Search found 5 matches
Return to “Cities improperly posting 30.06 signs?”
- Tue Apr 29, 2008 2:50 pm
- Forum: General Texas CHL Discussion
- Topic: Cities improperly posting 30.06 signs?
- Replies: 1085
- Views: 366936
Re: Cities improperly posting 30.06 signs?
You are correct - that sign is not enforceable to CHLs.
- Sat Feb 02, 2008 6:59 pm
- Forum: General Texas CHL Discussion
- Topic: Cities improperly posting 30.06 signs?
- Replies: 1085
- Views: 366936
Re: Cities improperly posting 30.06 signs?
What rule change and what 3 versions? Yes or no to what (specificity is important here - we are talking legal minutia).texasparamedic wrote: since the rule has changed... My question here is that there is 3 versions of this ruling. 2 saying no and 1 saying yes, but everything I have read says that the 30.06 statement must be in the policy manual if the employer wants to ban. Is this not correct?
A statement conforming to 30.06 wording does NOT need to be in the employee manual in order to be enforceable legally. But a governmental agency (which a city and everything the city own is) cannot enforce 30.06 regardless of where it is posted. Posted can be wording in the manual. Posting can be a sign. Posting can be on a card given out. Posting can even be verbal. The first 3 require specific wording. The second one requires additional things like size and colors. The final one can be just about anything.
Short version: You cannot be prosecuted for carrying on duty. You can be fired (but you knew that).
- Sat Feb 02, 2008 6:05 pm
- Forum: General Texas CHL Discussion
- Topic: Cities improperly posting 30.06 signs?
- Replies: 1085
- Views: 366936
Re: Cities improperly posting 30.06 signs?
I would ask for a more specific question from you as well, but let me give you a general thought. IANAL.texasparamedic wrote:This is long but I still need help
First - they can make it a condition of employment that you not carry. You lose (short version)
Second - Do you work for a private company or a governmental operation? If private, they can post and it is legally enforceable. If public, the posting is not enforceable. They can post but it has no meaning at all. See the first point in either case.
- Sun Aug 06, 2006 8:27 pm
- Forum: General Texas CHL Discussion
- Topic: Cities improperly posting 30.06 signs?
- Replies: 1085
- Views: 366936
Re: Presbyterian Hospital of Greenville
I would argue yes. And I in fact found the same thing with the Seton / Brackenridge chain in Austin. CHoA is city owned and not posted (but run by Seton who does post their hospitals).S&W6946 wrote:So, does that mean they can't post 30.06 signs under 30.06 (e)as it is publicly owned property?
- Thu Dec 08, 2005 2:28 pm
- Forum: General Texas CHL Discussion
- Topic: Cities improperly posting 30.06 signs?
- Replies: 1085
- Views: 366936