New Employee Manual, Just like a opinion

[BrianSW99]

You can try rationalizing the wording of the manual to define the words "authorized" or "dangerous", or whatever, to fit your desired meaning, but in the end it's likely you'll get fired if you're caught unless you're on really good terms with the bosses.

I just don't believe most businesses intentionally word the policy to make people think it's gun free, but in reality are allowing a back door for CHL's. I doubt they're putting much thought into it at all, because to the people who write the policies, any gun is a "dangerous" weapon when it's in the workplace and it's their interpretation that counts when they're deciding whether to fire you.

Brian

[BrianSW99]

I hear where you're coming from, but I would reply: "On the other hand, the death of an unarmed employee with a family to feed might be a bigger deal than the death of a young single guy with no dependents." ..... ....or something to that effect.

My point was only to say that it's a decision he must make after weighing the consequences of both choices. I know it would be a tough choice for me if I were in the same situation.

[Ameer]

I would jump for joy if carry was legal and I only had to worry about policy. No suck luck, thanks to Ellis, Gallegos, Ogden, Straus and others who support criminal street gangs instead of students and professors.

[CCreyeder]

My company has similar wording in our emlployee manual. I think all HR depts just copy and paste lol. Here is my take:

I dont ask and I dont tell. The wording does not meet the very specific criteria set forth by 30.06 and I have not been given verbal notice, therefore I have no fear of being arrested. However, being arrested and fired are two different things. Could you and I be fired? Absolutely. My attitude is that, if they found out and fired me summarily, and if my work ethic and morals, NEVER call in sick, never late, the amount of income I produce for them, etc, etc, etc.. if all of that is not good enough for them to at least give me a warning, reprimand, etc.. then that just tells me what kind of character they really have and they are not somebody I want to be working for anyway and they can loose a top employee and it will be their loss and not mine.

You asked for my opinion! lol

[kjolly]

My company includes being wrong to leave weapon in car (through there is no 30.06 sign in the parking garage. If they suspect you have a weapon in car they claim the right to search your vehicle (even through this would be an illegal search) and if you refuse them the right to search your car they can teriminate you.
I make a point of not carrying to, at or from work as I need the job to buy more guns.
Remember in Texas you can be terminated without reason so don't scare them. Always smile and keep quiet about having a CHL so you don't raise suspicions. I worked at one company that conducted yearly random drug tests. Even through I have never done drugs I was always the random person selected for the drug test.
We all have to follow rules to live in society.

[b322da]

My company includes being wrong to leave weapon in car (through there is no 30.06 sign in the parking garage. If they suspect you have a weapon in car they claim the right to search your vehicle (even through this would be an illegal search) and if you refuse them the right to search your car they can teriminate you.

An illegal search? Not really, IMHO.

Furthermore, the presence or absence of a 30.06 compliant sign is irrelevant so far as an employee is concerned. If you choose to not permit the search and are fired, you will not have been fired for violating a compliant 30.06 sign. You would have been fired because the employer fired you -- it is that simple.

That missing sign would also be irrelevant if a gate guard, having the authority to do so, tells a casual visitor that his car is subject to a search prior to permission being granted to enter the premises. Happens at many sites. After receiving that advice from the guard the visitor has a choice -- a legal car search or turn around and leave.

Your employer appears, from your discussion, to make it clear that if you deny them permission to search your car they can terminate you. It is absolutely up to you which choice you make. They recognize that you may deny permission for a search. If they should search your car after you deny them permission then you might make a complaint. Then you might expect to be fired. With only the strictest limitations a Texas employer can fire you for no reason at all -- they may just not like the color of your hair. But, again, if you prefer the sanctity of your car to your job, "Just Say No."

There are employers who make your agreement in advance to a search of your car at any time a condition of your employment. This appears to go even a step further than your employer, but without an opportunity to read the fine print, as compared with your discussion of what it means, it is not possible to tell for sure.

Elmo

[MrShootert]

Another poster summed it up as don't ask don't tell. I think that's about right.
My Employee Manual says something similar. In large companies lawyers help write these things.
I think they are being purposefully vague about "authorization". Authorization by who? Obviously you have legal authorization from the state, but not necessarily from your employer. This way they can decide on a case by case basis. Chances are your upper management is gun friendly, or they would have chosen stronger language. So long as you keep your weapon well concealed it should never be an issue. On the other hand, if you talk about carrying with colleagues at work, or your gun is printing half the time, then they can single you out and tell you that you're not authorized and you better leave it at home - or else.

[snatchel]

You are authorized by the sate of texas, and your company didn't specify that licensed individuals were also included. Carry on, but I would be cautious. Sounded more like a CYA kinda thing for the company.