Search found 4 matches

by baldeagle
Mon Mar 07, 2011 11:24 pm
Forum: General Texas CHL Discussion
Topic: Fired because of gun
Replies: 155
Views: 24393

Re: Fired because of gun

KaiserB wrote:Was the vehicle moved? (no, the driver did not move it and asked the load to be changed, thus no law was broken)

Was the vehicles weight changed before the company moved it from its lot? (unknown because the driver in this case was fired prior to the truck moving)
Read this
the Supreme Court recognized a narrow exception to the general "at will" doctrine of employment in Texas, and found that an at-will employee may sue his/her employer if he/she is fired for refusing to commit an illegal act.
The truck doesn't need to move. All this is required is that he refused to drive the overweight truck and is fired as a result. Under those conditions, the company is civilly liable for his dismissal.

And if he wins the case?
An employee who wins a suit under the Sabine Pilot cause of action may be entitled to actual damages that include past lost wages and benefits (back pay), future lost wages and benefits (front pay), and damages for mental anguish. In addition, a prevailing plaintiff may be entitled to punitive damages, prejudgment interest, and court costs.
All that is required, based upon the facts presented by the OP, is that the jury be convinced by a preponderance of the evidence that he was fired for refusing to drive an overweight truck and he prevails. He does not have to prove his case beyond a reasonable doubt, as is the case in a criminal trial, but merely needs to convince the jury that it's more than 50% likely that his version of the story is correct.

No emotions, just facts.
by baldeagle
Mon Mar 07, 2011 10:31 pm
Forum: General Texas CHL Discussion
Topic: Fired because of gun
Replies: 155
Views: 24393

Re: Fired because of gun

KaiserB wrote:And what pray-tell is the event that the whistleblower exposed; other than the vehicle was overweight from an alleged paperwork error.

Perhaps we could explore Admiralty law in this case because Texas' coast is on the ocean.
The vehicle wasn't overweight from a alleged paperwork error. It was overweight. That is a violation of federal and state law which would subject the company to substantial fines if it's found to be a pattern of behavior. Furthermore, a truck driver can be fined personally for driving an overweight truck and is also exposed to charges of reckless endangerment, manslaughter or even murder if an accident results in death while driving an overweight truck.
by baldeagle
Mon Mar 07, 2011 9:53 pm
Forum: General Texas CHL Discussion
Topic: Fired because of gun
Replies: 155
Views: 24393

Re: Fired because of gun

IANAL either, but I think the OP has some strong cards to play. First, he has the police report which documents the fact that on the day he was fired the company made a huge issue of the fact that he was carrying a gun. Second, he can still go to the feds and provide evidence that can lead to an investigation of the company. That alone should be sufficient to get them to the bargaining table. Furthermore, he can show that he was fired because he refused to break the law, which is an exception to the right to work laws of Texas. So, I would think that the company would be tickled pink to settle out of court (probably insisting on a sealed settlement order as well as a promise never to go to the feds.)
by baldeagle
Mon Mar 07, 2011 9:11 pm
Forum: General Texas CHL Discussion
Topic: Fired because of gun
Replies: 155
Views: 24393

Re: Fired because of gun

KaiserB wrote:Since one states "This person then informed the Officer that he got his Concealed Handgun License because drivers were required to accept large sums of cash in bad neighborhoods in full view of store customers. This person then went on to point out that this was thousands of dollars being carried for one to three days. Then this person further pointed out that the trucks did not have a safe, so the cash had to remain on his person."

I got my CHL to protect myself and family from harm, not as a pretense to secure myself at work because I transport large sums of money.

However in this case if the employee had not been duly informed of policy they are probably in the clear legally. Civilly it will depend on the actual damages incurred.
Good Lord, man, what country are you from? Can you not even find it plausible that he might have been in fear for his life because he was required to carry large amounts of cash for days on end? This has nothing to do with being a security officer. It has to do with self defense, which, last time I checked, it exactly what a CHL is for.

Return to “Fired because of gun”