. Employer found competitor's brand in the guy's fridge. Guy was fired.

Fired guy got lawyer and filed civil rights violation lawsuit. U.S. District Judge Barefoot Sander nearly had an aneurism on the bench when employer announced that "fourth amendment doesn't apply to us, your honor." 5th Circuit in New Orleans upheld the decision.

Fired guy is very rich today, thaks to punitive damages.

Jeff

 

[jeepmor]

Simple.

Off their property, not their business. Even if they want to make it their business....unless you signed something as a condition of your employment.

I'm with PennsyPlinker, go get yourself that person's job out of this. They are obviously threatened by your skills or they wouldn't pull such a stunt in the first place. Pressing the issue and you coming up clean erodes their credibility and indicates vindictive behavior. A big no no in corporate dwellings and plenty of reason for termination or reassignment to get her away from you.

 

[atblis]

Let's summarize

Does this sound right?

If you're car is on company property they can ask to search it (they could either way, but you know what I mean). They cannot legally search it without your consent in any conditions. If you consent then... If you refuse, they can probably fire you "justifiably" (depends on the state). Some states may require that it be in the company handbook/policies for it to be a justifiable termination.

If you're car is not on their property, they cannot legally take any actions against you based on a request to search your car. They have absolutely no legal standing to do this. Even if they think you have stolen property, they still have to go through the police.

1) Figure out if your car is on company property. Do not park on company property.
2) Figure out what constitutes a wrongful firing in your state. Make sure you do everything right so you can sue if it comes to that.
3) Do not provide your coworker with any more info. Make no statements regarding firearms.
4) Find a good lawyer.

 

[mokin]

I think you did right thing. As I also live in Colorado, I'm with Commader GuinneaPig. We have the right to carry a loaded handgun in our cars while traveling. If you are not on company property they have no right to search your car. From a discussion with the local Sheriff I have come to understand feelings about the "shall issue" condition of the permit process in Colorado vary (quite drastically) in different regions in this state. You might try contacting a CCW instructor for information about legal advice or the Sheriff who issued you your permit.

Good Luck!

 

[Cosmoline]

No, sorry. Gun owners are NOT a protected class. They can discriminate against you for being a gun owner and there is generally nothing you can do about it legally.

You need to be very careful about making bold statements like this. Employment law is complex, and unless you have legal training and know the specifics of a situation it's impossible to come to any reliable conclusions. Ordering a search could be OK, or it could be in violation of an express contract. It could be in violation of an implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing. If you have a serious question like this you really need to seek legal advice from an attorney in your jurisdiction.