Weapons Policies at Work

[Hobbes4Pres]

I'd like to start a thread discussing weapon's policies at work. Before I get flamed for even the mention, let me first say I'm pro for allowing employees whatever rights their states provide.  If your state allows for concealed carry or open carry, your place of business should as well.  Same rule should apply to knives and other personal protection items ... so long as state and local laws are met for where business is located, company should not interfere.

However, this is not always the case.  My company is considering implementing a weapons policy.  For those readers who have them at their place of business, can you summarize them briefly?  Who has one that should be replicated?  Of concern that I've heard, is more about insurance than a political agenda.  What to do if you have an employee at work who is handling a firearm erratically at their desk, displays threatening behavior, etc.?  What if employee decides they don't want to store their gun collection at home and mount a gun rack and rifles over their desk?  How about cleaning their gun at the lunch table?

I don't have any answers here so I'm hoping the community may have had some experiences here to present some good policy examples that protect our 2a rights while addressing workplace concerns.

[Texas_Bryan]

I'm lucky not only does my employer not care about employees bringing weapons, but if you get a new pistol your encouraged to bring it in and have show and tell.  But my work environment is what I would consider unconventional.  Beer, bourbon, video games, a little bit of work here and there.

[shooter32]

 But my work environment is what I would consider unconventional.  Beer, bourbon, video games, a little bit of work here and there.
 
 Boy I'd say. 


 

[TAB]

What it all boils down to is liabilty.  There is alot less of it if you have a no weapons policy, then if you don't.
The insurance angle really does not come into play very often.   Don't forget that in many jobs a having a weapon on you is a danger to yourself, others and company property.  Lets just say for example your a windown washer, if you fall and the gun is between you and your harness, your going to get hurt.  If you drop it, you could hurt others.   If you were to work in say a power plant and are close to the generators, having a big hunk of metal on you is a danger to yourself and could do hundreds of thousands in damages to company property.


Reality is, while on the clock, your employer is liable for anything and every thing you do.

[tombogan03884]

I usually disagree vehemently with TAB on this subject, but this time I have to agree that  his examples do point out that in some circumstances it would not be appropriate. Just as it would not be appropriate to bring a pin cushion into a condom factory.
Each persons work situation is different but my former employer handled it by having a "No Weapons" policy, but they did not ask questions, or subject workers to metal detectors, shake downs or other interference.   If a worker was responsible and remembered the "concealed" part of the phrase no one knew anything, otherwise you could be fired on the spot.
I've worked in other places where I carried a pistol in a shoulder holster with my Supervisors knowledge.

[Sponsor]

[Hobbes4Pres]

By insurance, I'm referring to Liability Insurance.  I get the concern.  I can also appreciate there being a question of property rights of the employer. If I owned my house, and I was anti-gun, I can tell someone not to come in to my house with the gun.  It's my house.  The company's place of business fits the same ruleset.

In your example, if the window washer drops a tool from the 20th floor and it falls on the head of someone on the street, killing them instantly, is the company any more liable if the tool was a handgun vs. a hammer?  Is the person any more dead?  If wearing a firearm posses a danger due to the work involved that itself makes sense to me.  If you repaired high voltage transmission lines, wearing a metal sidearm seems counterproductive.

A company does not have liability of their guest's actions. Take a restaurant.  In Virginia, you may open carry to any restaurant, and conceal carry to those that do not sell alcohol.  If a shooting takes place in the restaurant, the restaurant isn't liable for the action of its patrons although the individuals involved would be. Would a company enact a policy for its employees granting them more freedom than its own employees?

There is separate liability even if you do ban weapons at a workplace.  Any company can be visited by those that are legally armed.  Should a gun policy ban the carrying of weapons by off-duty police?  What about customers coming to visit when they themselves may carry a firearm as part of their job?  Does the company ask them to take out their loaded firearm and ask them to put it in a storage container or safe?  We have out of town guests that fly in, use a taxi to come to the office, and a taxi to leave.  In that situation they can't just keep it in their car.  Seems like even if you have a ban on firearms, you still need to have a policy of what to do when one "shows up".  Handling a loaded firearm outside the holster to me raises the liability factor substantially as the likelihood of an AD goes way up.  In that case the company should be named party to the lawsuit as it was their policy that led to the AD.

To be clear I'm not arguing that laws are enacted to trump property rights.  I'm suggesting I'd rather understand and promote work place policies that achieve what each interested party would want.  I have an underlying assumption the owner or head of the company is at least neutral if not pro-gun in setting these policies up.  If less than neutral I don't see there being much the individual citizen can do other than accept it or find an alternate place to work.

Of issue to me is finding a policy that makes sense.  The policy should reduce or transfer liability of the company, making the actions of the individual the same as their actions as defined by state or local law.  Some places cite a "safe work environment" requirement out of OSHA and that allowing weapons violates that.  I don't know the history of that rule, but I'm sure it was intended to say that the floors shouldn't be caving in and the water shouldn't be poisoned.  To me a safe work environment would be one where if I choose to take an active role in my personal protection that I am allowed to do so as long as I meet state and local laws.

So the question is still out there.  Does anyone have any sensible work weapon's policies they would like to share that address this?

[TAB]

Something else I would like to point out.

If you are fired for having a CCW against policy, it will be extremly hard to get another job.

 "terminated for violating weapons policy" is pretty much a death blow for your chances of getting a job with any larger employer.  

I've never seen a liabilty policy that had a no weapons cluase in it.   I have seen workmens comp policys that do.


Even if the employer is found completly free of liabilty, it still costs them time.  Time is money. 

Lets just say that you have a ND at work and shoot yourself in the leg.  Your employer will have to fill out reports, file a claim with the comp company( which will not pay), If your at the docs for more then 24 hours, OSHA will have to do a field inspection.( does not matter that you shot yourself )  I have never heard of an osha field inspection not finding a violation.

So this is how things add up... You employer had to spend hours dealing with thier workmens comp company, talking too the police( your comp company will want a police report)... on top of that, they now have a position they need to fill.   I think you get the picture.

[Timothy]

Where I work, no firearms are allowed on company property, period.  Not even in the locked trunk of my vehicle.  I don't really have a problem with it other than the inconvenience to go home and get my guns it if I want to shoot after work.

I don't have a problem with the policy.  If I believe in the rights as given me by our Constitution than I must respect the right of a private company to allow or disallow what they do with their private property.

I don't allow anyone in my home with a loaded firearm other than my immediate family either.

[TAB]

My weapons policy is, if its legal for you to CCW, the property owner gives written permision, then you can do so.


To date I have only had 1 property owner given written permission to have weapons on thier property... It was a shooting range.

[ericire12]

What it all boils down to is liabilty.  There is alot less of it if you have a no weapons policy, then if you don't.
The insurance angle really does not come into play very often.   Don't forget that in many jobs a having a weapon on you is a danger to yourself, others and company property.  Lets just say for example your a windown washer, if you fall and the gun is between you and your harness, your going to get hurt.  If you drop it, you could hurt others.   If you were to work in say a power plant and are close to the generators, having a big hunk of metal on you is a danger to yourself and could do hundreds of thousands in damages to company property.


Reality is, while on the clock, your employer is liable for anything and every thing you do.

Sounds like the typical blanket statement that liberals often use to argue that no one should be allowed to have CCW rights anywhere.