Employee Handbook Policy - Draft of Mine

[tamc9395]

As an owner of a new business, I am in the process of preparing a employee handbook for future hires. Since I need to protect the business, it sets the tone for a different prespective.

Please provide feedback accordingly. Most of this was boilerplate from a group we hired to prepare the document, I think the edit is obvious. Any other items:


No Weapons in the Workplace

Possession, use or sale of weapons, firearms or explosives on work premises, while operating company machinery, equipment or vehicles for work-related purposes or while engaged in company business off premises is forbidden except where expressly authorized by the company and permitted by state and local laws. This policy applies to all employees, including but not limited to, except those who have a valid permit to carry a firearm. This policy does not apply to firearms stored in the employee's locked motor vehicle.

Employees who are aware of violations or threats of violations of this policy are required to report such violations or threats of violations to their supervisor immediately.

Violations of this policy will result in disciplinary action, up to and including discharge.

[C-dub]

This policy applies to all employees, including but not limited to, except those who have a valid permit to carry a firearm.

This sentence is a mess. Consider taking the red part out, adding something to it so that it makes sense, or splitting the whole thing into two separate sentences.

[Wes]

Agreed, normally that portion would not be followed by the word except. It would be to apply it to a specifically named group.

[Jumping Frog]

MIne is a little simpler

"Employees are to follow all state and federal laws with regard to drugs, alcohol and, firearms."

My take is simply, "Illegal possession drugs, alcohol, weapons, or other substances will result in employee discipline, including but not limited to termination of employment."

[A-R]

MIne is a little simpler

"Employees are to follow all state and federal laws with regard to drugs, alcohol and, firearms."

and this...

"All full employees are eligible for reimbursement of a portion of costs associated with educational expenses or licensing which can be shown to benefit the company, reimbursements must be approved in advance"

Having a CHL is a benefit - you have my assets, I want them protected - I'll chip in for your license.

Careful there, could be construed you're paying them to provide armed security - a no no in Texas without proper security license

[Jaguar]

How about, "No illegal weapons allowed." Short and sweet.

Where I was previously employed the whole section on firearm and weapons was scrapped and changed to the wording above. I had a meeting with the president of the company, before it started I asked about the change, he patted his side and said, "I wanted to be able to carry."

[flechero]

MIne is a little simpler

"Employees are to follow all state and federal laws with regard to drugs, alcohol and, firearms."

and this...

"All full employees are eligible for reimbursement of a portion of costs associated with educational expenses or licensing which can be shown to benefit the company, reimbursements must be approved in advance"

Having a CHL is a benefit - you have my assets, I want them protected - I'll chip in for your license.

Careful there, could be construed you're paying them to provide armed security - a no no in Texas without proper security license

The benefit doesn't have to be "armed security"- it can be peace of mind from the background check, which includes mental illness. He can say it was cheaper than a corporate background check and didn't violate any hippa laws. (which would be true) You know that mental health is front and center these days.

[Dave2]

I was careful not to specify WHAT training would be reimbursed - only the portions of my post in quotation marks appears.

Yeah, but I kinda agree with him. Best not to give hostile lawyers any ideas if something bad happens.

[tamc9395]

Thank you all for the insight and feedback. I may still tweak it some more and I really like the short/simple version, but want to encourage folks to obtain a license if they desire to carry.

[Dave2]

Thank you all for the insight and feedback. I may still tweak it some more and I really like the short/simple version, but want to encourage folks to obtain a license if they desire to carry.

I still don't see what's wrong with a one-page manual that says (in its entirety) "Do do your job and don't do anything illegal", but maybe that's why I'm neither a lawyer, nor in charge of employee handbooks.

[ctb5]

Possession, use or sale of weapons, firearms or explosives on work premises, while operating company machinery, equipment or vehicles for work-related purposes or while engaged in company business off premises is forbidden except where expressly authorized by the company and permitted by state and local laws. This policy applies to all employees, including but not limited to, except those who have a valid permit to carry a firearm. This policy does not apply to firearms stored in the employee's locked motor vehicle.

Employees who are aware of violations or threats of violations of this policy are required to report such violations or threats of violations to their supervisor immediately.

Violations of this policy will result in disciplinary action, up to and including discharge.

My take on it (and no, I am not a lawyer):

You create a potential minefield by saying "where expressly authorized by the company". Since your policy doesn't actually authorize anything, it could be construed as denying everything.

[C-dub]

The benefit doesn't have to be "armed security"- it can be peace of mind from the background check, which includes mental illness. He can say it was cheaper than a corporate background check and didn't violate any hippa laws. (which would be true) You know that mental health is front and center these days.

Interesting. I wonder if it would be acceptable to make having a CHL a prerequisite for employment?

[tamc9395]

You create a potential minefield by saying "where expressly authorized by the company". Since your policy doesn't actually authorize anything, it could be construed as denying everything.

I guess my indirect goal is if you spend the effort to be educated, then you can be allowed to carry while you are an employee and working. Anything else does not provide implied or approved consent to carry a weapon illegally on your person (other then MPA).

Most of the language was provided by a hired payroll service who I take has most of my (employer) best interest's at mind, I am tweaking things accordingly. It has been an interesting process to say the least in learning what rights EMPLOYERS still have when you are a small business.

As always, thank you for the feedback.