GM Worker fired for carrying gun on company property given job back

Status
Not open for further replies.
Wow, has common sense made a appearence? I hope so. He deserved his job back.
 
Another good guy with a gun! Where are the anti naysayers on this one?
 
You can bet future plant searches will target Mr. Sarder. He either won't be carrying or will be fired again.

Wow, has common sense made a appearence?
Click to expand...

Nope, not in the sense that they haven't changed the rules. They just gave this guy a 1-time break is all because he saved a life.
 
^^This^^

Pressure on a publicly traded company would be huge. However, a targeted search on some random workday will simply be a case of a guy fired for violating company policy and not another word will be said. His time there is limited, the company will find a reason to fire him now.

Or, if you're the conspiratorial type, they'll have him in Human Resources sometime after the dust settles and explain to him why he's no longer working for GM. I'm sure they'll think of something.
 
The smart move is to not take the job back and move on. It's obvious that the corporate culture can't make the right decision and stick with it. No surprise there, but why be manipulated for their benefit after they tossed you out - for their benefit?

Typical organizational based thinking. They won't be able to ever trust the employee to do the wrong thing now, which upstages their policy. He has concrete notice they don't want to have him as an example of employee empowerment. There will be future repercussions.

I learned that watching an employee get fired even when he was promised a job for life - he'd lost his leg in a workplace accident when a safe tipped over moving it to display in a retail department store. Basically, once the original managers move on, new ones will not and can not be trusted to "keep their word" on something said by their predecessors.

Whatever guarantee of employment he's hearing now isn't worth the hot air used to speak it. The manager saying it may well mean it to the bottom of his heart - he won't be their for the next 50 years and he will not be given enough control to make it happen.

Move on, quickly, and avoid the press as much as possible. Nothing good will come about staying. That is the cost of standing up for your Rights. Sad, but realistic. The aftershocks later down the road are usually more longlasting than the incident itself.
 
Tirod said:
The smart move is to not take the job back and move on. It's obvious that the corporate culture can't make the right decision and stick with it.
Click to expand...

How many corporations allow employees to carry guns at work?

It's not like most people can just go out and get a well paying job that fits their schedule and allows them to carry a gun to work if they like
 
1911 guy said:
^^This^^

Pressure on a publicly traded company would be huge. However, a targeted search on some random workday will simply be a case of a guy fired for violating company policy and not another word will be said. His time there is limited, the company will find a reason to fire him now.

Or, if you're the conspiratorial type, they'll have him in Human Resources sometime after the dust settles and explain to him why he's no longer working for GM. I'm sure they'll think of something.
Click to expand...
They never tell you "why", for legal reasons.. only that you are being let go. "Why" only comes out if litigated.

I agree though, this guy's time is limited...ESPECIALLY since he's a contractor, not a regular union employee.
 
OK, so what are the FACTS?

"He said he was never informed of a no-gun policy."

"A" no-gun policy or "The" no-gun policy?

Did he in fact, knowingly or unknowingly violate a company policy or not?

If he violated policy:
I understand him carrying anyhow.
I applaude him taking the opportunity to save this woman.
I understand him being fired though instead, an admonition and re-statement of policy is really in order.

If he did not violate a standing, published policy:
Much as I hate the general concept, I'd be in contact with an attorney.


Todd.
 
Purely from an insurance standpoint, consider this...an employee killed on company property while engaged in the performance of their work as a result of violence in the workplace is afforded workers' compensation benefits in most states. The armed contracted employee saved GM from a death benefit claim.

Why do you think most employers that deny the right of self protection are all running employees through the "Run, Hide, Fight" movie training??
 
Unless I missed it....

I wonder if the knife attacker was fired before her arraignment or is she OK for having observed the "No Guns" implied policy?

No, given where this happened - she's probably now considered a "victim".



Todd.
 
Employees are one thing. Contractors another. I would have fired the guy too. I've fired people for lesser violations of weapons policies in accordance with company policy.
 
I agree though, this guy's time is limited...ESPECIALLY since he's a contractor, not a regular union employee.
Click to expand...
Zero tolerance at both GM and Ford say even if union, you would not be protected. Likely Chrysler as well. As has been said, this is a one-shot deal. Don't know if he's limited though, now that the media has had a run at it. But, he'll never be caught with a firearm again.
 
There are very few workplaces in the U.S. that allow workers to have firearms on the premises. This is not new it's been that way for a long time, as in decades. Mostly they don't want folks to shoot their bosses, and as others mention financial fallout from the beancounters.

The reason the gentleman got his job back was because he saved a life. Had he been simply caught with the gun on him he would have been fired, and I oughta mention that the cops would have likely been called on Mr. Didarul Sarder. Page 1 headlines something like "Suspected Middle East Terrorist Stopped". Two weeks later a small article following up would appear on page 14, "Suspected terrorist released but fired from job."

Why do you think most employers that deny the right of self protection are all running employees through the "Run, Hide, Fight" movie training??
Click to expand...

Well they don't deny the right to self protection...handguns are far down the list as ways to protect yourself and others. They just limit the areas where guns can be carried and by whom. The courts have backed them up on this many times. You also surrender a few other rights when you walk on their property. But the bosses have the jobs.

I've found it interesting that a good many advocates of open carry and ccw who brag on how they will never be without a gun on them (they won't go to a NFL or MLB game becasue of the no firearms policies) and that they are needed to protect themselves each minute of the day, will abandon their pieces when they walk in the plant gate or into their office and not think twice about it. That paycheck and bennies, weigh a lot. Folks that speak about their willingness to "take out" a bad guy in a heartbeat and face the consequences...often get the night tremors about missing a car payment or the rent. Just true. It reveals what the actual fear is from the manufactured fear. Gunfights are rare...not being able to support yourself or your family...common.

I'm glad the man got his job back but unless they make him a security guard, he won't be carrying on the job again.

tipoc
 
Jlr2267 said:
They never tell you "why", for legal reasons.. only that you are being let go. "Why" only comes out if litigated.

I agree though, this guy's time is limited...ESPECIALLY since he's a contractor, not a regular union employee.
Click to expand...
I am not sure where you work, but I have terminated the employment of hundreds of people at multiple companies(part of the job), have been fired once and laid off once, and I have never heard of not telling someone why they are losing their job. Do you say this becasue he is a contractor? Just curious.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

T
  • Locked
Major Victory for American Workers' Right to Self-Defense
Replies
8
Views
725
psyopspec
P
F
  • Locked
S.C. Legislator Arrested After Firing a Gun at Two Utility Workers
Replies
5
Views
588
Andrew Rothman
A
R
  • Locked
Man Shoots Wis. Factory Worker Dead, Before Killing Himself
Replies
0
Views
364
romma
R
C
  • Locked
Employee with toy gun and sword attacks co-workers
2
Replies
28
Views
1K
Elza
E
D
  • Locked
(TX) Man Threatens To Shoot Co-Workers; Guns Seized
Replies
11
Views
1K
loose cannon
L
Back
Top