Does this make it sound like CC'ing would be legal?

[rudeguy]

Possession of any type of weapon, explosive, firearm, or any other instrument that could be intended for use in a dangerous manner while on Company property or Company business is strictly prohibited (except to the extent such possession is permitted by law). Employees may not have these items on their person, in their personal vehicle, or in a Company vehicle at any time while on property owned or leased by xxxxx, or while conducting xxxxxx business, regardless of the location. Violations of this policy will result in immediate termination.

The part in parentheses is what makes me think it would be ok.

 

[Sport45]

The part after the parentheses makes me think you'd lose your job if they caught you.

 

[Loosedhorse]

I think so, but (though I hate to say it) you should check.

If you can check with the CEO rather than someone in personnel, that would be best. Sometimes a person in human resources can impose their own interpretation on you. If you don't have CEO access, get as high in HR as you can for the opinion.

And get it in writing.

Alternatively, you could ask your lawyer, but they would represent you after your termination, not prevent it or reverse it, if they guessed wrong. At your expense.

 

[bikemutt]

I think any carry method would be "legal", are you sure you don't mean "against company policy"?

Their sole remedy mentioned is termination of employment, and I suppose if an employee was warned to desist and continued, a charge of trespass could be the result.

My guess is the parenthetical prose is designed to make exceptions for LE, armed security guards, armored car driver's and the like.

 

[ForumSurfer]

It is a poorly written policy that contradicts itself. This may be just poor wording or it may be vague on purpose.

In my experience, if you have to ask...the answer is a resounding "no" and the policy may be rewritten after you ask.

Concealed means concealed, and according to policy it isn't against company policy. The overall vagueness of it makes it a tough a call.

Given the vagueness, I could see this these possible scenarios:

1. Something happens and you need your firearm. You get fired for having it, but you live. Now you need a lawyer (which you can't afford since you are unemployed) to argue with the company (who likely has deeper pockets than you) about how you shouldn't have been fired. Best case scenario: You win. You are awarded back-pay plus pain and suffering. You go back to work for a company that now harbors ill will toward you. Upward mobility isn't looking so great. Not only that, you still owe your lawyer thousands more than you were awarded.

2. You accidentally let your firearm hit the floor while you are in the bathroom. The guy in the stall next to you freaks out and reports a man with a gun. Now you need a lawyer (which you can't afford since you are unemployed) to argue with the company (who likely has deeper pockets than you) about how you shouldn't have been fired. Best case scenario: You win. You are awarded back-pay plus pain and suffering. You go back to work for a company that now harbors ill will toward you. Upward mobility isn't looking so great. Not only that, you still owe your lawyer thousands more than you were awarded.

3. Something happens at work like an accident or health problems. The paramedics or a co-worker find your gun while on the premise. You get fired AND you just lost health coverage. Now you need a lawyer (which you can't afford since you are unemployed) to argue with the company (who likely has deeper pockets than you) about how you shouldn't have been fired. Best case scenario: You win. You are awarded back-pay plus pain and suffering. You go back to work for a company that now harbors ill will toward you. Upward mobility isn't looking so great. Not only that, you still owe your lawyer thousands more than you were awarded.


4. No one ever notices you printing or carrying. You never let it fall to the floor when you drop your pants in the restroom stalls. Concealed means concealed an no one is ever the wiser.

5. I'm overly paranoid, and the vague wording is just poor policy. The company is perfectly OK with legal ccw.

I live in a right to work state. That means they don't really need a great reason to can me. Given the vagueness of that policy, I wouldn't carry in MY situation.

YMMV

 

[Birch Knoll]

The policy may be read as prohibiting possession of weapons by anyone (vendors, clients, visitors, etc.) on company premises or at any company function, except for law enforcement or similar. Employees are prohibited from possessing weapons across the board.

 

[ForumSurfer]

The policy may be read as prohibiting possession of weapons by anyone (vendors, clients, visitors, etc.) on company premises or at any company function, except for law enforcement or similar. Employees are prohibited from possessing weapons across the board.

See? That policy is poorly written and super vague. That is just one of the many ways one could interpret it. I thought that at first, but after re-reading it...it just isn't specific. It seems to be left open to interpretation (interpretation in their favor, not yours).

 

[Birch Knoll]

See? That policy is poorly written and super vague.

Yes, it's a typical company policy.

 

[Double Naught Spy]

Prohibited.

 

[Mainsail]

No no no, you're not understanding what is written and the beliefs behind the person that wrote it.

except to the extent such possession is permitted by law.

This is a fancy way of saying the rule doesn't apply to law enforcement officers.

 

[316SS]

This is a fancy way of saying the rule doesn't apply to law enforcement officers.

Agreed. Similar to "void where prohibited." I think the first sentence applies to anyone, and means "we prohibit you from carrying, etc. unless we don't have the authority to do so." Employees of the company should skip ahead to the sentence that begins "Employees may not have these items ..." That sentence, on its own, answers your question, rudeguy.

 

[Standing Wolf]

My understanding is lives are harder to replace than jobs. I've had to replace jobs any number of times, but must confess I've never tried to replace my life.

 

[rudeguy]

I think any carry method would be "legal", are you sure you don't mean "against company policy"?

Their sole remedy mentioned is termination of employment, and I suppose if an employee was warned to desist and continued, a charge of trespass could be the result.

My guess is the parenthetical prose is designed to make exceptions for LE, armed security guards, armored car driver's and the like.

I'm mostly worried about having it in my car. I figure they would need to break into it to search it, but I'm still concerned.

I work late and have to pick my son up in the hood, so not carrying isn't an option.

The only thing I can think of is if someone sees my holster on accident and makes a fuss. I never carry in the building, but could my employer really demand to search my car because someone saw an empty holster on my hip?

 

[bikemutt]

The only thing I can think of is if someone sees my holster on accident and makes a fuss. I never carry in the building, but could my employer really demand to search my car because someone saw an empty holster on my hip?

I have no idea if there's such a thing as civil probable cause, which is pretty much what you described. Now if there's something in your employment agreement wherein you agreed to some sort of "implied consent" to be searched, much as you do when you accept a driver license and the deputy asks you to blow into a Breathalizer, then I suppose it is what it is.

It sounds to me like the most balanced approach you can take is to exercise the utmost care when leaving your car on their property; leave nothing in plain sight, double-check, lock up and go in. Take concealment to new level.

 

[Owen Sparks]

There is a difference between "legal" and what is allowed at work. For example, it is perfectly legal for a man to go outside without wearing a shirt, but your boss probably will not let you come to work that way unless you are a life guard. Many stores would ask you to leave if you came in shirtless even though it is not illegal. Rules can take on the force of law though. If you are asked to leave for inappropriate attire or whatever, if you refuse you become a tresspasser and can be removed by force and arrested.

 

[mgkdrgn]

Possession of ... or any other instrument that could be intended for use in a dangerous manner while on Company property or Company business

Which, when push comes to shove, means just about anything that has size and mass.

Stupid policy, written stupidly, that can (and will) "mean" anything that whom ever is in a position of authority wants it to mean at any particular moment.

 

[Birch Knoll]

Stupid policy, written stupidly, that can (and will) "mean" anything that whom ever is in a position of authority wants it to mean at any particular moment.

That's not stupid at all, from the point of view of the authority who wrote it.

 

[The Lone Haranguer]

You wouldn't be breaking the law, but violation of your company policy would almost certainly get you the boot.

 

[GMcBoozer]

"except to the extent such possession is permitted by law"

I see PTC's as possession is permitted by law. To me, the above statement applies to an individual who has a PTC.

But as an employee, it clearly says you cannot. The "except to the extent such possession is permitted by law" pertains to the first sentence. At least that is how I see it.

 

[Sport45]

[QUOTE-rudeguy]I'm mostly worried about having it in my car. I figure they would need to break into it to search it, but I'm still concerned. [/QUOTE]

Where do you live? (Come'on guys, it's easy to list your state as a location. We're not going to hunt you down, I promise. )

In Texas, we recently passed a law that prevents the worry you mention above.

 

[rudeguy]

I'm in Michigan.

 

[Owen Sparks]

Seriously, when was the last time your employer asked to search your car? They CAN'T break in, that is illegal.

 

[CapnMac]

except to the extent such possession is permitted by law

So many company policies are written so poorly. Really, what they mean to say is:

"While on [company] premises, criminals are to obey all laws and [Company's] Regulations, or face possible immediate termination of employment."

 

[bearcreek]

Rudeguy, more than likely, if I were you, I'd get a pocket gun and carry. A lot of it depends on what kind of work you do too. I do tree trimming and removal right now. I don't carry when I'm climbing or dragging brush but I've always got a gun in the truck and it goes back on as soon as I get in the truck. From what we know of your situation it seems like the chances of it being discovered are real slim.

 

[HankB]

(except to the extent such possession is permitted by law)

Concealed carry is "permitted by law" in most states when a person has a state-issued concealed carry permit or license; this provision in the policy appears to explicitly carve out an exception to the blanket prohibition for such a situation.

Of course, the company may argue otherwise, and IANAL, but termination - not criminal prosecution - seems to be the worst-case scenario if one is found out.

An inquiry for clarification may bring a response that makes the prohibition more explicit - sometimes silence is golden.