Company Forbids Off-Duty Carry of Firearms on Property?

[gamma19]

My company was recently acquired by another company, and as such we were issued employee handbooks with new policies. One policy that stood out was the no firearms section. It states "employees shall not have in their possession firearms and/or ammunition while on on duty. This includes firearms and/or ammunition stored in personal vehicles. Employees shall also not have in their possession any firearms and/or ammunition when off duty but on company property. Violation of this policy will result in dismissal. The previous company's policy was no firearms while at work, but that was it. Without saying which company I work for or what they do, I will say that they own a lot of property which is open to the public, and which I need to step foot on to conduct everyday business. As far as I know, they do not prohibit their patrons from having a firearm on their person while utilizing their services. However, I, as an off duty employee patronizing their establishment, am not allowed to conceal carry on the property. Can they get away with this? I understand (though do not agree with) the rule prohibiting conceal carry while at work, but if I'm off duty and am in a place not restricted by law, how can the company forbid me from exercising my second amendment right? (while allowing their non-employee customers to carry).

 

[skeetshooter]

Is another job a viable option?

 

[mark056]

Seems to me that this had already been covered by the thread about Earl's in Texas. Consensus is that a business owner has the right to establish the rules he or she wants on his or her private property.

This was articulated quite emphatically so it seems to me case closed. The fact that it applied to gays and not gun owners should be irrelevant IMO. Thanks OP for posting this cuz I want to see how many people are gonna hem and haw and waffle on their previous position 'bout the rights of business owners and property owners to do what they damn well please. Hope this thread takes off , like a blazing rocket ship to Mars.

From my perspective concealed means concealed and if you get caught be willing to face the consequences, but that's just me. What you do on your own time is your business but your employer might not see it that way. Discretion is the better part of valor .

 

[Bonesinium]

Employees shall also not have in their possession any firearms and/or ammunition when off duty but on company property. Violation of this policy will result in dismissal. Can they get away with this? I understand (though do not agree with) the rule prohibiting conceal carry while at work, but if I'm off duty and am in a place not restricted by law, how can the company forbid me from exercising my second amendment right? (while allowing their non-employee customers to carry).

That's a pretty ridiculous policy, but yes, I have no doubt they can get away with it. You are likely out of luck if you want to not violate their policy. Your only choices are likely to a) suck it up and follow the policy, b) say eph it, and carry anyways, and deal with being fired if found out, or c) fight the policy, bringing attention to yourself, likely getting nowhere but fired for 'something else'.

Seems to me that this had already been covered by the thread about Earl's in Texas. Consensus is that a business owner has the right to establish the rules he or she wants on his or her private property.

This was articulated quite emphatically so it seems to me case closed. The fact that it applied to gays and not gun owners should be irrelevant IMO. Thanks OP for posting this cuz I want to see how many people are gonna hem and haw and waffle on their previous position 'bout the rights of business owners and property owners to do what they damn well please.

You drew a direct parallel between that and this? Really? Refusing service to patrons for something and a policy that says they will fire employees for something else are unlike situations, dealing with separate issues...

 

[Lip]

Thier company, thier policy. Either ignore the policy or move on.

 

[weldingmachine]

So quit & out them so they lose all of our business.

 

[JayMcB]

So quit & out them so they lose all of our business.

or at least out them.

 

[Radtekk]

My employer has a "No smoking during working hours even if on meal break and not on property" and extends that restriction to "within 1/4 mile of company property".

Is it legal? Dunno. Is it fair? I personally don't think so. Could I afford to fight it? Nope.

Fwiw, said policy was enactes/upgraded/enhanced several years after I started working there. I also quit smoking a year ago, six months after it went in to effect.

Regarding the firearms policy in the OP... While o think it's bullsh1t, "their house, their rules" and "concealed means concealed". I also don't carry at work, the PO, my daughter's schools...

 

[Rancho]

Their property , their right to restrict whatever they want I guess.

 

[Mike-Mike]

When you boss calls on your day off during an emergency and asks you to come in say "I can't I have a gun on, guess your on your own. Your rules not mine."

 

[shamrockjr]

When you boss calls on your day off during an emergency and asks you to come in say "I can't I have a gun on, guess your on your own. Your rules not mine."

+1

 

[mremski]

Didn't the OP say the don't prevent patrons from carrying? If so, would an off-duty employee patronizing the property be any different than Joe Public patronizing the property? I also thought the "at work, stored in vehicle" has been covered, perhaps a different state?

 

[Delta L Varmint]

Concealed means concealed. Plenty of people carry at work, I doubt many of them have been called on it.

 

[mtnbiker26]

Keep calm and CARRY on. Assuming co-workers don't know you carry and you don't have to worry about some weasel outing you, just keep doing what you're doing as long as it's not illegal. I suspect it's eventually going to be the standard policy at all big companies so they can cover their butts if someone sues them for a shooting on their property.

 

[Palladin]

concealed means concealed

 

[dcmdon]

My employer has a "No smoking during working hours even if on meal break and not on property" and extends that restriction to "within 1/4 mile of company property".

Is it legal? Dunno. Is it fair? I personally don't think so. Could I afford to fight it? Nope.

Fwiw, said policy was enactes/upgraded/enhanced several years after I started working there. I also quit smoking a year ago, six months after it went in to effect.

Regarding the firearms policy in the OP... While o think it's bullsh1t, "their house, their rules" and "concealed means concealed". I also don't carry at work, the PO, my daughter's schools...

This is probably illegal.

Re the OP's quandry. While they certainly have a right to prohibit possession and carry by employees leaves 2 options.

1) Quit and look for a new job.
2) Roll the dice and if ever found out, look for a new job.

It sounds like option 2 is more practical. Just be very discreet. While I was working at a startup in Cambridge I regularly carried a G19 IWB with a polo or a T shirt over it. The person I worked with knew I shot a lot. We spoke often about carrying while with your children and while he was generally anti, he definitely understood that desire. He never asked and I never told. The company consisted of just the two of us and some outsourced developers so there was no "workplace violence" policy.

Prior to this, when I was in corporate Amerika (fortune 50 company) I still carried. But I carried a LCP in my pocket. The way I see it, a mouse gun in your pocket will never ever get "made" unless you either have to use it or you have a medical emergency.

My current gig is somewhere in the middle. I've scoured their policies and have found nothing prohibiting firearms or "weapons" in general. Which is interesting.

Don

 

[dcmdon]

concealed means concealed

In MA, yes.

But not necessarily true other places.

 

[EddieCoyle]

This was articulated quite emphatically so it seems to me case closed. The fact that it applied to gays and not gun owners should be irrelevant IMO.

Judging by the responses in this thread, that's exactly the way it seems to be. Not one hem, one haw, or even a waffle. Not really the rocket ship you were thinking of, huh?

 

[Cero]

This is a pretty interesting question. If this company has space open to the general public and doesn't forbid the public from carrying then how can it forbid off duty employees from carrying? Wouldn't the off duty employee be the general public?

Also I disagree with their property their rules. I think that if the company is open to the general public (ie anyone can walk in and conduct business) then they don't have a say. If your not pen to the public then you would have the ablility to make no carry rules. So Starbucks, Chipolte, etc shouldn't be allowed to ban CC. Pricewaterhouse Coopers not open to the general publi they can make rules their property thing can work (again don't like it but I can see the their property their rules thing more clearly).

 

[The5thDentist]

Meh, as long as you don't go in there waving the thing around, don't worry about it. As the mantra goes, concealed means concealed.

 

[hunt4riches]

My employer has a "No smoking during working hours even if on meal break and not on property" and extends that restriction to "within 1/4 mile of company property".

Is it legal? Dunno. Is it fair? I personally don't think so. Could I afford to fight it? Nope.

Fwiw, said policy was enactes/upgraded/enhanced several years after I started working there. I also quit smoking a year ago, six months after it went in to effect.

Regarding the firearms policy in the OP... While o think it's bullsh1t, "their house, their rules" and "concealed means concealed". I also don't carry at work, the PO, my daughter's schools...

You can be fired for any reason, or no reason at all in MA (and most other states). You just cannot be discriminated against for race, sex, age, religion and a variety of medical stuff. You have no constitutional rights with respect to your job. A job is a contract, and part of that contract is a somewhat of a negotiation of rights.

I was hired by a company several years ago and well south of here to support a particular customer of theirs. They hired me, got cold feet about letting me work with that customer, then had no other work for me, then fired me 6 months later. The written reason was: no longer in need of services (so at least I got to collect unemployment).

The real reason was the guy I was hired to slowly replace figured out his days were numbered and found creative ways to sabotage me. I wanted to sue for false advertising, fraud, wrongful dismissal, the works. My lawyer advised me I had no case, even though fundamentally he agreed with me there should be a better avenue for me for due recourse. He said the best I could do would be sue the actual sabotaging douchebag, but I would have had to do that out west and in his 30 years of experience he said a case like that would cost no less than $20,000 to pursue with about a 5% chance of success for receiving a settlement of MAYBE $100k. My NDA expires in 2 years and unfortunately it's a much better story with all the details.

 

[Quiet]

My employer has a "No smoking during working hours even if on meal break and not on property" and extends that restriction to "within 1/4 mile of company property".

Is it legal? Dunno. Is it fair? I personally don't think so. Could I afford to fight it? Nope.

Fwiw, said policy was enactes/upgraded/enhanced several years after I started working there. I also quit smoking a year ago, six months after it went in to effect.

Regarding the firearms policy in the OP... While o think it's bullsh1t, "their house, their rules" and "concealed means concealed". I also don't carry at work, the PO, my daughter's schools...

So they accomplished their goal and are patting themselves on the back for not only saving themselves money but also saving your life. I bet you have mixed emotions about all of that. Frustration, anger, made the best of it, good outcome but how dare they.... lol

I'd have been pissed, but now I'd be glad to be an ex smoker. I'd probably still be resentful forever... and that forever would be longer too! Their own fault.

When you boss calls on your day off during an emergency and asks you to come in say "I can't I have a gun on, guess your on your own. Your rules not mine."

Sorry, your personal life is interfering with your ability to be available to us for on call service, you're terminated.

This is probably illegal.

I highly doubt that. What law would they be breaking even by requiring that employees be complete non-smokers?

 

[92G]

My employer also has a full-on "no gun" policy, which i do follow but when time comes for me to leave I will provide a letter citing this as a personal infringment.

 

[Deleted member 12999]

My work has a gun policy. I have to have it. They try to call me in, and I say: sorry... im 4 beers deep, cant carry gun. Your policy not mine. Then I lol

 

[Deleted member 12999]

I know a town that the guys said that on an "ordered in", The chief then told everyone that he just might send a car for them and have them blow the next time they pulled that. Well needless to say after the call came the next time each one pounded a couple down, just in case.

Old chief knew that trick. New one not so much....

 

[jd4444]

I know a town that the guys said that on an "ordered in", The chief then told everyone that he just might send a car for them and have them blow the next time they pulled that. Well needless to say after the call came the next time each one pounded a couple down, just in case.

If you are not being paid, you could be in Africa as long as you are there the next time you are scheduled to be at work. This applies in most but not all jobs.

If they let themselves be brought in for a breath test, they at least should have been paid.

The same applies for these policies. If they want you to follow them 24x7 when you are not at work, then you should be paid 24x7. If they want you to be on standby you should be compensated to restrict your activities such as drinking.

That being said, if they find out you violate a work policy they just might find another reason to fire you an leave the ball n your court to call the state on them (try the course of action you are already paying for) or possibly sue them.

 

[drgrant]

They can get away with it because you work for them, its that simple. Depending on my job and circumstances I'd probably just ignore the stupid policy.

 

[Rob Boudrie]

Is it legal? Dunno. Is it fair? I personally don't think so.

When trying to figure out if a practice is illegal, you need more than an innate sense of unfairness - you need to be able to cite a law. When it comes to smoking, the limits are less well established than they are for gaydom (which, unlike gun possession and smoking at work is protected by law).

My employer also has a full-on "no gun" policy

If it's a large company, the real policy is probably "except for designated minions of the CEO".

You can be fired for any reason, or no reason at all in MA

Just try flipping the coin to understand the concept. How would you feel about being told you could not fire a plumber or contractor if you told him/her not to smoke in your house and (s)he refused?

 

[xring]

CONCEALED carry. Next question?

 

[mark056]

Judging by the responses in this thread, that's exactly the way it seems to be. Not one hem, one haw, or even a waffle. Not really the rocket ship you were thinking of, huh?

It only shows how successful NES has been in policing its boards, and is a direct reflection on the success of you and the other mods. I was wrong and I freely and openly admit it, although I think a year ago it would have been different. NES (and GOAL) are much better places thru your tireless efforts.