New Company policy

[tubular031]

tubular, something to think about....you sound like you feed a strong loyalty to this company, and it sounds like a small enough company that they should know they have several guys who like their guns. So where is their loyalty to y'al? Maybe it's time to talk to the other companies that have been courting you?
I learned a very long time ago, just because I was very important to a company didn't mean they treated me like I was.

I am loyal and they are loyal to me. That is the big reason I came here. They have taken good care of me in the past and have really stepped up. I think this new rule is more coming from the owner/property management of the building we are in. We are in a multi tenant office building that we lease. Believe me, my boss/owner of the company does not care.



hmmmm so here is what the 30.06 says

Sec. 30.06. TRESPASS BY HOLDER OF LICENSE TO CARRY CONCEALED HANDGUN. (a) A license holder commits an offense if the license holder:

(1) carries a handgun under the authority of Subchapter H, Chapter 411, Government Code, on property of another without effective consent; and
(2) received notice that:
(A) entry on the property by a license holder with a concealed handgun was forbidden; or
(B) remaining on the property with a concealed handgun was forbidden and failed to depart.
(b) For purposes of this section, a person receives notice if the owner of the property or someone with apparent authority to act for the owner provides notice to the person by oral or written communication.
(c) In this section:
(1) "Entry" has the meaning assigned by Section 30.05(b).
(2) "License holder" has the meaning assigned by Section 46.035(f).
(3) "Written communication" means:
(A) a card or other document on which is written language identical to the following: "Pursuant to Section 30.06, Penal Code (trespass by holder of license to carry a concealed handgun), a person licensed under Subchapter H, Chapter 411, Government Code (concealed handgun law), may not enter this property with a concealed handgun"; or
(B) a sign posted on the property that:
(i) includes the language described by Paragraph (A) in both English and Spanish;
(ii) appears in contrasting colors with block letters at least one inch in height; and
(iii) is displayed in a conspicuous manner clearly visible to the public.
(d) An offense under this section is a Class A misdemeanor.
(e) It is an exception to the application of this section that the property on which the license holder carries a handgun is owned or leased by a governmental entity and is not a premises or other place on which the license holder is prohibited from carrying the handgun under Section 46.03 or 46.035.

The part in red is what kinda worries me. If they have told me I can not carry on the property and I do anyway it would appear that I am in violation of the law. This is crap. In court how can anyone prove that I was told and prove that I was listening when it was said?!?!? The law should be more black and white. If you don't want me to carry, put up the correct sign. Bam done!

Anyone know a lawyer I can talk to about this? I want to be sure that I am not breaking the law. Again I know that I can be fired and don't care about that. I only care about the law and or legal issues.

[OldGrumpy]

When you sign receipt for that handbook you are acknowledging knowledge of the rule. The law is the law - you may not like it but spending money on an attorney is wasting money. Your choice - your gun or your job.

[JJVP]

tubular, something to think about....you sound like you feed a strong loyalty to this company, and it sounds like a small enough company that they should know they have several guys who like their guns. So where is their loyalty to y'al? Maybe it's time to talk to the other companies that have been courting you?
I learned a very long time ago, just because I was very important to a company didn't mean they treated me like I was.

I am loyal and they are loyal to me. That is the big reason I came here. They have taken good care of me in the past and have really stepped up. I think this new rule is more coming from the owner/property management of the building we are in. We are in a multi tenant office building that we lease. Believe me, my boss/owner of the company does not care.



hmmmm so here is what the 30.06 says

Sec. 30.06. TRESPASS BY HOLDER OF LICENSE TO CARRY CONCEALED HANDGUN. (a) A license holder commits an offense if the license holder:

(1) carries a handgun under the authority of Subchapter H, Chapter 411, Government Code, on property of another without effective consent; and
(2) received notice that:
(A) entry on the property by a license holder with a concealed handgun was forbidden; or
(B) remaining on the property with a concealed handgun was forbidden and failed to depart.
(b) For purposes of this section, a person receives notice if the owner of the property or someone with apparent authority to act for the owner provides notice to the person by oral or written communication.
(c) In this section:
(1) "Entry" has the meaning assigned by Section 30.05(b).
(2) "License holder" has the meaning assigned by Section 46.035(f).
(3) "Written communication" means:
(A) a card or other document on which is written language identical to the following: "Pursuant to Section 30.06, Penal Code (trespass by holder of license to carry a concealed handgun), a person licensed under Subchapter H, Chapter 411, Government Code (concealed handgun law), may not enter this property with a concealed handgun"; or
(B) a sign posted on the property that:
(i) includes the language described by Paragraph (A) in both English and Spanish;
(ii) appears in contrasting colors with block letters at least one inch in height; and
(iii) is displayed in a conspicuous manner clearly visible to the public.
(d) An offense under this section is a Class A misdemeanor.
(e) It is an exception to the application of this section that the property on which the license holder carries a handgun is owned or leased by a governmental entity and is not a premises or other place on which the license holder is prohibited from carrying the handgun under Section 46.03 or 46.035.

The part in red is what kinda worries me. If they have told me I can not carry on the property and I do anyway it would appear that I am in violation of the law. This is crap. In court how can anyone prove that I was told and prove that I was listening when it was said?!?!? The law should be more black and white. If you don't want me to carry, put up the correct sign. Bam done!

Anyone know a lawyer I can talk to about this? I want to be sure that I am not breaking the law. Again I know that I can be fired and don't care about that. I only care about the law and or legal issues.

If they told you (orally) that carry was prohibited, then you have been given effective notice under 30.06 and can be prosecuted in addition to being fired. If all they say was, " here is the new policy manual, read it and sign it", then IMHO IANAL, you have not been given effective notice under 30.06 and all they can do is fire you.

[bdickens]

How exactly are going to "terminate" a customer, vendor or visitor? They are not employees and have not seen, much less signed the company policy.

Quite simple, actually. "We will no longer be doing business with you."

[tubular031]

When you sign receipt for that handbook you are acknowledging knowledge of the rule. The law is the law - you may not like it but spending money on an attorney is wasting money. Your choice - your gun or your job.

This statement is not quite what I am after... your gun or your job. If that is what it comes down to, I am ok with not following the rule. Fire me and Ill move on to another job, no prob. BUT if not following the rule means I could go to jail, a felony, misdemeanor etc, I am not ok with breaking the rule and I will probably work from home all the time or go get another job.

I just need the fog cleared. That is what I am hoping I can get an answer to. And if that means paying a lawyer a few bucks to give me a black or white answer, I am ok.

[bdickens]

Just a thought: if you are in an industry where everybody knows everybody else or knows someone else who does, getting fired like that could affect your future employment opportunities.

[RottenApple]

When you sign receipt for that handbook you are acknowledging knowledge of the rule. The law is the law - you may not like it but spending money on an attorney is wasting money. Your choice - your gun or your job.

This statement is not quite what I am after... your gun or your job. If that is what it comes down to, I am ok with not following the rule. Fire me and Ill move on to another job, no prob. BUT if not following the rule means I could go to jail, a felony, misdemeanor etc, I am not ok with breaking the rule and I will probably work from home all the time or go get another job.

I just need the fog cleared. That is what I am hoping I can get an answer to. And if that means paying a lawyer a few bucks to give me a black or white answer, I am ok.

This really isnt that difficult. The notice in your handbook does not meet 30.06 language requirements therefore it is not legally binding. You can legally ignore it but, as has been stated, you can be fired.

If, however, they also told you orally "no guns", then that does meet 30.06 and you can be prosecuted for criminal trespass.

So did they tell you "no guns" or just give you the handbook? That's what it boils down to.

[tubular031]

This really isnt that difficult. The notice in your handbook does not meet 30.06 language requirements therefore it is not legally binding. You can legally ignore it but, as has been stated, you can be fired.

If, however, they also told you orally "no guns", then that does meet 30.06 and you can be prosecuted for criminal trespass.

So did they tell you "no guns" or just give you the handbook? That's what it boils down to.

I am trying to remember what was said in the meeting, I do think she said no guns. How would that hold up in court? Can they prove they said it and can they prove I heard it? If I spaced out and was not listening, how can I be expected to follow something that I was not told?

hmmmm....

[VMI77]

I want to keep it on me like I have done everyday for the past 2 years as long as there is no legal issue. I don't care if they want to fire me.

During those two years, has anyone ever known that you had one?

One other person knows That I carry. He has asked about it and is going to get his chl soon.

We are all gun nuts at the office and talk about guns, hunting etc.

So why did they hire an idiot dingbat for HR? If I didn't care about being fired I wouldn't sign the document. In my previous job I didn't care and was doing my best to go somewhere else.....there's no way I'd have signed any document as ridiculous as this idiotic policy. The funny thing is, I refused lots of stupid stuff like that and didn't get fired. Fortunately it's not a choice I have to make now: my current company changed policy to expressly allow CHLers to carry, embraced the parking lot law, and has even paid for employees to take the CHL class.

It's the nonsense of pretending that this stupid policy is for employee safety that I find truly objectionable......the company wants to ban guns on premises, do it, it's their right, but don't spew lies about how it is for the safety of employees.

[03Lightningrocks]

Thanks for the clarification folks.

[Pecos]

I can't carry at my work either. just a gun buster sign. I have a HI-Quality consealment paddle holser form Safariland-I just slide it off & leave it in my truck during work. I can do this while sitting in the driver seat. Hasnt really been a problem.

[texanjoker]

One thing to consider is that if you carry a weapon in your car, and it is stolen, the police may notify your employer. This is done when asking about video, ect. This could put you in a bad spot.

[E.Marquez]

If you decided to not sign the new policy, and they bring it up..
Consider issuing the most senior person in the company you have access to a version of this letter tailored to your situation

Copied from another thread here http://texaschlforum.com/viewtopic.php? ... lit=hilton" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Commissioner Jerry Patterson wrote:
Gentleman,

I recently picked up a member of the Texas State Board of Education (SBOE) from the Doubletree on 15th St in Austin and noticed the new signs announcing that concealed handguns are not permitted (the signs are silent on whether other types of firearms such as rifles and shotguns are prohibited).

I have several questions:

1. Is a firearm in a personal vehicle in your garage prohibited?
2. Since I was in my vehicle and armed when I drove up to pick up my colleagues the other night, was I in violation of your policy?
3. When you accept reservations do you inform your guests of this policy so that they are not surprised when they arrive?
4. If a guest with reservations and a firearm, and who was not aware of your new policy arrived at your hotel would you provide safe off premises storage for the weapon?
5. If there were no provisions for storage of a firearm, would you insure the guest could find other equivalent lodging in Austin even if all hotels were booked as is often the case?
6. Since most of the SBOE members stay at your hotel because they can walk to state office buildings, do you assume an additional obligation for the personal safety of guests who are disarmed by your policy and who may be victims of crime while on or off your premises, particularly while walking at night to and from meetings?
7. Do you have any concern that the signs posted on your building might attract criminal activity since criminals are likely to be attracted to a location where they believe their potential victims are unarmed? Does this obvious incentive for criminal activity create an additional liability for you if a guest is assaulted?
8. Are you aware that the signs you have posted likely do not comply with Texas Penal Code section 30.06 and therefore may not be legally sufficient to ban handguns from your property?

While a State Senator, I was the author of Texas' concealed handgun law. There are few if any in the State of Texas who are more familiar with state and federal firearms law than I. Additionally, I have spent approximately $15,000 hosting receptions at your hotel, and have attended many others as a guest of other elected officials and the Republican party. I can reasonably state that tens of thousands of dollars of future revenue may be in jeopardy if this senseless policy remains in effect.

I recognize there is a great deal of misunderstanding about Texas firearms law, and frequently premise holders believe posting signs may be required by law in order to achieve some desirable objective. In other words, posting these signs is not always an informed decision.

While I am not an attorney, I am more than willing to explain Texas firearms law to anyone with the Hilton Hotel corporation. I'm very qualified to do so since I authored most of the laws pertaining to carrying handguns while I was a member of the Texas legislature.

I look forward to hearing from you.

Sincerely,
Jerry Patterson

Commissioner, Texas General Land Office

[bayouhazard]

Maybe they were once loyal but the new policy shows that's not true anymore UNLESS the HR Nazi did it without the owners knowledge.

Fortunately there's an easy way to find out. Get a bunch of the pro gun guys together and go talk to the owner. Tell them you're not happy with the policy. If it gets fixd they're still loyal. If not, don't show up For work Monday. Whether permanent or a "blue flu" event is up to you. Or sell your rights for a bowl of porridge. Is your choice what kind of company you're willing to support with your in-demand skills.

[android]

If you are fired for cause, don't they have to give a reason to TWC to try to prevent you from collecting unemployment insurance?

I would bet that many companies are not even aware of the parking lot law and would admit they fired you for having a gun in your car on that documentation.