texas bulldog
Member
well, almost...
i still have to draft a revised version of my original proposal based on the feedback at our meeting. then the GM has to sign off on it. that might sound less than promising, but you'd have to know where i work to truly understand just how close i am. once i write up the new policy based on the consensus we reached at our committee meeting, the rest will really just be a rubber stamp, frankly. i put my chances at better than 95%.
background: we are in the process of revising much of our policy manual. so this was in the context of several other policy proposals.
here is the old policy:
my first point of contention was that many of us, even managers such as myself, use knives as a tool in our daily work and that the policy as it stands is not enforced. however, i was also hoping to alter the policy to allow a gun to be locked in one's car without violating policy.
because i didn't want to "tip my hand" by going into great detail about what i was ultimately after, this is what i tried to pass:
i made several arguments to support this idea. foremost among them was the idea that the business really needs to be concerned with violence rather than objects. and since violence is already grounds for immediate termination, it really doesn't matter what object is used in that violence. also, as we all know, crazy people don't care what the policy manual says. there were other arguments, but they weren't anything THR folks haven't heard already. you know...CHL-holder are law-abiding by definition, yada yada yada...
overall, this was surprisingly well-received by a group of non-gunnies. however, when asked directly what my goal was, i went ahead and spilled. ultimately, people are still uncomfortable with a CHL-holder carrying in the building and certainly with the idea of anyone brandishing a weapon [duh!]. i explained that i was in agreement on those issues, and really only wanted to be able to store what i wanted in my own vehicle on company property.
EVERYONE, including the finance manager, who is typically the most conservative on potential liability issues, was absolutely fine with this.
i've been asked to type a new "violence and weapons" policy to replace the old weapons policy. it will focus primarily on violence or threats of violence in the workplace. all i have to include about weapons is that concealed weapons may not be carried on one's person, and that brandishing or threatening with any weapon [not just guns] at work will result in immediate termination. all seven folks on the committee felt comfortable with that threshold.
sorry to drone on and on with details...i'm just stoked about being able to store in my car without fearing for my job security! hope i haven't bored you too much.
thanks for reading!
FWIW...we are an organization of about 80 people.
i still have to draft a revised version of my original proposal based on the feedback at our meeting. then the GM has to sign off on it. that might sound less than promising, but you'd have to know where i work to truly understand just how close i am. once i write up the new policy based on the consensus we reached at our committee meeting, the rest will really just be a rubber stamp, frankly. i put my chances at better than 95%.
background: we are in the process of revising much of our policy manual. so this was in the context of several other policy proposals.
here is the old policy:
my first point of contention was that many of us, even managers such as myself, use knives as a tool in our daily work and that the policy as it stands is not enforced. however, i was also hoping to alter the policy to allow a gun to be locked in one's car without violating policy.
because i didn't want to "tip my hand" by going into great detail about what i was ultimately after, this is what i tried to pass:
of course, this allows quite a bit more than just keeping the weapon in my car. this would allow carry at work. it also allows knives up to 5.5 inches, OC, etc.
i made several arguments to support this idea. foremost among them was the idea that the business really needs to be concerned with violence rather than objects. and since violence is already grounds for immediate termination, it really doesn't matter what object is used in that violence. also, as we all know, crazy people don't care what the policy manual says. there were other arguments, but they weren't anything THR folks haven't heard already. you know...CHL-holder are law-abiding by definition, yada yada yada...
overall, this was surprisingly well-received by a group of non-gunnies. however, when asked directly what my goal was, i went ahead and spilled. ultimately, people are still uncomfortable with a CHL-holder carrying in the building and certainly with the idea of anyone brandishing a weapon [duh!]. i explained that i was in agreement on those issues, and really only wanted to be able to store what i wanted in my own vehicle on company property.
EVERYONE, including the finance manager, who is typically the most conservative on potential liability issues, was absolutely fine with this.
i've been asked to type a new "violence and weapons" policy to replace the old weapons policy. it will focus primarily on violence or threats of violence in the workplace. all i have to include about weapons is that concealed weapons may not be carried on one's person, and that brandishing or threatening with any weapon [not just guns] at work will result in immediate termination. all seven folks on the committee felt comfortable with that threshold.
sorry to drone on and on with details...i'm just stoked about being able to store in my car without fearing for my job security! hope i haven't bored you too much.
thanks for reading!
FWIW...we are an organization of about 80 people.
